has anyone gained a space at a selectiive school without a tutor?

[ananga]

Hi everyone,
I woke up rather stressed yesterday morning when I started to question my choices as a parent in refusing to tutor my children for the 11+. I firmly believe tutors are invaluable when a child is struggling in a subject and their expertise can help them gain stability in an area they are weak. However, I have always wanted my children to have a natural passion for learning without the aid of a tutor. I want them to learn because they want to not because I am forcing them to. Coming for a community where tutoring is the norm I have always tried to be strong to resist it.

However, the other day I realised that all the parents I knew were specifically tutoring their children for 11+. I have spent time researching the same and a lot of evidence suggests that tutored kids do perform better. My concern is where does it stop? Children are being tutored throughout Secondary Schools too.

I know Grammar schools may require tutoring, however I have always hoped there would be more chance with the indies as many do non verbal and verbal reasoning. (I know these can be prepped for too) But recently I feel that may not happen either as in the end it is the exam that matters.

So please would any one mind sharing if they have achieved places at selective boys schools without the aid of a tutor?

Thank you

I think that there can also be a fear about not getting a place if you think it is the environment within which your child will thrive. By that I don't mean achieve their best academically, I mean be happiest and grow in confidence. I am hoping IF my DD gets in she will stop trying to hide her academic ability and will feel it is okay to be all aspects of herself. I worry that in a mixed ability school she will keep trying not to stand out.

We did not employ tutors but did get our kids used to the format of entrance papers so they were not surpised by non verbal reasoning etc. We also got them to do some
Written comprension in books from WH Smith. Our kids were at a junior school which was part of a 4-18 setup so we got zero help there. We got the outcome we wanted but have the feeling that the heavily tutored kids who also made it are not really up to the pace. I really think that heavy tutoring can be counter productive.

@ChocolateWombat I mostly agree with your last post re tutoring. DS was not professionally tutored, but I and a friend started preparing him 18 months before the test. One thing I came across was a level of secrecy and exclusiveness when it came to finding a tutor who could prepare him for the grammar school we were aiming for. I tried posts on mumsnet, posts on the 11 plus forum, asking people att eh school gates. Nada. I just wasn’t on the inside track. That is another level of unfairness. Others had access to tutors who have prepared kids for those schools for years, have a good idea what was on the paper year after year, and even possibly have taught at those schools. Our prep was diy, relying on google searches, posts on the 11 plus forum etc. In all fairness I do not think that is the same as going to a prep school which advertises its success at getting kids into grammars on its website, or having a professional tutor.

I am not surprised that people become liars on the issue, because so much is at stake and our aspirations for our children go to the heart of our competitive, class conscious society. While there were undoubtedly several well meaning persons who did their best for the school and its pupils, giving up their time for extra curricular activities, I actually found the whole primary school social scene quite a competitive one, behind the smiles.

I'd agree that for parents who want to use a tutor, there can be secrecy with people keeping their knowledge of good ones to themselves so the 'competition' can't access. And yes, it's true that tutors who have been prepping for certain schools for years might have old papers which aren't available to all (were in website but removed now) and probably have lists of all the old story tasks etc. That said, I firmly believe that a well -clued up parent can do it, partly because their level of personal interest in achieving success will always be higher than a tutors and because they can engage with their kid 7 days a week if they want to.

Prep schools I think are a mixed bag. Some are really good in terms of the general teaching and get their kids to a good level in terms of literacy and numeracy, but others less so. And you'd be surprised how few prep or prep effectively for 11+. Often the approach has to be quite generic is they are prepping for several schools and so it's often not that targetted. Those kids are also often tutored too - so is it the Prep education or the tutor that's getting them to level required?? In my experience where Preps have added real value is in language teaching which has often (although not always) been far ahead of state primaries and also in sport. Unless state primary kids have joined clubs outside school or are really natural sports people who pick sport up very fast, it's often been harder for them to get into teams when lots of a secondary intake are from Preps. But then, languages and sport aren't tested at 11+ and you can pay for a lot of sports clubs with fees saved and also lots of the same tOp tutors which the Prep school kids are using if you want to......if you can get hold of their details of course!

DS1 took the 11+ in 2012 and he had 6 sessions with a tutor to familiarise him with the VR and NVR elements. We also went through the Bond books and he sat 1 mock, again to familiarise him with the procedure.

With DS2, because we were more confident, we just did GL papers at home (the exam had changed) and he also sat a mock.

Both boys got top 180 and are really happy at their school.

And one last thought about Prep schools within it all. I speak as someone whose DC went to a well established and successful Prep which had 11+ leavers but mostly 13+ leavers, and now my DC have all left and gone onto the next stage.

