Mixed ability or streamed for an able child?

It would be a no brainer for me - B

Our secondary has maths sets, and that's it, everything else is mixed ability. I have two children there, one is G&T in maths and very good at every subject, the other one is G&T in English and good in every subject.

I have to admit that it worried me at the beginning that the English wasn't set, but looking at the challenges that are in front of him, DS who is G&T in English is doing very well, he is progressing without being pressurised. He has made himself a group of mates who like English and reading and they are egging each other on, they work together and challenge each other. Their English teachers have so far been very supportive.

For Maths, DS2 who is G&T in maths is well acknowledged, recognised and already significantly challenged (the teacher has already set him some GCSE challenges to work on) and he has only just started year 7. The teacher is right on it.

So what I'm saying is that streaming is not a breaking point for us, both DSs still manage to progress steadily and be challenged and interested with their favourite subjects, without feeling too much pressure or stress. It's the quality of the teaching that makes all the difference, but that's very difficult to judge when looking for a school.

The trouble is that too many schools/teachers don't believe in pitch to the top and support underneath. Or if they do, they don't have teachers with enough experience or ability or support to do it. DD2s mixed ability English classes were appalling, partly because of that. Unfortunately, it's very difficult for a parent to get that level of detail about how classes are conducted, and anyway they are likely to vary depending on what teacher your child ends up with. That's why the 'safer' option, in my view, is to opt for the school that sets.

Another problem with mixed ability is that for GCSE optional subjects like French, there is pressure to lower standards in order to keep the numbers choosing that option up, i.e. not develop a reputation for being a subject that makes pupils work hard or isn't 'fun'. Setting can provide some protection against that for the more able students who are keen to learn.

Setting for maths is almost universally considered to be the best option for most students due to the nature of the subject. Highly able students will often need entirely new topics due to speed of coverage/mastery and the subject builds more.

Something like English or geography is fine mixed ability. You can teach Romeo and Juliet (for example) and set an essay on love and the balcony scene and get essays anywhere from basic inferences through to university level critical theory and everything in between. The challenge there (once you've got the sensible approach of pitch to the top and support beneath) is ensuring that any students who've got this fixed mentality of 'I must be seen to be top and doing special takes because I was on the yellow unicorn hedgehog table last year and my teacher told my mum I'm top of the class eleventy years ahead' to realise that yes it is the same extract and the same task, but they will access it at different levels and achieve at different levels.
The trick, in my opinion, is that support should be subtle. Day to day differentiation in mixed ability shouldn't be 'purple group you can do this task, and blue group cam have this worksheet and green group you can do the task and I'm going to spend 30 minutes doing another task with the weakest children'.

Mixed ability isn't always the evil people on mumsnet make it out to be. It can be done wrong, but then equally so can setting. I'd sooner pick a school where I had confidence in the quality of teaching over how they group students (though my personal preference is loosely streamed).

I don't know how they do it generally Maisy - I just know that at my dd's school they cream off the very top set and then I don't know what happens to the sets below - the teacher boasted to me that they didn't spend much time on the hard questions , stuck with the nice easy stuff so it was a lovely class for dd to be in and when I said that explained why dd thought she was doing really well at maths and found everything really easy until she sat an exam and it wasn't really benefiting dd much - she started back peddling and denying her previous comments. DD is targeted a level 7, (she is not a high flyer and I have never ever complained about her not being stretched, 30 kids last year got a 9 in their Maths - so I know my place) she is capable of achieving her target but not with her current maths teacher.

QuantumGroan
I agree, whilst also being aware that differentiation doesn't mean doing that irritating thing of fussing over the top students and saying 'ooh you lot are so much better so you can have a special task'.
Sometimes I find able students get irritated if they think they are doing the 'same' work as their peers (Often because they've had it instilled that they should have special clever child work) when the reality is that the teacher is pitching the lesson to the top level and differentiating like mad to support all students to make progress towards that top level and students will achieve at different levels.
Teach to the top and support underneath is the best way to teach mixed ability well.
Sadly even if the able students haven't mastered the challenging task fully, some still complain and we get phone calls saying "my Timmy was on top table at primary and now he tells me he is doing the same work as less intelligent students. This is so demotivating. You aren't challenging him enough etc." Then I point out that the whole class is working on GCSE criteria and doing difficult work with differing levels of support and scaffolding but actually Timmy hasn't mastered It, whilst others have (and they have extension work). Actually Timmy needs to spend more time developing as a learner and less time trying to be seen to be smarter than his peers and when Timmy is easily hitting the extension tasks then he will get a higher level of challenge but really he isn't quite there yet.

Sometimes I think discussions around mixed ability, setting and streaming can become simplistic on MN.

Easy. School B.

Questions to ask at open days:

How many GCSE offered? (8 is probably the main for school A, school B should be offering up to 11, with 9/10 min).

How many taking GCSE Triple Science? (this is x3 GCSEs in each of Physics, Chem and Bio - tends to be the brighter kids, excluding arty types. Double Science is x2 GCSEs spread over the 3 subjects - lower achieving schools tend to push this).

How many take Further Maths/Additional Maths as well as Maths GCSE and A level?

How many modern foreign languages offered in lower years and taken for GCSE and A level?

If your DD is artistic - how many took art, DT, drama, dance GCSE last year?

