Over coaching?

[mattsurf]

The 15 hours of coaching a week for a 10 year old bit!

DS has not abandoned all other activities - we go canoeing one evening per week, he goes to cubs (and cub camp etc), we frequently go for cycle rides. I will be teaching DS to windsurf this summer. What has gone is a lot of TV time.

Other parents are shocked by the amout of extra work that we are doing, and some are openly hostile. He has lost one good friend, who now wants nothing to do with DS.

To be honest, 15 hours a week is quite a lot, but really not excessive. It is strange that as a society, hard work in children is frowned upon, especially in the state education system. Look at how hard children in Asia and India are made to work and remember that in a global economy, they are the people that our children will be competing against as adults

[Cranleigh]

I couldn't agree with you more but a growing number don't see it like that. As they see it 'you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear' (most in UK believe this) and those not up to par academically have been getting in to selective schools and struggling.

For example, St Paul's girls school are now asking parents to declare how much tutoring their child has had prior to them sitting the exam. They have said that over-tutored children often go on to struggle at the school and the feeling is it's not to be encouraged, they should be informed etc...

A few things strike me. Our local prep prepares children for CE and 11 plus exams from Reception up. Go in and you'll see Y4 up doing regular, timed tests. You'll see class sizes of 16 and outstanding teachers. You'll see children being stretched way beyond the NC. I could go on but it's too depressing.

I believe intellect can develop over time, your ability isn't fixed. I've seen children get cognitively smarter when they practice and put in the time, when they are shown 'how to' in one-to-one sessions and small groups. So on and so forth. This isn't generally believed especially amongst many who are 'old school'. I've spoken to enough Public school headmasters and others who believe they can just tell if the child has the academic potential or not way before 11. They'll say you can't increase IQ beyond a few points etc, etc.

Our state primary doesn't go in for preparing children for any exam, they want level 4s at KS2, that's the main goal. There are 30 in a class, the teaching is hit and miss. There's lots of low level disruption (compared to the Prep where children sit in a neat horse-shoe facing front and there is no room to hide).

Surely a pupil at our state primary who has been aggressively tutored should not therefore be penalised. As others have said the curriculum won't have been fully covered anyway in time for entry tests.

The St Paul's exam is tough. It requires the application of knowledge and a very sound intellect. I would struggle with some of it. They are looking for creative, original thinking etc. I can't see how a child without the ability would ace the test. They interview too. So surely any girl who does well enough deserves their place?

For what it's worth I also think Prep school children who have been tutored should be penalised either. See comments above re: exam as to why.

Also, I think a bright child that passes but is disruptive and doesn't recognise the chance they've been given at grammar school is far less deserving and potentially much more of a blight that an 'over coached' committed, pleasant child who 'may' struggle at the grammar?

People also forget that the grammar will probably set.

[doodles]

I think that I am going to shut myself in the understairs cupboard, this thread has depressed and scared me. From where we live it is superselective GS or nothing on the GS front and at this rate poor DS2 has got to score virtually full marks to get a look in!

However, saying that I am not sure that I could put him through 15 hours preparation a week. He currently does an hour a week with the tutor and she gives him an hour or so's homework per week, he also does a little bit with us but it comes to nowhere near 10 hours per week. He gets quite a bit of homework from school and does have to have some time to be a 9 year old boy.

[suzanne]

I think I'll join you Doodles.....

In our area this is the reason the Maths & English tests are being brought in following the VR & NVR. I wonder if the result is going to be even more tutoring?

There are 1 or 2 children in my DC1s class who really struggle to keep up - it is quite a competitive environment - quite difficult for the children who struggle. They seem to know who got what Mark etc and when the average Mark is 80 or 90% and someone gets 29% something has perhaps gone wrong with the system.

[inmystride]

@ immystride - quote -Grammar schools are geared toward the brighter students, not the average ones.
Yes, but an average/above average child in what school ??? A middle of the road /above average student in a good junior prep school can be the "gifted & talented" in another not so good school???? If a child is bright - it does not necessarily mean that in year 4 if they are not top of the class, they are therefore unsuitable for a grammar school. Some children start to improve year 5/6 and If a child passes the 11+ - regardless of tutoring or not they rightly deserve their place!!

