Why would people be dishonest for 11+?

[Namechangefor11]

Living in London, we have observed that many parents are not honest about how much effort and time they invested in preparing their children for the 11+ exam. This is true even for those who have already gone through the process. What is their motive for lying? Why is this such a hostile environment? We cannot comprehend it.

How do you know? My son passed his after asking to sit it a few months earlier we did a few papers together and spent less than an hour a school night. Not all children need tutors and swatting but I guess if it makes you feel better not to believe it

How do you know? My son passed his after asking to sit it a few months earlier we did a few papers together and spent less than an hour a school night. Not all children need tutors and swatting but I guess if it makes you feel better not to believe it

so you did at least 45mins 5 times a week for a few months? What would you class as swatting?! 😆

I tried to not talk about tutoring after bumping into tutor who taught a child where the parents said that they didn’t tutor…. Awkward

I am one of the people who are in theory against tutoring. We have seen so many cases of tutored children then struggling to keep up in highly academic schools. However, given the amount of tutoring going on (most I heard was 6 x per week, since year 5, one open parent started in year 3/4), I think that in some areas it is impossible to get in without some tutoring.

I did work myself with DD. We started in the summer after year 5 (did a good chunk every day) and tried to do a bit every day in year 6. But I would send links to the books / materials I used if anyone asked me.

I had the same question especially I was working very long hours during my daughter 11+ journey and didnt have time to sit down with her so we had to rely on tutor. Some people were lying about it, hiding books, claim no tutoring, all reasons mentioned above, we chose to be honest about it, honest to our child about it. It is NOT possible to pass super selective 11+ without studying hard for it.

And I could say it is worth it for us though, looking back, the tutor, the revision books and all are necessary.

The main reasons behind secrecy and dishonesty have already been mentioned. I would add two more, less common ones and somewhat more noble. Some well-meaning, usually politically on the left, parents feel bad about the advantage their kid gets simply in virtue of having more money to spend than other parents. They realise it's an arms race and money has a lot to do with it, and they are ashamed to admit publicly that they allowed themselves to be drawn into it, particularly when talking to less well-off parents. The second reason is that some parents, realising how stressful and long the whole process is once you are drawn into it, try to downplay its significance in their own eyes, for their own good, just like they try to do the same with their kid. They don't want to admit to themselves that they are going all out, for fear that a disappointment (not only for the kid but also themselves) would be even greater. By not telling/hiding it from other parents, they try to make it less of an issue in the lives.

Embarrassment (for a multitude of reasons) and game playing - in the hope you can persuade other candidates that the necessary tuition isn't necessary, thereby chipping away at the opposition.

Those two reasons.

Either way it's pretty unedifying behavior in an unedifying process. Urgh

Not at our son's grammar. At the information presentations a couple of years ahead of the exam, the head was very clear in his advice that formal tutoring wasn't required.

Instead, he gave out sample exam papers, a short list of "recommended" work books and other advice/guidance as to how to prepare your child for the test.

He also highlighted all the areas that the children wouldn't have covered in their primary school by the time of the test, and again, handed out a list of topics and recommended reading/workbooks.

His third "big topic" was that the 11+ exam was nothing like the average primary child had seen before, so that exam preparation/exam technique was important to practice.

He very strongly advised against formal tutoring and instead recommending that parents spent time with their children working through his recommended workbooks, past papers, etc., for two reasons, one to cover the topics that they wouldn't have covered in school, and secondly to do exam preparation, i.e. learning the style of the questions, learning how to manage time, learning to answer the "easy" (to the child) questions first and leave the harder ones to come back to later, i.e. exam technique that primary school may not have covered.

He was very clear that he didn't want pupils tutored to within an inch of their lives who'd struggle with the fast pace and high demands of grammar school. He was clear that pupils needed to "want" to go to the grammar and needed to have it within themselves to work hard, study hard, and not just do it because the parents or tutor pushed them!

We, and other parents, came away from that evening with the clear "pathway" as to what we needed to do with our son, and formal tutoring wasn't part of that for us!

@user1497207191 I’ve yet to come across a head of a grammar that tells parents they need to tutor.. the sad reality is most do need to do this - especially the super selective like Tiffin Boys and Tiffin Girls.

Also let’s be real tutoring includes practice papers it’s not just one to one sessions with a tutor.

Interesting to hear of people's perceptions of unfairness about not being able to pay for 11+ tuition, and the hypocracy involved. The same parents are probably paying for private "clubs" such as weekend football or other sports, dance lessons, swimming lessons, etc. Why is it OK for private sport or art lessons, but not academic? Same with tech subjects, back in my day, in woodwork/metalwork and "design" classes, it was abundantly clear which pupils had a father or uncle with his own workshop - they were miles ahead of everyone else as they'd been "playing" with tools probably since primary age, yet when it came to exams, all the classes efforts were ranked against eachother for marking purposes, so of course, the kid who has an uncle with a workshop produced something like a working go cart, with tubular metal supports all welded together, etc. that had clearly been made in a workshop, whereas the poor sods without an uncle like that produced a wonky wooden radio using the minimal tools available in the school "workshop" i.e. blunt saws etc!

We're in a "normal" area, not a super-selective area.

@user1497207191 some may consider that you are fortunate those in an area with super selective the tutoring is definitely necessary.

I take issue with you claiming that most pay for clubs but complain about tutoring… there are many clubs like Scouts where the cost is £50 for the term compared to tutoring this is affordable for many… tutoring is not. Many complain about tutoring irl they might not be on Mumsnet (as we know this site is predominantly, middle-class) but there many who can’t afford clubs or tutors - hence the system sucks! No denying it!

