How necessary is tutoring at top schools?

[roses2]

We’re looking at secondary schools for DS and DH wants to apply to the top schools. We’re using Atom Learning extensively for exam prep.

My worry is where does this stop. Once he’s in - how likely is it that the average child will continue with a tutor (on top of private fees) to keep up? Is tutoring still used extensively for GCSE, A level, other years etc?

I am struggling to see how these schools maintain such good grades when I know in order to get in the first place kids are tutored heavily!

This. They won't. DDs friend is at a London independent and the school gently asked if they have thought about tutors.

Exactly - the ridiculous levels of tutoring to get children in to leading independent schools means that some children end up in schools that aren’t right for them.

When it starts to become obvious that the child is struggling to keep up with the pace of learning then the school won’t sacrifice their spot in the league tables. The options are either you leave or you tutor.

Again, that's not my experience. Not all schools are obsessed with league tables. But people tend to extrapolate their experience of (or stories about) one school to other similar schools. I'm sure there are some leading schools which are obsessed with league tables and push tutoring. But that doesn't mean there aren't plenty that aren't and don't.

My experience is the same as @crazypig No need for a tutor, any extra help needed is given by the subject teacher.

But I’m talking about help if struggling with something, not tutoring designed to get ahead of the class or help DC come top in tests. I don’t see the point of the latter, and I don’t think the school would provide it (though I’ve never asked).

"I'm sure there are some leading schools which are obsessed with league tables and push tutoring. But that doesn't mean there aren't plenty that aren't and don't."

Interested to know which leading school doesn't care about league table, obviously not obsessed (only some parents do).

Also my observation is that the higher the league table school is, the more likely the school with high cluster of competitive parenting. Though it is not the school who ask for extra tutoring, the school won't proactive stop it.

I'm not saying that there are lots of schools that are totally oblivious to their league table position, but I think there are plenty of schools that care much less about it than about other things (student wellbeing for a start), and far less than parents might think. Sorry, I'm not about to start naming schools, for either good or bad, because that wont end well. My experience from many years on MN (NC frequently but I'm a very old MN hand) is that parents are far, far more cynical about schools' motivations and actions in many cases than is actually warranted.

To answer @PreplexJ no, we won't individually tutor kids to 'get ahead', but we do provide loads of extension opportunities to challenge even the most able students. And as for proactively stopping parents from tutoring - apart from telling then they don't need to and giving them all the reasons why we don't think they should, how do you propose we do that?

" I think there are plenty of schools that care much less about it than about other things (student wellbeing for a start), and far less than parents might think."

"we do provide loads of extension opportunities to challenge even the most able students."

Thanks @crazypig I think what you stated below is really what IMO a good school should be. I wonder the schools with such attributes will be ending up in the very top of the league table, or will at least be very volatile in their league table position. How can the parents to identify/find these schools though?

Yes, it probably yeild little difference from school telling students need tutor or not - it can't change the parents mind if they think they need it for whatever reasons.

Actually, I think the impact on league tables is also less than you'd think. If you have a very selective school, with an intake of very clever kids, and you teach them well and generally look after them, then the vast majority are going to end up getting great results. How you treat the small percentage that struggle (ie whether you push them to get tutors and/or manage them out, or whether you just support them to do the best they can without wrecking their mental health) will actually not make a dramatic difference to your results, because the numbers in question are small. But it can make a very big difference to the atmosphere and culture of a school, if you're the type of school that chases that extra 1% A-C at all costs, or whether your school leadership has the confidence to think that other things are more important. Where I agree with you is that it can be very hard for prospective parents to tell the difference from the outside.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I think school result is largely explain by the intake cohort ability.

I'm talking about the schools that at the very top bracket i.e the few percentage difference in GCSE - some parents I know even only look at 8-9 GCSE percentage, and A levels at A* percentage only, that is the kind of obsessiveness of perfectionism competitive parenting in the top range of those league table schools. And to some extend, such concisiously two way selection of the parents/schools drive the direction of the culture and atmosphere of these schools.

One of my DC attended one of the so called superselectives in SW London. She used practice papers to get in but no tutoring as such. Nearly everyone else was tutored for years to get in.

I found out later that many of her peers were tutored throughout their time at the school.

I was told consistently that my DD was in the top third at least of the year group but these students were consistently the top in the class.

In DC’s opinion a couple of had been overtutored as they always struggled but all the others were very clever. I think their parents were just paranoid or competitive.

I belatedly hired a tutor for one of the sciences in upper Sixth because one of the teachers was appalling. Most others had hired one within a week of starting lower Sixth.

DC later got a first in her science related degree (no tutoring!)

@PreplexJ I still disagree to an extent. My school (and I suspect possibly the school of another teacher poster on this thread) would fall into that top bracket, but the school is not obsessed by results. Some of the parents are, but there's not much we can do about that. We just carry on doing what we do in the way we think it's right to do it!

Ok, I'm not a teacher so you probably have more saying on your school.

As you agreed on a prospective parent probably we couldn't tell which school care less about league table than the other.

In my opinion, the culture and atmosphere of the school does largely influenced by the parents overtime, when a large group of parents obsessed with league table send their kids to a specific target school high up in the league table, I can't imagine the school can stand for its principle and believe without adopting to it.

@crazypig are you referring to me? Would be interested to know where you teach!

Likewise, but sorry not sharing!

I don’t buy this for a second, and I have a DS who is a top student at one of the top senior schools. Never had a private tutor in his life.

If I had to guess, I would say loads of tutors are posing to prop up demand for their services on MN.

In my opinion, the culture and atmosphere of the school does largely influenced by the parents overtime.

There's definitely a cultural angle. We were in the ethnic minority at our prep school (we're white) and most of the kids had tutors from an early age. School were very anti tutoring and pointed out it was entirely unnecessary (it was an excellent school in terms of teaching) but it didn't have much impact. There was also a lot of over-competitive behaviour from parents.

Secondary school is more balanced. School doesn't encourage tutoring but some kids have extra tutoring on top if they're struggling in a subject. Not casting aspersions on the school provision as they provide a lot of extra support at lunchtimes and after school for those who need it.

It's not just a private school thing either. My friend's sons go to a high performing grammar school and have had extensive tutoring to make sure they got A stars in their A levels and 9s at GCSE.

I keep meeting people from a south east private school who still pay for tutoring. One person I met paid for tutoring until the end of a levels.

I don't think anyone thinks it's just a private school thing. I think the general consensus is, it's a state school thing, and it's shocking that it happens in a private school where you're already paying fees. I don't think anyone would be surprised that a grammar school kid has a tutor.

What do you mean by top schools, OP?

My dc at a "top" private school had no tutoring to get in. One had a bit for maths GCSE as her maths was never great and - even at a top school - you do get rubbish teachers, like hers. She had no confidence and needed handholding from a young, empathetic maths graduate who lived locally. If she'd needed it across all subjects or for A level I would worry. One dc's friend does have a tutor for every subject, her parents are absurdly rich and that's the way they roll but it simply isn't necessary ... No one else afaik does