Did your child receive Tuition or not?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:50 pm

sorry I can't spell either

That should be independent

James · Post by **James** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:46 pm

I think there are practical issues here too. NFER are adamant that kids plateau quickly on their tests, and I think there's a reasonable amount of truth in this for NVR, VR. I think Maths is much more teachable, but probably best to do a bit regularly from a few months before exams rather than a crash course.

One place where I think tutors can be very useful is the more sophisticated English exams (essays, non-MC comprehension) used by Independents and a few State schools. Kids need good examples of this and tutors should have a supply of past papers. 11+ toolkit also has a few. There are too few other commercially available past paper analogues.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:58 am

I coached my child independently at home. She passed her 11+ but we've opted for an independent school. Competence (on the part of the parent as well as the child), preparation, time... it takes all these things and more.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:29 pm

I don't disagree with having a tutor, but money was tight and maths is my subject anyway, so I coached my child myself.

I do think that they need some coaching, because there were subjects in the Kent maths paper that they had not covered at school yet.

Also, I think it's important to become familiar with the paper, the way it is set out, and strategies such as having a guess at questions they don't know rather than leaving them blank.

However, I do know one child who only did one practice paper in each subject at school, and still passed.

Catherine · Post by **Catherine** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 6:48 pm

James wrote:NFER are adamant that kids plateau quickly on their tests, and I think there's a reasonable amount of truth in this for NVR, VR.

I agree that kids will plateau at some point, but my experience is that it is not nearly as quick as the NFER reckons, specially when it comes to improving speed.

James · Post by **James** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:43 pm

I did qualify it wih a 'reasonable'! I still think though that Maths is worth more input, in part because unlike VR NVR it is taught at school. It means, I think, there is an inbuilt expected level of knowledge that distinguishes it from the rather more abstract VR/NVR tests. How to do volumes, percentages etc can be directly taught and applied in all appropriate q's! My kids' school pays far, far more attention to SATS than school entry, so when they sit the tests (a few months before SATS) the children are not up to the level of maths needed.

HP · Post by HP » Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm

James wrote:... My kids' school pays far, far more attention to SATS than school entry, so when they sit the tests (a few months before SATS) the children are not up to the level of maths needed.

Agree wholeheartedly James. Made the same point in my post earlier in this thread as to why I tutored.

HP

Sally-Anne · Post by **Sally-Anne** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:45 pm

I agree that kids will plateau at some point, but my experience is that it is not nearly as quick as the NFER reckons, specially when it comes to improving speed.

I think that Catherine's point is very important - children develop speed as a result of practice.

Our son got every question right when he had all the time in the world. Then, under time pressure he would get every question right, but not finish them all. If there is one thing that 11+ practice/tutoring did for him, it was to help him understand that work rate is a big part of success.

That has paid off in other ways - he can now complete homework in record time when put under time pressure, and I think the teachers are finding the same at school.

So glad to realise that we got something for our money after all!

Sally-Anne

James · Post by **James** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:03 am

The only point I was trying to make is that you can either get your kid through by working them harder than the rest, or by working more efficiently, targeting the most productive areas. It is easiest for a poor tutor to choose the former, for example setting excessive homework. For the weak tutor this also has the dubious benefit that it's the kid's fault if he/she doesn't make it.

Catherine · Post by **Catherine** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:05 pm

James wrote:The only point I was trying to make is that you can either get your kid through by working them harder than the rest, or by working more efficiently, targeting the most productive areas. It is easiest for a poor tutor to choose the former, for example setting excessive homework. For the weak tutor this also has the dubious benefit that it's the kid's fault if he/she doesn't make it.

I agree with this 100%, James.