For what it’s worth, I think the good Prep provided a good all round education and certainly provided more languages, science, music and sport than almost all state primaries. The English and Maths teaching was mostly good. There was prep for 11+ but in my view it wasn’t sufficient in a competitive world. The prep was a little generic as kids were sitting for probably 10-15 different schools. Work was done but there wasn’t a lot of marking or personal feedback of a 1-2-1 nature to target weaknesses of an individual. There is a difference between receiving 1-2-1 from a tutor or parent and a group session within school or a tutoring centre in terms of personalisation and targeted tasks which reflect exactly where a child is and where their weaknesses were.
Do I regret the Prep school? No, because it was a wonderful, magical place in its freedom to go outside the national curriculum and in terms of its wider opportunities, plus we could afford it so didn’t feel we were making huge sacrifices but smaller ones. But in terms of passing the exams to the next school, I don’t think it did more than a good primary plus a tutor and/or parental input could achieve. I think the idea that Prep school kids have a massive advantage is a bit of a myth for competitive 11+. Its fuelled by Prep schools themselves, prep school parents justifying their choices and parents of younger kids who live in fear of not getting into the selective state or independent schools and want a belt and braces approach. I’m not saying it’s not worth paying - there are lots of great things about some Prep schools and I’m glad we did it, but not for 11+ outcomes with hindsight.

We didn't pay for a tutor, but like many we supported at home with the bond books for VR, NVR and comprehension. DS was at state primary in non grammar area. He took exam for 11plus indie and was successful. The advantage we found with supporting him ourselves (apart from the cost obvs) was that we could really focus on his weaker areas, use methods and games that appealed to his interests and we could choose the best times from week to week for him to do the work. If he was tired, unwell, we had other plans for the weekend etc we simply stopped. If things were going well, we continued. This wouldn't be possible if you had a set time with a tutor each week. I would have done the same if in a grammar school area. Placed the emphasis on exam technique, not ability as if you need to tutor in the ability, I am a strong believer that you shouldn't be applying!

OP, you are asking an age old question and I've been through this process ages ago. My two kids, a girl and a boy, are now grown up, both have had a choice of more than one grammar school place in their time in this area of probably the nation's most super, super-selective grammar schools of north London. The question of tutoring was, and still is, a very, very thorny subject in here. I absolutely agree with what ChocolateWombat said above.

I am on record here to say I tutored both my kids the day they were born - whatever the word "tutor" means to anybody. And I hasten to say i am bloody proud of it! By the time secondary transfer came along, they were more than ready and just walked through those exam. In fact, I think my younger child could have taken the 11+ at age 5 and still gain those places. No, I didn't care what neighbours, friends, relatives or anybody said about my method of parenting - well, say what they will - neither did I have a clue what question types each of the grammar schools we attempted were. The likes of 'Eleven-plus' and 'MumsNet' forums didn't exist at that time and there was not a single soul or even the schools themselves that you could ask anything about the entrance exams.

Yes, I "tutored" my kids about everything under the sun insofar as they could grasp it - anything from holding a spoon to tying the shoelace to learning the algebra to whatever it takes etc. as they grow. At primary school the kids learnt nothing new and was a complete waste of time. My son, for example, was made to teach other kids, ffs! But I continued sending them there to socialise with friends which I thought was also very important.

All home "tutoring" came to an abrupt stop the moment the elder child entered secondary grammar school and the younger child won a massive scholarship to a full boarding school aged 10. I was confident they could fly "auto-pilot" by now and they never failed me. So yes, please tutor your child never mind what others may say. If you cannot do it yourself, then pay for others to do it for you. If you cannot cook at home, then go to a restaurant - what's the problem?

You can either pay or do it yourself.
Either way most kids need some assistance.

Depends where you are tbh.
South Warks there are one each single gender and one mixed state grammar.

Boys one....87 places. It's SO hard unless your child is mega, mega clever for them to get a place unlt you give them some help.

Independent schools aren't quite so stringent in their pass marks round here.

It's s fine to say "I didn't need it" (I didn't, I waltzed into a scholarship with no tutoring or 11+ practice) but these days it's different, sadly.

My DS is having tutoring and it's helping him become more confident and trust in his own judgement, and that's been worth it no matter where he ends up for school.

I was crap at helping my DD so i got a tutor. Turned out she wasn't that great either. My DD is high ability but disinterested in hard graft. Consequently she may not get a place at the selective indies she has sat for. Only applied to them because they are local to us and wanted a local school.
So go for it if u have the stomach, we clearly don't.

my 'high ability' kid has had her confidence knocked by this process and given the time over i wouldn't bother.

