Mixed ability teaching at Secondary

[FlyingBanana]

One school we really like locally for its nurturing ethos and whole rounded focus on the child etc has been mixed ability teaching for the last 3 years (so now yr 7-10).

Can this really work? My child is v bright and struggles with noisy classrooms and getting bored etc at juniors so im thinking it may not work for her...
I just wondered if Id missed something!

sashh - but in ALL your examples, they are groups who have the aptitude to take the course! You do not walk in to an A level economics class unless you have the ability to do it. So again, if you are expected to be able to do it and pass, then you are working at A level standard. GCSE has that -1 to 9 spread. You don't find that in A level, or uni. Yes they may be new to the subject matter, but they have the ability to do an A level.

I don't think you realise just how wide the spread is at GCSE. There are kids who can barely read sitting in English GCSE sets. How is it possible to teach them well alongside kids who need to be analysing shakespeare?

and many of the other courses you mention - uni, anatomy class etc, teach the content and you pass or fail. University courses don't come down to the level of the weakest student, but GCSE teacher does have to do that.

The evidence is that mixed ability is better for all but the top.

Quite a few schools now do top set Maths and the rest mixed ability.

Personally I prefer to teach sets. Moving between sets isn't always for thr best. Even a move upwards. Once students are used to a particular teacher, their classroom routines and expectations, each move requires them to re learn these and settle in with another member of staff. We try not to move many students unless there is a stand out anomonly because the settling in and re adjustment has an impact on the learning.

No you don't. Lots of subject are not available at GCSE or not available at all schools, Computer science is one.

Yes, but in the sixth forms I know about, you have to have attained a certain number of GCSE's above a certain grade to be admitted to sixth form in the first place. At my son's sixth form, the minimum admission criteria was at least 5 subjects at grade 5 or above with both Maths and English required at grade 6 or above even for pupils not sitting Maths nor English A levels.

Mixed ability is proven to work and be better for everybody except the top 5-10% of kids. In my opinion schools would be daft to ignore this and still set. Unfortunately with the money available to schools it has to be a best fit approach.

Hmm. Do with a high flyer def top 10% who is desperate to learn do I do nurturing but very mixed ability or huge more mixed in terms of intake but set. Hmmm.

DC's school is the same - mixed ability apart from maths (there is some "natural" setting when they get to GCSE options e.g. the better scientists tend to choose triple science, some options are perceived as harder.

It's been a godsend for my bright but lazy DS who would otherwise be languishing in a bottom set and have been pretty much written off.

My high achiever DD finds that there is sufficiently challenging work for her (though this is very much down to the teacher).

Interestingly both DC say that they wish maths wasn't set!

I was nervous before my DC started but then I compared the results with a local school with a similar type of intake that set in every subject from day 1 ... and found their results were virtually identical.

I would choose nurturing over sets any day. I also (based on the many threads on the education forums) think that sets work well when your DC is in the "right" set (particularly if this is the top set :) ) but can cause no end of problems if they are in the "wrong set". If you pick a school that sets, I'd want to know how frequently they move DC between them.

It’s a conundrum. My school is moving towards more mixed ability groups to follow the philosophy that all children are capable of achieving highly, given enough time. I am a little disquieted by this because it is not in my power to move the date of their y11 exam.

However I have observed in many ‘lower set’ kids a tendency to pigeonhole themselves as failures because of the set they find themselves in. Many also see a foundation level course as a poor second best. It therefore becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy that ‘lower ability’ kids underperform.

There is definitely something in the principle of spinning attainment as a function of persistence that is achievable for everyone and it’s easier to sell this line if your class is more mixed.

sashh - but in ALL your examples, they are groups who have the aptitude to take the course! You do not walk in to an A level economics class unless you have the ability to do it

Then why do people get U grades? A Levels are graded A* - U, so 7 possible grades, GCSE has 10 possible grades. It's not that different.

Yes, but in the sixth forms I know about, you have to have attained a certain number of GCSE's above a certain grade to be admitted to sixth form in the first place.

But that's not true of every VI Form. Lots Of students also take their qualifications in colleges where they can do a level 1 course followed by a level 2.

We never had "sets" at all here, until you reached about 14. Even then, with the exception of a couple of classes you were all one big group.

Worked absolutely fine. In fact. studies show it's preferable in most situations.

Then why do people get U grades?

Lots of pupils are capable of getting a better grade, but end up with a U for many reasons. Some may have been off ill for a long period. Some may have discovered boys/girls and lost interest with their studies. Some may have suffered with a bad teacher or an absent teacher.

There's a lot to be said for "spreading out" the disruptive/low ability pupils through all sets so that they're not concentrated in one group therefore affecting the pupils in the "bottom" group who really want to work and are capable of better.

But, I don't envy a teacher with a mixed ability group where there is a couple of highly disruptive pupils, plus a handful of pupils at each of the 9 levels of the GCSE grades. I don't know how anyone can teach such a wide spectrum and make the lessons right to all those different levels.

I can certainly understand why it's generally accepted that the brightest don't achieve their full potential in mixed groups as it's inevitable lessons will be aimed more at the majority/middle ability ones.

I was in a mixed ability secondary (only set for maths in GCSE year). It was awful, I just remember being really bored and I had to teach myself the extension work in a few of my subjects in order to get a decent mark.

You have to teach to the middle in a mixed ability class and that doesn’t work for the brightest or slowest children.