Why selective school kids need tutors?

[Trebla]

You can hide this advertisement by registering.

Originally Posted by oasfree

Selective school teachers are only better in the sense that they survive the tough environment. They would have transfered if they are humiliated by smart students. I thought if students have problem understanding they could tell the teachers rather than turning to tutors. Learning ahead is rather odd. If the kids are smart, they can self-learn ahead. It's as simple as reading ahead. Could it be that many kids in selective schools are there simply because they went to coaching since they were young. And that stopped them from acquiring the skill to self-learn? So they are hooked into the vicious circle of slipping behind and going to tutoring to pull ahead?

Some teachers in selective schools do get humiliated by smart students, yet they don't leave. I know in my school, there is a terrible Chemistry teacher who just diverts any intelligent question by saying "check it in the textbook" or "you can find that out yourself".

There is a difference between being smart and being diligent. Not all smart kids are diligent. Not everyone has the ability to self learn. With some kids, even the smart ones, self-learning is very time consuming and inefficient because more than likely they would have many unanswered questions. If they pose these questions to the school teacher, usually the reply would be "wait till we get up to that topic" otherwise the teacher would pay less attention to those who want to learn the current topic, whereas with a tutor they can be answered more or less straightaway as they learn ahead.

[TearsOfFire]

Originally Posted by oasfree

Selective school teachers are only better in the sense that they survive the tough environment. They would have transfered if they are humiliated by smart students.

I don't agree with this. Like Treble says, not all selective school teachers are good; Thus one of the reasons students look for tutors. Some teachers may not even have to teach much, since most of the kids are getting tutored. But in saying that, there are still some excellent teachers at my school. Also, teaching at a selective school has its advantages over teaching at a comprehensive school ~ Most of the students want to learn and teachers may not be spending most of the time just yelling at students and just trying to maintain order inside the classroom.

[litany]

Why is tutoring helpful to selective school kids? It's my belief that GENERALLY SPEAKING, most students in selective schools are naturally intelligent and capable of learning and understanding pretty much anything they set their minds to in terms of the courses taught in the curriculum. With this in mind, the key points of usefulness regarding tutoring is that it:

1. Forces the student to practice the material, thus reinforcing their understanding and refreshing their memory.
   
2. Provides a more student-centred rather than class-centred teaching style, in that it allows for the weaknesses of a certain student to be addressed and not foregone in the best interests of teaching the whole class (as is the general case in high schools)
   
3. A linked point to the above, tutoring allows students to ask questions in an environment that is more forgiving to it. By this I mean - as many other posters mentioned - if there are other students in the tutoring class, they won't haze the student asking the question, and the questioning student won't feel intimidated.
   
4. Allows the student to CHOOSE their teacher/tutor, meaning the style of learning most conducive to student can be chosen, as opposed to leaving it to pure luck as is the case in high school.

[soporific]

i'm not sure if selective kids NEED tutoring, it's more so that they WANT to go to tutoring because of the competition. i think it works like that for every school, regardless of whether it is selective or not. everyone wants to receive the same (if not better) advantage as the person beside them.

[oasfree]

Originally Posted by Trebla

With some kids, even the smart ones, self-learning is very time consuming and inefficient because more than likely they would have many unanswered questions. If they pose these questions to the school teacher, usually the reply would be "wait till we get up to that topic" otherwise the teacher would pay less attention to those who want to learn the current topic, whereas with a tutor they can be answered more or less straightaway as they learn ahead.

I get this point. But self-learning is a big part that brings out the balance. If tutors always give the best solution, there will be no thinking. In the long term kids will be hesitant to think hard. But surely teachers do tend to run a one-way dialogue especially if you have a boring one. However I thought that teachers do organise groups of students to work and it's their job to do many activities at HS pretty much like primary school teachers do for little kids? Or at HS they just stop that group style and deliver boring instructions in a monotonous way?

[oasfree]

Originally Posted by litany

Allows the student to CHOOSE their teacher/tutor, meaning the style of learning most conducive to student can be chosen, as opposed to leaving it to pure luck as is the case in high school.

I think this is more of the one-on-one market or the small group market. Many coaching places run large classes pretty much like schools and deliver boring lessons too? I know one-on-one is very good if you get a good tutor. It's possible to address gaps in knowledge left unfilled by teachers at HS.

Many teachers from HS in their 40s came from the 80s when UAI for entering education training was between 48 - 60. Many of them actually failed the HSC and still got in colleges to do a degree in education. Many did not study the subjects that they are teaching right now. But I would say that these teachers would not survive in selective schools. They would have transfered themselves long ago.

[oasfree]

Originally Posted by Trebla

There is a difference between being smart and being diligent. Not all smart kids are diligent. Not everyone has the ability to self learn. With some kids, even the smart ones, self-learning is very time consuming and inefficient because more than likely they would have many unanswered questions.

Agree on this. Smart kids can become arrogant and would not study hard. This is why many diligent kids will score higher purely by hard work and good memory. A balance is what required to be well-rounded and still score at highest level. Tutored kids can surely save time. But the downside is that being spoon-fed knowledge and arriving too too fast at solutions will take a way the need for building one's self-learning ability.

Many parents seem to believe that kids will not manage top 1%-2% in the HSC without using some form of tutoring service. Therefore they think to get into very high demand courses, the kids must have tutoring. On the other side of the class system is the elite private schools that charge so much money. They have better teachers and extra tuition wrapped in a big package. Their kids also do very well in the HSC to compete for top courses at University.

I have a feeling that by getting into selective school and spend money on private tutoring, parents save a little over 1/2 comparing to sending kids to elite private schools. And they can pick tutors that seem to know how to teach. It looks like a financial choice in this sense.

