Tell me about good GCSEs without use of tutors

[AtomHeartMotherOfGod]

Both children are at a private school but neither me nor DH know much about them. I was grammar, he just worked bloody hard and had clever DPs.

Year 10 parents have been asking for tutor recommendations for GCSEs and I'm wondering how naive I'm being about their use for these exams. DCs do pretty well, but if the reality of private school results is that actually they are heavily backed by tutors then I don't want them to be disadvantaged.

Please tell me what your reality has been, and anything that you did for your children (yourself, or via tutors) that really helped them. Many thanks!

Ridiculous to have to pay for tutoring on top of private school fees unless for a specific need imo. What's the point in paying for private school if it's not going to provide everything your child needs?

Mine were private. All A* with a couple of A’s.

In Y10 DD’s maths teacher went on mat leave, the supply was hopeless and disappeared after a term. DD had about half a dozen lessons with a tutor mainly for her confidence. The school put it right, the following term by putting on additional sessions after school.

Ime lots just use tutors to push the child further even if they aren't struggling.

What's the point in paying for private school if it's not going to provide everything your child needs?

Not all private schools are equal & sometimes there is less focus on academics. Also some dc despite being in private need additional help.

DS, changed school at the start of year 11 (old school were vehemently against it, said it would ruin chances but bullying was so abhorrent and no school support so he decided to risk it).

Old school told new, smaller school that he was expected no higher than a 5 in anything due to SEN (he has lung disease and autism, but to old school it meant educationally not expected to do well).

Through hard work of his own, constant studying, and we used to make him take a break, he got 7s and is in everything. I was so proud. New school helped as saw him as himself not his SEN, and encouraged him hugely.

He's now doing 4 A'levels, maths, computer science, economics and sociology. No tutors here just hard work and self discipline.

Our eldest went to a grammar school, no tutors and excellent exam results

There are plenty of private school kids who also have tutors and I think these posts may be misleading. I particularly see it in exceptionally competitive areas where there has been a complete arms race to get on and kids need extra help to keep up. It’s really sad and I find it incredulous to be paying circa £30k for private education PLUS tutors. But I think a load are and cover up some dodgy teaching.

I do think it’s also changed over past 5-10 years so talking about older experiences are out of date.

@PrimeLocation agree

We looked at a grammar/selective place for my eldest after it was suggested but the competition & commitment is insane. Some dc do 4 hours extra work a week from yr 4. I wasn't prepared to that, dc is clever but not genius so would have to work.

Wish it was only 4 hours a week! South west London and grammar competition is insane. Why the schools can’t set a test you can’t tutor for… though it’s not in their interests. This way they get heavily invested parents (and kids). Makes their jobs a whole lot easier.

There are a number of factors at play.

Firstly, the main predictive factor in terms of results at GCSE will be cognitive aptitude ,which used to be called IQ. That is why all schools test on entry in Year 7. The difference between the best teaching and pretty bad teaching is generally considered to be two grades.

The good thing and the bad thing about private schools is that they are really focus d on not letting pupils fail, so they assiduously follow up on missed prep, have clinics in every subject a couple of times a week and liaise with the parents should any problems arise.

So why isn’t this all good? As it is via failing and realising why you have failed that pupils learn self motivation and resilience. Tutoring just adds another layer to the support offered. Most pupils who get tutors haven’t bothered to do their prep properly, turn up to the clinics et, as they believe that they are immune to failure, never having been allowed to fail.

I think the odd tutoring session to cover missed work, or if you have a weak teacher is ok, but to add regular tutoring to the already over supportive private school system is to create an unhealthy dependency on support and mitigates against the ability to learn independently.

The higher up the school system and further education you go, the less relying on other people works. Ultimately the scaffolding has to be withdrawn and underperforming (within reason) at GCSE will teach you to work harder at A levels.

The children I know who were tutored in all subjects for GCSE are also being tutored for all subjects at A level...

I was quite surprised how much degree level tutoring was on offer when I was looking at tutor websites.

It's a massive industry these days, and the internet has made it internationally available and 24/7 availability.

I don't know anyone who considered it as a way of turning someone incapable into someone capable. More a way of just adding 1:1 bespoke and tailored support.

The enormous increase in the cost of private schools in the last 10 years has also lead to a lot of parents, who in the 80s and 90s would have just automatically gone for private schools, now opting for State Plus.

I also suspect that the majority of those using tutors don't advertise that they are.

@PrimeLocation is it more than that? We are in SW London and fortunately are in catchment for a v.good school plus have faith options.

@OhCrumbsWhereNow ,

‘The children I know who were tutored in all subjects for GCSE are also being tutored for all subjects at A level...

I was quite surprised how much degree level tutoring was on offer when I was looking at tutor websites.’

Well precisely, learned dependency.

And, chances are, despite the tutoring, they didn’t excel.

Ultimately, though, aside from the generationally permanently wealthy, at some point they will have to stand on their own two feet.

I don't know anyone who considered it as a way of turning someone incapable into someone capable. More a way of just adding 1:1 bespoke and tailored support.

Agree. I had a tutor in the 90s because I loved a particularly subject and I guess there weren't as many accessible resources to push me.

I also suspect that the majority of those using tutors don't advertise that they are.