Because it's essentially competitive - the grammar schools don't make more places if more children pass.

It’s about people trying to leverage the most advantage for their kid over others.

They see other people as competition.

For those who have gone through it, people want to make out that it came easily and they didn’t use tutors - it’s so that they appear more deserving.

It happens constantly in society- people like to talk about how their ‘hard work’ got them where they are today, but playing down the fact they’ve had massive privilege ( private school, extra tuition, contacts etc)

Amazing guideline and support! That would be fabulous if given out but some schools are very opaque and therefore people tutor because they don’t know what to do, topics to cover and both parents working or from overseas. You are very lucky to have such an informative head.

Everything in life is a competition.

If a firm has one vacancy and 2 potential, equally good, applicants, only one will get the job. That's life.

Same with sport, music, arts, etc., Take, say, the Eurovision song contest. Many years, someone comes second who "could have" come first had it not been for an unusual particularly strong entry who stormed it to the top position, like Abba with Waterloo back in 1974 - literally no other singer/group could have won that year when up against Abba!

Same with school plays, school football team, etc., only one child will be awarded the lead in a school play, only 11 will be selected for the starting line up of the first footie team, etc etc.

I was just answering the OP's question!

If you were entering the Eurovision song contest and you wanted to have an advantage, you'd probably have some voice training, but if someone asked you for tips, if you didn't want to share that advantage, you'd be like "Oh no, I didn't do any training!"

If you're applying for a job and you know your friend also has the same skills you might decide not to tell them about the job in case they perform better than you at interview.

It's the same thing - people want their own child to have the best chance at getting into the school they want, they don't want a level playing field. Even if you believe that is fair in theory, when it comes down to it most people will want to advantage themselves rather than other people.

Everyone who did the 11+ at my DD's Primary school all had tutoring, my DD didn't because I couldn't afford it and she failed by like 5 marks on the verbal reasoning as she was never bothered about learning it (I mean who is at 10 years old lol) and said she just guessed most of them. All her friends that passed and went on to grammar schools and my daughter surpassed them all with her GCSE results even with going to the worst school in our area.

I don't know if times have changed but all the parents would brag about how they got tutoring for their children and I remember one day one of the mums came into school and handed me a folder of 11+ resources that her daughter was using from her tutor 🙄😂

Both myself and my exDH went to grammar schools many years ago. Neither of us were tutored and we never thought to employ tutors for our own DCs. However, we were both highly qualified professionals and did help our DCs a lot at home after school, weekends and holidays in general so they were well-ahead of their peers by the time they sat the 11+.

I actually never asked and never have been asked about it (in DS's year).

Not many of them intended to sit the 11+. From earlier on, I got a vibe that if you indicate you are "academic" and want your child the same, you'd meet judgements, as if you wanted more than what's the norm or disapprove the rest by doing so. So I never told other parents , even though the kids they do talk.

With other families who were doing it, it seemed to be an unspoken boundary not to ask about details. It's weird, as there would be a comparison if you get exposed. I didn't need that extra pressure or judgement. I guess the others felt the same.

There was another mum with a younger DC who asked me. I didn't give her the tutor's name but planned to once DS went through it. I confess it's a bit selfish. On the other hand, I knew her well enough to tell she's not a "pushy" parent like me. In our area, unless your DC is super bright, there's no chance if you don't work extra hard (with a pushy parent like me) to get in a selective, as we are talking about reaching the top 5-7% percent here. If she was serious, I would have shared the information with less hesitation.

But I don't think it matters to know how hard the other people have worked. There are those super bright - I know one - who wouldn't need any formal tutoring. There are also always some other children being programmed to live a life with school+work+computer games (as a reward) only. You have to know your own DC, as each child is different and has their own right of balancing work and life. Some that I knew who worked ridiculously hard didn't get through, as they broke at the exam room with high anxiety which their parents probably didn't believe it's a real thing. I really sympathise those DCs. Hope they could reconcile with themselves soon and regain their faith in hardwork...

"He very strongly advised against formal tutoring and instead recommending that parents spent time with their children working through his recommended workbooks, past papers, etc., for two reasons, one to cover the topics that they wouldn't have covered in school, and secondly to do exam preparation"

"He was clear that pupils needed to "want" to go to the grammar and needed to have it within themselves to work hard, study hard, and not just do it because the parents or tutor pushed them!"

I think the Head is just talking party line.

😂

I don’t think this is the great egalitarian gesture that you think it is. He was essentially guaranteeing that his intake continues to be the intake of highly educated parents who are unfazed by a significant amount of bureaucracy.

He very strongly advised against formal tutoring and instead recommending that parents spent time with their children working through his recommended workbooks, past papers, etc., for two reasons, one to cover the topics that they wouldn't have covered in school, and secondly to do exam preparation, i.e. learning the style of the questions, learning how to manage time, learning to answer the "easy" (to the child) questions first and leave the harder ones to come back to later, i.e. exam technique that primary school may not have covered.

so informal tutoring is fine. Not every parent has the time for that though.

Interesting to hear of people's perceptions of unfairness about not being able to pay for 11+ tuition, and the hypocracy involved. The same parents are probably paying for private "clubs" such as weekend football or other sports, dance lessons, swimming lessons, etc.

i don’t think it’s perception, tutoring is £40 or so near me. Football & swimming don’t cost anything like that.