[spence]

Originally Posted by oasfree

Many teachers from HS in their 40s came from the 80s when UAI for entering education training was between 48 - 60.

Are you really suggesting that performance in the HSC and teaching ability are related?

[Trebla]

Originally Posted by oasfree

I get this point. But self-learning is a big part that brings out the balance. If tutors always give the best solution, there will be no thinking. In the long term kids will be hesitant to think hard. But surely teachers do tend to run a one-way dialogue especially if you have a boring one. However I thought that teachers do organise groups of students to work and it's their job to do many activities at HS pretty much like primary school teachers do for little kids? Or at HS they just stop that group style and deliver boring instructions in a monotonous way?

These 'group activities' still exist and this occurs depending on the specific circumstances confronted by the teacher. Self-learning still occurs to some extent whether or not you have a tutor. Most good tutors do not simply give the answer away and the work they set does require the student to think for his or herself.

Originally Posted by oasfree

Many teachers from HS in their 40s came from the 80s when UAI for entering education training was between 48 - 60. Many of them actually failed the HSC and still got in colleges to do a degree in education. Many did not study the subjects that they are teaching right now. But I would say that these teachers would not survive in selective schools. They would have transfered themselves long ago.

There is something called a second chance. A teacher should be able to redeem his or herself from whatever past failures they made. Obviously, there are teachers out there who are complete failures even in selective schools. As for the rest, the teachers are trained to teach whatever subject they are qualified to teach regardless of whether they did it in high school themselves or not. They obtain the knowledge relevant to the subject they are teaching from their tertiary studies, if not from secondary school. Anyway, the courses today have changed dramatically since the teachers were once students themselves, so most would not have experienced some of the content that is taught today. Having good knowledge doesn't necessarily make you a good teacher. It's all about the communication skills...

[TearsOfFire]

Originally Posted by oasfree

I have a feeling that by getting into selective school and spend money on private tutoring, parents save a little over 1/2 comparing to sending kids to elite private schools. And they can pick tutors that seem to know how to teach. It looks like a financial choice in this sense.

Agree. You're getting free [decent] education and most parents spend that money saved on tutoring. A lot of parents see this as a good investment, hoping the money they spend on tutoring and education pays of when their son/daughter enters university.

[hermand]

for me, i go to a selective school, and i have tutoring only for english, only for my hsc, because i'm not good at it & i have to do it & it has to count towards my uai. i don't understand why people have tutoring for subjects they do extension in though. if you do extension, you shouldn't need tutoring. especially extension two. don't do it if you can't cope with it on your own. it seems like a waste of time and money to me. do a subject that you're actually good at and save money on an expensive tutor.

i went to a private school from 7-10 and i believe that's much more useful than going to tutoring for all your subjects, just in my opinion anyway. there's a much better environment and if you're at a good private school, some of the teachers are amazing. i was really lucky to have the teachers that i did.

[annabackwards]

Originally Posted by hermand

for me, i go to a selective school, and i have tutoring only for english, only for my hsc, because i'm not good at it & i have to do it & it has to count towards my uai. i don't understand why people have tutoring for subjects they do extension in though. if you do extension, you shouldn't need tutoring. especially extension two. don't do it if you can't cope with it on your own. it seems like a waste of time and money to me. do a subject that you're actually good at and save money on an expensive tutor.

i went to a private school from 7-10 and i believe that's much more useful than going to tutoring for all your subjects, just in my opinion anyway. there's a much better environment and if you're at a good private school, some of the teachers are amazing. i was really lucky to have the teachers that i did.

Yeah i go to a private school and i have great teachers. Except for math extension 1 and 2 for this year (aarrrgh) so i got myself a nice private tutor that i only go to for 2 hours a week (and this is flexible). The main reason i go to him is because i know this new math teacher of mine won't be able to teach and so i'll be learning from him. I also get awesome sheets etc of him and i get help when i need it.

I don't have tutoring for anything else though and never had one. I know some people who have a tutor for every subject though ==" I really don't see the point in that at all seeing as the other subjects are easy....

But the reason people get tutors from what i get from my friends is that the teachers at their school are HOPELESS. That is all.

[hermand]

Originally Posted by annabackwards

Yeah i go to a private school and i have great teachers. Except for math extension 1 and 2 for this year (aarrrgh) so i got myself a nice private tutor that i only go to for 2 hours a week (and this is flexible). The main reason i go to him is because i know this new math teacher of mine won't be able to teach and so i'll be learning from him. I also get awesome sheets etc of him and i get help when i need it.

I don't have tutoring for anything else though and never had one. I know some people who have a tutor for every subject though ==" I really don't see the point in that at all seeing as the other subjects are easy....

But the reason people get tutors from what i get from my friends is that the teachers at their school are HOPELESS. That is all.

hmm yeah fair point if your teacher is hopeless. i just deal and learn it myself, because none of the teachers at my school teach how i like, so eh.

yeah i don't get why people get tutoring for every subject. that's just a waste of money.

[moll.]

Only the rich, mediocre kids who aren't quite smart enough to get into selective on their own actually have tutors. I went to a selective school in the suburbs, and only about half the grade had a tutor, and that was only for certain subjects.

[annabackwards]

Originally Posted by hermand

hmm yeah fair point if your teacher is hopeless. i just deal and learn it myself, because none of the teachers at my school teach how i like, so eh.

yeah i don't get why people get tutoring for every subject. that's just a waste of money.

Yeah same here, it is a huge waste of money especially if you have crazy private tutors charging you something along the lines of $50+ an hr =="

Most of the subjects you can teach yourself though as you do, I just can't teach myself math extension 2 because the books i try and learn from don't explain well and like to skip many steps =="