Another thread about tutoring

[PooshTun]

Elsewhere there is a rehash of the usual tutoring versus no tutoring arguments.

There are those who argue that schools should not select kids based on a 11+ since it favours kids that are tutored as opposed to kids who have natural ability. As the saying goes, don't bring me problems, bring me solutions ie how would you fix the selection process?

Please, if you want to simply ban selective schools then start your own thread. I am interested in ideas from parents who are in favour of grammar schools but think that there should be a better way of allocating places.

I agree that the existing process is unfair but in the absence of a machine that measures true intellence or a test that you can't possibly be tutored for I don't see what can be done to make the whole selection process fairer.

Poshtoon "I am sure that you have lots of empirical data to back up that generalisation .... or not."

blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2012/05/21/on-grammar-schools-2/#axzz1vm47NUtp

A long thread so this may already have been posted, but here is a recent article showing (yet again, sorry grammar apologists) how statistics do show that GS areas (Kent) generally do worst then comprehensive areas (London) ....

@exotic yes you can have both. My DCs have a theoretical choice between a SS GS about a hours bus drive away, or 4 city comps. On average about 7 or 8 kids from our city go to the GS every year (well, going by the numbers on the bus). They would not form a coherent viable top set even if they all went to the same comp in the city, which they wouldn't because there is a feeder system in place for the comps - and of course there are also the posh schools (in DD1s year group, 3 of the kids from the city went to a posh school instead of a state primary, at least two of those would probably have gone on to the posh upper school had they not got in to the GS).

OhDearConfused - that is an interesting article but, as someone who lives in a rich area of a large city (Paris) but whose family is largely based in Kent, a county I know well, I would hesitate to attribute all the difference in educational attainment between London children and Kent children to the quality of the schools. The opportunities for personal development afforded to even quite poor DC in rich areas of large cities exceed by far the opportunities afforded to poor DC in provincial towns and rural villages.

@exotic you clearly do have a chip and since your own life story does not bear out the claim that selective systems fail most DCs how can you expect us to take you seriously? You claim that you achieved your potential and did very very well at school. So I don't see where the problem is?

OhDear - I followed the link. It is the conclusions of a blogger based on his interpretation of the 'facts'. Would my opinion have more weight with you if instead of posting to MN I posted to a blog?

Recently a major poice force posted that burglary rates were down. Why? Because if someone breaks into your car while it is parked in your drive way it is now no longer classed as burglary but as a vehicular crime.

If I was so inclined I can use this information to post a blog entry to make whatever point I wanted to make about crime rates, punishment and deterrent or even about the socio economic makeup of the area.

I've read the blog that you provided a link for and, based on the language being used by the blogger, I can't help but think that he had a position on the issue and was looking for facts to back it up.

PS: I have friends and family living in Kent. I myself have lived in SE London, North London and West London. You'll have a hard time convincing me that Kent is actually doing worst than London :)

This thread is becoming, as usual, unpleasantly personal.

PooshTun- you are accusing exotic of having a chip on her shoulder about her education- she has never shown any signs of this in any of the posts I have seen. She did well, despite her 11+ failure- why does this disqualify her from having opinions on the selective system? Just because you, personally have done well out of something doesn't mean that you are not allowed to recognise that others don't and the system in inherently unfair.

Sorry, that last post was directed to metabilis as well.

And yes, it is possible to have a "near as dammit" comprehensive school in areas where only 5% or so are creamed off to the grammar school. Readingbis a good example of this. But that is not how it operates in most grammar school areas, where 20%ish go to grammar school. The remaining school cannot, by any definition, be called comprehensive.

@seeker I would never have accused exotic of having a chip (because that would be rude) had she not said 'I do not have a chip'. Once she said she didn't have a chip I think it's fair comment to disagree with that statement, based in the evidence in her posts.

Bonsoir do you think that is so?
In London it always seems to me that the poorest children (and indeed adults) seem to access so little of what is on offer.
I worked for a coupl eof years in Peckham and most of the young people I represented had barely been out of South East London.

"you are accusing exotic of having a chip on her shoulder about her education- she has never shown any signs of this in any of the posts I have seen"

"[We] were thrown on the scrap heap at 11yrs old.(and don't tell me we weren't because that is what I felt at 11yrs)...... One day you can say that you want to be a doctor and everyone says 'lovely' and the next they say 'can you still do that' as if you can only aspire to shop assistant! I just used to say I didn't know, it was a lot simpler than explaining that I still could and how"

If there was GCSE for having a chip on her shoulder, exotic would get a A* based on her submitted coursework.

As for your comment about how as usual this thread is turning unpleasant, I was soliciting opinions on how the selection process can be improved so that it doesn't favour kids that have been tutored. Various posters, including yourself, have morphed this thread into a discussion about how parents that favour GSs have no social conscience.

