"He's in top sets for everything"

[isitanywonderthat]

How do people know this? Genuine question, I have 2 dc now in secondary school and I haven't a clue what art they are in for anything. Never have at secondary or primary. Never been given this information and never asked.

How do all the mners with DC in top sets have this information?

My kids went to a variety of schools due to moving and age gaps. One was at a school where they did the opposite in maths, head of maths had the bottom groups or most challenging behaviour. NQTs got the higher sets or the ones without big behaviour problems.

My GS was in set 2 for maths and was doing really well and was going to be moved up to top set and he said he wanted to stay where he was as he was doing well as it was moving at the right pace for him. Fourteen year olds can be very aware of what works for them.

I do remember being in set 3 for science and my best friend and I came top in the end of year exams, set 3 generally did far better than set 1 and 2. It caused quite a bit of aggro with parents blaming teachers, parents demanding kids were moved up. I happily stayed with an excellent teacher in set 3.

My lazy son would have always picked the easiest sheet even if he could do the harder ones. He didn't believe in wasting his energy and to him it was a waste.

Well you asked the question!!!

Mine would have picked the harder one if it was more interesting but not if it was just more work. For example, in maths he hated being given three or four digit sums instead of two digit ones he could do quickly in his head then get to sit and read a book instead. Once he understood place value at 4 he could add anything, so it wasn't more challenging for him, it just took longer wasting his time. Interesting different work he was happy to do.

My DC school is confusing, they have pathways which gives some differentiation, but then some kind of sets within that (DD didn't do the higher science papers for example). They also offer some subjects as GCSE or a Btec dependent on ability.

My two were/are on different pathways, i will be proud of them whatever the outcome.

It’s clear that you have no actual experience from which to offer a helpful opinion.

If the teacher is setting work for average ability, there’s nothing for the brighter child to do other than twiddle their thumbs and stare out of the window.

My other 3 would have done the harder ones because they could, the lazy one had worked out how to scrape by with a minimum of effort. We worked out that he always did enough to be slap bang in the middle of any group/set/class he was in so I reckon if he'd been in the bottom group he wouldn't have been top, if he'd been in the top group he wouldn't have been bottom. Parents and teachers were all aware of it and the only way to get him to achieve anything like he was capable of was for him to be in a top set.

As far as school went he was definitely the most frustrating of mine. I always felt we were getting it wrong but then the other 3 were different so I don't think it was anything we were doing or not doing, it was his view of life.

I found in primary some parents of high fliers were very pro sets and anti their child mixing with anyone other than fellow geniuses. I remember at a 'meet the teacher' evening, the new Y2 teacher at the school announced they weren't having tables based on 'ability' that year (I think it was just him not the whole school). There was uproar from some parents. One dad said his child would be held back if he had to sit with mixed ability children. I scanned the room and noticed his DS was sitting next to my DS who was always bottom set despite being very bright and articulate. I was tempted to say - do you want to move him now then in case DS' 'low ability' rubs off on him.

@WombatChocolate we had the shapes thing in infants and DS was a circle. It would have been less insulting if they had just numbered the sets. Still rankles with me 10 years on.

That shapes thing for tables is rubbish. If they are going to set by ability then at least be transparent about it. It’s not as if the kids won’t work it out anyway.

I will put my hand up and say I was ‘that parent’ who challenged my DC’s secondary school when they moved from setting to mixed ability for one year group only because of the ‘challenging cohort’. The response I had from the assistant head was that they were worried about the self-esteem of the students in the lower sets after Covid and they hoped some of behavioural and work practices of the better-behaved and more able students (not saying those 2 always go together) would positively influence kids with more challenging behaviour.

I agree setting for PE is a huge step forward. Being with the sporty kids was humiliating and totally turned me off sport! The teachers always focused on the high ability, we all knew what ability we had. It’s so much more comfortable learning with people of similar ability.

My DD was in the 2nd from bottom PE set, she has always loathed PE and any sort of competitive sport and by her own admission made very little effort and chatted to friends at any available opportunity. In year 11 though some of the teachers said they could do "just dance" and she absolutely loved it.

Kids always know who are the cleverest kids in their class, it's pretty obvious. Even from Yr 2 all the kids know which is the 'top table' in the classroom. It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

We were never directly told that DD2 was G&T at primary school. It was only when she asked what the symbol next to her name in the register meant that it came out. But then she went on to grammar school with plenty of other girls who were probably G&T, too.