Home preparing isn't for everyone. Not only does it need quite a lot of work from parents in terms of accessing resources and confidenc to do it, but it can be a real strain on the relationship between parent and child. Lots of children will resist working for their parent whereas they'd work for a tutor. It can create all kinds of battles and resentment and is a key reason some people choose a tutor. That said, tutors will usually set work to be completed for next week, which might require an hour or more of work and the parent will still have to get the child to do it - all fine if you have a helpful, compliant child, but not so easy with a resistor. Having the stomach for it all can mean anything from finding the time, to accessing the materials, to battling with a reluctant child, to travelling to and from tutors, to reading up on VR and NVR and mastering it yourself, to living with the stress of the process and seeing your child stressed. I totally understand why some people decide it's not worth it. It is possible to go for 'light preparation' but that's quite hard too when everyone else seems to be doing 'intense preparation' unless you've got some good alternatives. Actually, often the 'bad' alternatives aren't as bad as people think they are.....and that is probably a key part of the problem.

Personally, I found tackling VR and NVR difficult. I found mastering the loads of different questions difficult - perhaps I'm not very clever! Luckily the children found it easier than me and did better on them than I did, but I felt I had to have a basic grasp of it all in order to work with them on it. Some children can be given the book and told 'go and do it' and will, but others need more input. And I wouldn't say that only those who are highly motivated and driven to do the prep at 9 and 10 are suitable for Grammar - there are lots if highly able children who will thrive and do well, who are just a bit reluctant at 9 and 10 to motivate themselves.

Like many others on here, we didn't use a tutor, and both my kids got places at the so-called "super selectives" in Reading. However, we did give them some practice tests. You'd be crazy not to - I think almost no child (or adult) would get in if they had literally never seen this type of paper before. You don't necessarily have to do very much though. Mine did in the order of 4-6 hours total and we only started 2 weeks beforehand for DD (it was a last minute decision) and slightly longer (less than a month) for DS.

It wasn't particularly important to us that they got a place. If it was important, then we would have done a bit more. But not necessarily that much more - diminishing returns do set in at some point, and there are more fun and worthwhile ways to spend your time than practicing daft NVR tests.

I did employ a tutor, who was very experienced and highly recommended and within a few sessions said DS would never pass the exams to get in to his preferred school (superselective entry). He has SEN, so doesn't always come across as typically intelligent, but is.

So I got rid of the tutor for being too negative, and went through practice sheets with DS for around 2/3 hours a week, for about 4 months before the exam, with lots of praise if he did well, and trying to get him to develop a 'growth mindset' if he did less well, and he passed!

They're not magicians, they only go through practice papers, and it's more about your child's ability and motivation. I've heard that some tutors will only take high ability pupils, so of course they'll pass!

OP if your absolutely confident in maths and English and totally understand where your child's weakened are...NVR and exam technique I think you will be fine but you'll have to help your child.. even just a few hours a week.a few months before the test.

But You will have too do something...

I did not give my DD tutoring and she did not get into the grammar school. She clearly should have done - she got all 8s and 9s in her GCSEs. This does obviously also beg the question whether it mattered that she missed out on the grammar. She is now very happily doing 4 A-Levels at her comprehensive.

My DD has got a place in a selective independent school for September with no tutoring. We aren't in the south east though so I don't think its any where near as competitive, there were 100 girls for 50 places. I didn't even realise tutoring for entrance exams was such a huge thing til I stumbled across this section of MN (after DD had sat the exam)!

Lol @WhoNose88 I have heard of tutors in our area you need to tutors to 'get into.' How's that for a scam? What we have discovered is some of these high demand tutors specialise in academic scholarships. Lots of families are hoping for these.

We tutored (London where you have 700+ sitting for places.) DD 1 only 'lightly' - Nov before exams in Jan. To say I was stressed I'd missed the boat/let her down not arranging things earlier is an understatement. Did a year with DD2. We find out the outcome Friday week!

JenFromTheGlen Fri 11-Jan-19 17:50:29

"Yes, grammar school and two of the most competitive public schools. No tutoring, no practice tests, just a good night’s sleep beforehand and a healthy breakfast.*

I love the 'healthy breakfast' bit. I mean - good for your kids. Seriously - as long as mine get in too I couldn't care less how people do it.

There must be a direct correlation between the amount of Nutella on white my kids have made themselves for breakfast over the years and the tutoring required at our end. There I was giving DD2 credit for being independent scrambling her own eggs and making French toast. (She is less good at the clean up.)

@OVienna Good luck! If it makes any difference though, I know plenty of kids who didn't get in via selective entry to these schools but are doing very well at the schools they did get in to (and they will all probably be going to the same unis anyway).

I'm in London too - crazy, isn't it?