11 Plus Exams Forum

Hi just heard that apparently camphill provide an afternoon of 'tuition' per week for some year 5 children . I thought this grammar test was sold as ' tutor proof' so this does seem rather contradictory . Has anyone else heard anything ?

Hajra wrote:Hi just heard that apparently camphill provide an afternoon of 'tuition' per week for some year 5 children . I thought this grammar test was sold as ' tutor proof' so this does seem rather contradictory . Has anyone else heard anything ?

If this is really going on then it's absolutely disgraceful. Firstly CEM are very keen to state the test is purportedly tutor-proof as can be & secondly CEM have an agreement with the schools to keep the content as secretive as possible - I know that some teachers have access to the papers before the test (I remember a particular headmistress stating this a few years ago on an open day) & therefore surely the content can be compromised.
If it's true then what a farce!!

Bob1892 wrote:

Hajra wrote:Hi just heard that apparently camphill provide an afternoon of 'tuition' per week for some year 5 children . I thought this grammar test was sold as ' tutor proof' so this does seem rather contradictory . Has anyone else heard anything ?

If this is really going on then it's absolutely disgraceful. Firstly CEM are very keen to state the test is purportedly tutor-proof as can be & secondly CEM have an agreement with the schools to keep the content as secretive as possible - I know that some teachers have access to the papers before the test (I remember a particular headmistress stating this a few years ago on an open day) & therefore surely the content can be compromised.
If it's true then what a farce!!

I agree completely ! Will try and find out a bit more

I mentioned this two weeks ago on a thread that had since been locked.

"I highlighted the above point re fairness and tuition as a friend of mine, whose Year 5 child is at a local state primary, was telling me that her child's class is having tuition and exam practice each week at Camp Hill boys school, in school time. If true (I don't know as my Year 5 child isn't involved) then clearly their stance has changed ."

The Consortium have admitted in writing they have no evidence the test is resistant to preparation or tests innate ability. This was in a Freedom of Information Act response. The communications manager admitted the test can be prepared for and everyone knows it.

The issue isn't just of tutoring per say. It's also about the very institution giving it themselves to a select few. I'm sure they'll say it's part of the drive to increase the FSM quota/encourage those who wouldn't have ordinarily applied.

The irony is that my friend who's child is going is actually paying for tuition anyway, as are a lot of her DC's classmates, so it's not like they don't know about Grammar schools or even need free tuition.

isn't that the point of tests; preparation or am I missing something?

moseleymum wrote:The issue isn't just of tutoring per say. It's also about the very institution giving it themselves to a select few. I'm sure they'll say it's part of the drive to increase the FSM quota/encourage those who wouldn't have ordinarily applied.

Well, I totally agree. The Consortium clearly knows what was on the papers in past years and what will be in the test this year. This action will simply encourage tuition. If the Consortium tutor, prepare, prep or what ever you want to call it, the rest of the people will view this as a signal it is necessary.

The question is, how to get this tuition and can the content be shared for everyone. It would be interested to find out if they are taught vocabularly and if it appears in the test.

Why are state primary schools not allowed to prepare children and why is the Consortium?

gideon wrote:
Well, I totally agree. The Consortium clearly knows what was on the papers in past years and what will be in the test this year. This action will simply encourage tuition. If the Consortium tutor, prepare, prep or what ever you want to call it, the rest of the people will view this as a signal it is necessary.

The question is, how to get this tuition and can the content be shared for everyone. It would be interested to find out if they are taught vocabularly and if it appears in the test.

Why are state primary schools not allowed to prepare children and why is the Consortium?

I don't think it will encourage tuition -most children have some form of tuition anyway whether at home by parents or an external tutor.

It's the unfair advantage. They always say that a bright child should succeed anyway, so why should those people knowing the content of the paper give tuition towards it?

It's not about bright children, it about who have read a lot and being taught above their age group.
The average 10 year is expected to have a wide vocabulary, I quote their website:

"Generally speaking children who are successful in our exam are at Level 5 or 6 with their SATs and should have a reading age of 13-15 years".

Some are basically at GCSE level. In maths some are at foundation GCSE and would easily get a grade "C".

Read their website:
"We really do advise parents to be certain of their child’s ability before they register for the test. Children should not be entered because tests are free, neither should they enter if they have little chance of success".

Do you think this statement encourages children from poorer backgrounds to apply to the grammar schools?