So, at this risk of providing you with more 'evidence' of unpleasantness, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

@word I think it's patchy. There are loads of arts based initiatives in SE London, in disadvantaged areas. But there might not be any that involve specifically Peckham at given points in time. I expect there are sports and science based things as well but I don't know about that sort of thing, just the artsy stuff. a lot of the decisions about what area or what school gets involved in a particular scheme are political, or based on prior connections, it seems to me. Sad, but true. Marginal constituencies whether council wards or parliamentary seats always get more attention. Then there are the special situations deals - at the moment a lot of East London is benefitting massively from the preamble to the cultural olympiad. That area will also get the majority of the cultural legacy - but, you know, fair enough.

If relating a negative personal experience in support of a broader case counts a "having a chip on ones shoulder", I am wondering where characterising comprehensive schools as places where you get "swirled" because that is what happened to you fits in.

Exotic is not alone in having felt a failure because she didn't pass the 11+. The experience is shared by a significant number of children every year in my ds's primary school. And in primary schools in all the remaining 11+ counties.

PooshTun "OhDear - I followed the link. It is the conclusions of a blogger based on his interpretation of the 'facts'. Would my opinion have more weight with you if instead of posting to MN I posted to a blog?"

What a ridiculous comment. An attempt by a serious journalist and respected commentator on educational matters of a highly respected paper (FT) to make get behind myths using the best evidence available (statistics) ... characterised as "his interpretation of the facts".

No doubt he does have a position on the issues, but as with much serious research in this area, statistics can be used to support or undermine any view that might be held.

I don't have an answer for the OP's question and I haven't read the whole thread so might have x-posted but I think that it would be helpful if state schools were more open/knowledgeable about selective tests and warned parents of children who are unlikely to pass not to bother. I think that it would also be helpful if state schools provided some help for their students for GS entry. I'm not expecting a full on service like private schools but a few sessions in exam technique (I'd happily pay!) or maybe some links, suggested reading/workbooks would be helpful.

I lived in an area with super selectives and I can't help wonder if everyone was Level5/6 and had an equal shot at a place or whether a big chunk had clueless parents who wouldn't put their children through the experience if they had been advised that their child wouldn't pass the test.

The parent's at DS' s primary wanted to put on a talent show with prizes for 1st, 2nd and 3rd with a special prize for best effort. The HM tried to block this format because it would undermine the confidence of those kids who didn't win anything. Luckily the parent governors out voted him. Unluckily the HM got his way with Sports Day which became a meaningless spectacle with kids running around the field with no winner or loser at the end of a 'race'.

Its crazy when we get into a situation where we are not allowed to have winners because the losers won't like it.

you are right ohdear. I don't know what possessed me to suggest that journalists are predominantly left wing and that they might let their politics colour their opinions.

By the way, do you want a liink to a respected journalist's blog on why he doesn't think global warming is real?

crazy - Up thread I talked about how my DS's teacher wasn't interested in him because he had already reached his Year 6 KS target at the end of Yr 5.

I don't think I recounted the story about when I asked the HM whether it was worth me putting DS in for the 11+. He didn't come out and say it but reading between the lines, the 11+ was for the truely clever whereas DS was just above average. (he took the test and comfortably passed)

My point? Don't expect your non-selective school to help your DC get into a selective school.

re schools advising parents whether their kids had a chance, we gave DCs a mock test at the start of Yr 5 Easter break. We gave them another test after spending the break home tutoring. Their score, though still too low to past, had improved enough to demonstrate that they had potential.

You know your DCs better then the school is my point.

PooshTun- I don't expect it but GS would be less exclusive if state schools children had a better chance at passing. GS are still state schools so should be accessible and more "linked" to state primary schools.

The current system makes GS more selective and unachievable for state school children. I'm not saying that private school children shouldn't go to GS but helping state school children might make the playing field fairer.

@poosh while journalists may or may not be right or left wing the majority of newspapers are predominantly right wing and demand that their journalists write right slanted articles. Opposition to Grammar Schools is not confined to - or even predominantly found in - the left. The key opposition was always the Tories. More grammar schools were closed/converted under Thatcher than under anyone else.

crazy - the suggestion that GS places should go first to state school kids who met the minimum pass mark before being opened up to prep kids is the only sensible idea I seen so far. But even there it would have minimal effect.

I have no facts to support this but IMO many prep boys go onto the senior school so your disadvantage state school kid will still be going head to head with your advantaged and tutored state school kid.

@poosh (again) my DD1's primary school were the people who suggested we should be thinking in terms of the grammar school.

Meta - My impression has always been the reverse of yours but, as I've said, they are just impressions so I'm open to the idea that I am wrong :)

I think my point was that you can't say there is one rule for primary schools, really.

Also, in my DD1's case, I think having a fairly evident SEN issue in some ways worked in her favour at primary school - at least as far as her relationship with teachers was concerned. It worked in the reverse for her relationship with the small number of bullies, obviously. :(