How many families are really doing this?

wurzel · Post by **wurzel** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:02 am

Our children did seven or eight past papers during the few months before the tests. ?They speeded up over the first 2 or 3, but then didn't improve much more. We didn't discuss with them how to solve the questions, as I had thought the point of the tests was to see which children could work this out! If I had seen this forum before my first child took the test (and qualified) however, I might have been worried. My second son hasn't had his result yet of course!
Most of the children who qualified from our primary school could have been predicted to do so from their school performance, regardless of any additional tuition some of them will have had.

If we were in a 'super-selective' county, where some of the testing seems to be broader and more like schoolwork, I think we might well have done some additional prep.

T.i.p.s.y · Post by **T.i.p.s.y** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:24 am

Only read the article not the posts but do you not think this tutor has a duty of care to these children? I am shocked any adult (and I assume she was once a teacher) would be happy to have a child at 5am in the morning and IMO it is a form of abuse on both the parent and tutors part. This kid probably got up at 4am to get there!

Post by **mad?** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:29 am

T.i.p.s.y wrote:Only read the article not the posts but do you not think this tutor has a duty of care to these children? I am shocked any adult (and I assume she was once a teacher) would be happy to have a child at 5am in the morning and IMO it is a form of abuse on both the parent and tutors part. This kid probably got up at 4am to get there!

T.i.p.s.y

I completely agree.

mad

Post by **mad?** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:31 am

Milla wrote:the thing is that even with people who say they don't do much, "only a paper a day, sometimes 2, in the summer holidays" amounts to, aargh, calculates slowly, between 42 and 84 papers are there that many??? (not picking on you, Cleo, honest, it was just you were honest enough to quote a number I could play with! - just thought it interesting if that equated to "not much")

Must have been a typo, it certainly would equate to a **** of a lot in our household!

cleo · Post by **cleo** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:45 am

Hi sorry i didn't make myself clear. He did one a day (only during the week days) when we were at home. He did not do one when we went away or the days when we had arranged other outings i.e going to his friends houses, day trips put ect.

If the child wants to go to a certain school and wants the extra tutoring that is brill and should be encouraged. However, children should be allowed to grow confidently without feeling a failure if they have not reached the schools standards.
I am aware one size does not fit all and all children are different. Most parents do make the right choices for their children as they know them the best.
My apologies if I offended anyone. I certainly din't to mean to.

Post by **mad?** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:50 am

cleo wrote:Hi sorry i didn't make myself clear. He did one a day (only during the week days) when we were at home. He did not do one when we went away or the days when we had arranged other outings i.e going to his friends houses, day trips put ect.

If the child wants to go to a certain school and wants the extra tutoring that is brill and should be encouraged. However, children should be allowed to grow confidently without feeling a failure if they have not reached the schools standards.
I am aware one size does not fit all and all children are different. Most parents do make the right choices for their children as they know them the best.
My apologies if I offended anyone. I certainly din't to mean to.

Hi Cleo I don't think anyone was offended, I certainly wasn't.

Milla · Post by **Milla** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:23 pm

oh no offence at all. blimey, how could it be?! just interesting establishing differing levels of not muchness. And since it's just about all I'm thinking about at any (sad) given moment then I'm probably guilty of giving 24/7 at the mo. Made more complicated by having seen the local comp by day today and thinking, hmmmm, are we mad? should he go here?

Rugbymum · Post by **Rugbymum** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:30 pm

My son had a tutor in year 5 for about 6 months (weekly for 40 mins) and then I took over the tutoring but as by then he already knew the basics so it was just a matter of giving him old VR/NVR papers, some maths and English comprehension work. This was also done on a weekly basis with the occasional lapse due to holidays etc.

I do think there is a lot of exaggeration in that article

Chelmsford mum · Post by **Chelmsford mum** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:09 pm

Rugbymum wrote:
I do think there is a lot of exaggeration in that article

I really, really hope so.

essex-mum18 · Post by **essex-mum18** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:14 pm

There have been a lot of opinions/ discussions re tutoring in the forum recently. e.g Kent, Birmingham..

IMHO, I agree that certain level of tutoring/ coaching/ teaching/ familiarization/ helping (whatever you like to call it) is needed to prepare a child for the 11+ nowadays due to increased competition.

However, the following thread has raised an important point which is very worthwhile for us parents to think about.

http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... php?t=3161