100%. And there is a lot of downplaying. A few parents I know are quite anti tutor but they have done atom learning, CGP books, flashcards etc everyday

On the contrary - full sets of top GCSE grades and on track for top A level grades.

Given that there are routes for continued support at degree level too, it's only the parental bank balance that is really the issue.

It's also worth considering that SEN students with SpLd or things like ADHD are supposed to receive pre-teaching and scaffolding as a matter of course at school. Chances are that they probably don't unless they have a really good EHCP in place. So the tutor replaces what school should be providing.

There are also Home Ed students who often learn all their subjects via 1:1 teaching.

Are you saying that these students, who should receive this extra support, or those who are receiving it through HE or good SEN provision, are unlikely to excel?

What is on offer in education is so varied that I don't think you can really say one path or another is worse.

Is the Oxbridge student supported by a tutorial system, weekly essays and a full lecture curriculum a weaker student less capable of standing on their own two feet than a student at a university that delivers 6 hours lectures a week, no tutorials and 1 essay a term? Or are they just better taught and more engaged with the subject?

Is the comprehensive student in a disruptive class of 30 having an hour a week in Maths with a tutor less capable than the private school student in a class of 10 well behaved and interested kids?

@OhCrumbsWhereNow
Our experience of Cambridge supervisions isn't that they're there for supporting - much more for challenging! I'm very pleased by son was able to stand on his own two feet academically. I think it would have been very hard if he couldn't.

A generation or two earlier his dad can say the same of Oxford tutorials.
Definitely not supportive!

OP We didn’t tutor our DC who took GCSEs last year at a selective private school. But we did let her off chores, provided a good study environment, bought whatever stationary/apps/ equipment she needed, and encouraged her to go to school subject clinics as needed.

The difference between those who got the highest marks across the board, and those who just did very well, was mostly about ability to knuckle down and just learn facts and exam technique. You don’t need a tutor for that, though I assume one could help in that they will keep the DC focused.

My personal view is that I’d rather DC learn to work hard using their own motivation (or fail to do so, and feel the consequences) sooner rather than later. And better to learn that lesson at 16 than 21.

Yes, if it wasn't clear I am sceptical. They should be fine and it wasn't something I ever thought about until parents started asking for recommendations, then I thought 'do lots of people do this?'

Agree. All children are different, however sixth form college will expect them to be independent learners, so the embedding of good learning habits in secondary is key.

@AtomHeartMotherOfGod We had DDs at private senior school and no tutors. What my DC did was dance, music, drama, and various other clubs and activities like swimming and choir. In other words, a broad education and mostly supplied by the school. They did board but the day girls joined in with the clubs etc too plus lots of sport if they wanted it. It’s sad dc are forced to give up on so much for academics. A well rounded child is preferable. At home, I’ve seen dc tutored and they end up anxious to please and worry about school work all the time. That wasn’t what we wanted.

In an earlier post you mentioned you were worried your DC would be disadvantaged if they weren't tutored. I can't see how hot-housing them to a higher level that they might struggle to maintain through A-levels without similar tutoring is going to help them in the long run. Better to support them working to their very best now without the added pressure of knowing you're spending x amount on top of their school fees just to go up a couple of grades.

Mine got top grades, dd1 at a state school in special measures, dd2 in a "good" school

@OhCrumbsWhereNow ,

‘Given that there are routes for continued support at degree level too, it's only the parental bank balance that is really the issue.’

Given my teaching experience at private schools, the parental bank balance definitely wasn’t the issue!

‘It's also worth considering that SEN students with SpLd or things like ADHD are supposed to receive pre-teaching and scaffolding as a matter of course at school.

Chances are that they probably don't unless they have a really good EHCP in place. So the tutor replaces what school should be providing.

There are also Home Ed students who often learn all their subjects via 1:1 teaching.

Are you saying that these students, who should receive this extra support, or those who are receiving it through HE or good SEN provision, are unlikely to excel?’

These are red herrings in the context of the thread.

As someone who studied Natsci, specialising in Physics, at Cambridge, I can definitively say that tutorials were the polar opposite of what most tutoring is for school children. They were there to get a minimal amount of marking done and feedback and to discuss anything you were struggling with. The 4 hours of tutoring a week covered marking, feedback and discussion of a massive range of work. It was the only chance for any marking/feedback or going into anything in detail.

You need to be spectacularly self motivated to succeed at Oxbridge.

Private schools already give copious feedback and revision sessions. If you need stuff in addition, it really means you either aren’t that smart or that motivated or both. (Or it is a terrible school and you are wasting your money).

I don't think saying that GCSEs are ridiculously easy or "my child achieved 12 9s at GCSE with no work" are helpful to the OP.

These are peak mumsnet and aren't a reflection of real life.

I agree that if I was already paying for my child's education I would feel rather cheated if I had to pay for a tutor as well. I also agree that if a young person needs to be tutored for all A levels and at degree level (barring SEN etc) are they even capable of independent study?

DD was state educated and just had a maths tutor for a few weeks for maths GCSE as she had a useless maths teacher. For A levels and her degree she was on hwr own and worked very hard to achieve excellent results for both.

However, she didn't find either "ridiculously easy"