The grammar school had 5 sets for maths! Everyone knew exactly where they came in the maths hierarchy 😆

I agree setting for PE is a huge step forward. Being with the sporty kids was humiliating and totally turned me off sport! The teachers always focused on the high ability, we all knew what ability we had. It’s so much more comfortable learning with people of similar ability.

I don't think that applies exclusively to PE though. I went to a local Catholic primary, there was one English girl in my class of 48, no TAs just the teacher and 48 of us. We were mainly from Irish families but also Polish, Italian, Spanish and Afro Caribbean. I passed my 11 plus and went off to a grammar school that was a different world. I knew nothing about music, most kids seemed to have had some music lessons, recorder at primary school or private lessons. I was lost from day one, what the hell was middle C? What did all those dots mean? It was a mystery and my time at grammar school did nothing to solve the mystery. I couldn't do music and that was that.

Fast forward 30 years, I had a bright 3 year old who wanted to learn an instrument. A local music school did a group lesson for mums and 3 and 4 year olds so we went along and amazingly working with 4 year olds I did learn what middle C was and what the dots meant and by the time my child moved to the class for 5 year olds with no mums needed I could even pick out a simple tune.

The mixed ability music lessons seriously let me down and kindergarten music would have been much more productive and far less damaging.

I have always known what sets my kids were in in the three secondary schools they have attended. Not all subjects were set but those that were their timetable was clearly labelled and the classes referred to as Set 1, 2 etc

My DD was happier in setted lessons as she didn't have the brighter kids calling out answers before she had digested the question, or making fun of her work.

Maths and science has a top set, as it were, at my son's high school as they will do different papers to the others when it comes time for GCSE's. (Triple, individual sciences rather than double science, and the higher maths papers). Anything outside the top set isn't streamed. This was explained during the parent inductions and has been mention during year 9 parents evening ahead of GCSE 's starting.

I work in a secondary. Kids are placed in sets from year 8. It’s not always obvious, particularly if not much variation in what’s offered. We have two lower set classes but they’re smaller and follow same curriculum as others. It’s not until y10 when you have higher level papers it’s obvious.

re primary, some and it is SOME schools still group by ability. But that is not quality first teaching. Good primaries will have a mixture of abilities because it’s shown to benefit those struggling whilst those who do well still do well.

Well at the huge comprehensive my DD go to they have two streams (French side and Spanish side randomly allocated) and each stream has six sets. The sets are numbered from 1 to 6 and as set 1 has the kids in who got greater depth in their SATs it's really clear which way the numbers work... DD1 was a solid set 2 pupil and dd2 is one of those irritating Mumsnet kids "who's in all the top sets". I claim no credit for this, DH is clever and Dd2 works very steadily in all classes and hard in the ones that she finds more challenging.

We know because of the class names. So English 1, 2 and so on.

When mine were at school they couldn't do Computer science unless they were in the top sets for Science and Maths so that was a clue.. The pathway that included no language option but had to do citizenship was where the lower achieving students ended up.

My kids aren't old enough for this yet but I always knew exactly what sets I was in at school, and what sets all my friends were in. There was a clear order. Parents all knew too - the name of the set was printed on the timetable and discussed at parents evening and when talking about progress etc. Have you not asked?

Our Secondary has sets for English, Maths and Science but they dont get put into sets at the end of year 8, ready to start year 9.

Set 1 is highest, then 2 then 3, then everyone else. We get told on the end of year report if they will move into one of the top 3 sets or not.

My dcs primary always insist they don’t have top tables, but the kids very quickly learn which table is top etc. they’re given harder work, the work sheets they’re given often have different numbers of stars etc as a measure of difficulty.
My dcs secondary again insist there’s no top, but in the top set classes they’ll happily say things like ‘the other top set class etc’. Again the kids quickly work it out anyway. Ours have letters and numbers eg set A1, A2, A3, E1, E2 etc. each year group they mix up which letter is top to try and stop the kids working it out but they still do. As a parent you also know your own child’s ability, and the reports show which quintile they’re in also.

Your child's class will sometimes have a number in it. So a top set might be MA1 for maths. I like having 3 or 4 as a top set so you add a set up not down. So English top set is EN4 or EN3. I'm surprised it hasn't come up at Parents' Evening. I'm sure your kids know!

My DD thought she was in middle set because the DD of a governor who wasn't that good at maths, was in put her set.

Turns out t was top set and the governor's kid was moved down.

So my DD assessed the classmate better than the teacher.