Don't quite know what you are trying to say here. I was replying to a post stating that an average student needed tutoring to pass the 11+ (from memory!). My point was that Grammar Schools were established to provide a suitable education for brighter students in general. Not all students are equal, and not all are up to the demands of a GS. Whether we like to admit it or not, there is a difference between being 'very bright' and 'very well taught'.

[Moonlight]

@ immystride - quote -Grammar schools are geared toward the brighter students, not the average ones.
Yes, but an average/above average child in what school ??? A middle of the road /above average student in a good junior prep school can be the "gifted & talented" in another not so good school???? If a child is bright - it does not necessarily mean that in year 4 if they are not top of the class, they are therefore unsuitable for a grammar school. Some children start to improve year 5/6 and If a child passes the 11+ - regardless of tutoring or not they rightly deserve their place!!

I couldn't agree more - any child who passes the 11+ deserves their place irrespective of tutoring - it is one of the urban myths that GS is full of kids who cannot cope, yes there are probably one or two, but not common.

I think most people would agree that any child deserves their place having passed the 11+.

My son was tutored for one hour each week. He was not covering the level of maths or English required for this exam at his primary school and needed extending. Also, verbal reasoning was not taught at all so this was really useful practise.

I think that most students cope reasonably well once at grammar school but the standard expected is very different to that of a comprehensive school. My son is at a grammar and is constantly tested in every subject. He has lots of homework and expectations are always high. There is no let up. His friends, at our local comp, were really shocked when he told them just how much work he has to do every day.

I am not suggesting for one minute that students are not encouraged to work hard wherever they are but a grammar school will expect their students to reach high standards of academic ability all the time. There could be a great deal of pressure for students to keep up with their peers in this type of learning environment.

[Cranleigh]

Just wrote post & lost. Was trying to respond to the PP who said they believed there was a difference between inherently bright & well taught. Perhaps didn't word well previously but was trying to say that most would agree.

I've found that intellect can develop through good teaching & it's possible to get cognitively smarter through lots of purposeful practice. I've seen the ordinary child become extraordinary due to hours of practice.

[Amber]

Am I the only one who finds this quite depressing?

No, you're not, ourmam. And I think I had better leave my involvement in this thread at that point.

[Looking for help]

It is depressing. We were completely caught out in the case of our youngest. I had absolutely no idea how much intensive tuition was going on. My older three passed with about an hour a week for about 6 months, but this was not enough for my youngest, who despite the comprehensive education is being predicted more As and A*s than his older siblings were predicted or in fact got at GCSEs. He's now year 9. We shall see. One thing is for sure he is definitely not less bright than his older siblings, and so far has been doing really well.

If I had my time over again, would I do the intensive tuition ? I'm not sure. There are pros and cons. It would have been nice for all my kids to have gone to the same school, but perhaps he has actually benefited more from being a bright boy in his school, whereas he probably wouldn't have been noticed at the grammar (as my others weren't really).

However we were lucky ( ) in that we hd a reasonable alternative. If that had not been so, I would have been out of my mind with worry, so I guess what people do is based on a lot of things - not just getting the grammar, but getting a decent education, which sadly is not available everywhere.

I am thoroughly delighted I have no more to put through the process, as it can be harrowing.

[Fran17]

Doing that much prep at home wouldn't have suited my sons or me. However, I think it is up to the individual how much work they do with their children. Some private schools do a considerable amount of prep for the 11+ from a very young age, often putting the children at state primary schools at a disadvantage. I have heard lots about over tutored children not being able to cope at grammar and am sure you get the odd case, but I can't imagine it is a common occurrence. Succeeding and coping at a grammar school isn't just dependent upon a child's intelligence. Much depends upon their attitude to their studies and the amount of work they are prepared to put in. I know of three boys who have left my son's grammar school. My DS told me they were all bright boys but weren't interested in doing the work that was required of them. I think the school would perhaps have preferred three boys whose ability was slightly less, but who were conscientious and were prepared to work hard.

I am thoroughly delighted I have no more to put through the process, as it can be harrowing.

Me too LFH (sorry, our posts crossed).