Sports - are there teams? Are there fixtures against like-minded schools?

% of students that progress from year 11 to year 12.

Leavers' destinations. (Russell Unis? Any Oxbridge - sch B?).
.
Teacher turnover. How many left last summer/joined this Sept?

How many cover supervisors does the school use to cover lessons if no teacher? (Cover supervisors are not teachers.)

School hours. If School A has a shorter day - why?

30 mins walk twice a day will be easy. Plus good exercise if she is not sporty.

Good luck.

I think setting is a good thing. But visit them, ask questions about it and see which one you prefer.

Mixed ability would be fine if the teacher differentiated rather than taught to the middle of the class.

B

Streamed!!!!
I would have been doomed without streaming
My English classes were never streamed and they were just awful.
The behaviour is the main issue and the pace is better. In my opinion.

Mixed ability. Results in higher results for all.

Personally I think it's more important that schools concentrate on the lower ability children.

One local school moves the bottom and the top two pupils with obviously not both for top and bottom set

BTW if you are going to open days and asking questions, - ask how they set/stream and/or change the set/stream if it doesn't seem right.
Not a question I thought to ask when looking at schools, but it turns out even for schools that set/stream, there are completely different ways of deciding who goes into what. One school we looked at (but didn't go to) uses CAT scores. I asked (only when looking for DD, who is younger, never thought to ask for DS2) what happened if somebody had a bad day on the day of the CAT test, and it sounded like, although they might tinker around the margins if pushed, basically your test on the day of the CATs pretty much was expected to set you up until Year 11.
On the other hand the school we did end up going to basically reset ever six months! But they do it solely based on test result. As in, everybody sits the same test every six months or so, and the top 28 go into set 1, next 28 into set 2 etc. If scores are equal, depending upon numbers, they go either up or down. So, for example, DD was one of five at the cut off between set 1 & 2 on the test for science in Year 7, so all five were put in Set 2. CAT scores, although taken, are mostly ignored for setting purposes. The only concession is that one can only go up or down one set in each exam, after they are set initially. This means that messing up a paper in one subject only theoretically means dropping for six months, but on the other hand, it creates enormous pressure on those at the margins of any given set, every six months and can mean a revolving door between sets.
I am sure others on here have different experiences with how the setting works in their schools.

DD is at a school with no sets but as it is selective that has kind of been done already. If she was at a school where the main criteria for admission was distance I would choose sets every time. Otherwise particularly bright kids get bored and might be tempted to misbehave themselves.

Some Academies / Academy chains have some very formulaic approaches. Check out discipline policies. Personally I would avoid the ‘boot camp’ approach that some use, and the ‘teach to the test’ approach that Harris are open about adopting.

GHGN, that's interesting. I've also worked in several and visited many. They have tended to set for maths, occasionally for languages but everything else has been mixed ability. Yes, there is a range of ability, but it's been decided that setting isn't needed.....these are mostly superselectives, so I guess the range of ability is less than at some Grammars. It's also what I've seen in the selective independents I've had dealings with - lots don't even set for maths until Yr8. I guess that in schools where over 80 or 90% get A or higher at GCSE (L7 now) they are all able students. Even the handful who don't get those grades have often narrowly missed it with a B. It's a very different type of 'mixed ability' teaching. However, there are clearly a range of different approaches going on, if there are lots of Grammars you've experienced who are setting in the majority of subjects.

And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all. We have this - over 50% of the kids have a Maths Tutor to make up for poor teaching. Teacher does not vary the content for the lower half or the top half if she did maybe it would be fine, or maybe if she was a good teacher it would be fine, as it stands it's shit - the stats might make it look like the mixed ability is working at our school but given the amount of tutoring going on it, it would be the wrong conclusion.

Sorry for the bold failure and block of text. I can't press enter in the MN mobile site.

Do be aware too that schools with a narrower range of ability,much as Grammars, and some Comps don't do much setting either....they don't really need to, although if they are going to do it for anything,mint is usually maths. And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all.I agree. Something i would also consider (and I'm not saying this is you OP) is how you and your DC will respond if/when your child is no longer the top one leaps and bounds ahead or they aren't in top set? I only raise this as a child can be a big fish in a small pond and primary and then find themselves in set 2 at secondary because actually there's a lot of other intelligent children out there. For some people this warrants an angry call to school about how their gifted child is in the wrong class etc or their child's self esteem is apparently through the floor because they got the middle score in the class. (I would say school B though)

ChocolateWombat Every grammar I have visited and worked in sets in the main subjects. So that’s about 18 altogether.

My DDs school - most classes are mixed ability. She just got a batch of 8s and 9s in her GCSEs and is now doing 4 A Levels (maths and science) in the same school. It can work!

I wonder about this too....not so much a sense of stigma, but just wonder if the benefit of learning alongside the able is lost to a significant degree.....it's a bit like having a Grammar stream/set (and I appreciate you might get into the top set for some things and not others, which isn't poss if there's a true Grmmar system) and the rest are mixed ability in the secondary modern. Clearly, in most areas, Grammar/Sec Modern has been abandoned, but in some ways schools taking out a top set are doing a similar thing, especially if it tends to be the same children in the top sets for all or most subjects.

And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all. I find this interesting. Does anyone know if the benefits for the mixed class are retained in this scenario? Or does the sense of stigma slip back in and undermine things?