to think that some kids are just low average ability, and

[MyBrilliantCareer]

don't actually have dyslexia, or need to be withdrawn from mainstream lessons.

I am glad that children nowadays aren't automatically labelled 'slow' if they can't read or 'odd' if they have poor communications skills or 'bold' if they can't stay still for long.

However I have a friend who's a teacher and she said once that some parents just will not accept that their child is not particularly bright or a bit badly behaved and insist that they have a syndrome of some kind and cart them around to doctors and specialists refusing to take 'no' for an answer. I think that must be stressful for a child who is absolutely fine, just not as intelligent as their parents 'want' them to be, or just needing a bit of discipline that the parents aren't giving.

Sorry - MyBrilliantCareer - Did you really say Yes. I'm suggesting that we should let kids who aren't top of the class, but coping ok, flounder and left "illiterate"

Did you really mean that children who are 'low ability' shouldn't learn to read?????

WTF???????

To not have the mental ability to read you need to have an extremely low IQ. Low enough that you'd be in a special school.

Any kid with an IQ in the normal range should be able to learn to read. If they can't learn to read school needs to do absolutely everything they can to teach them to read.

Label it 'dyslexia' or not. I don't care. But treat it extremely seriously.

You have obviously not been through the heartbreak / stress / trauma of seeing your child not be able to learn to read. You have absolutely no right to judge other kids who you know nothing about.

So, you are being very very unreasonable.

Tricky one, BeerTricks - I think we have to be very careful not to write people off too soon - some children do blossom very late. Which is why the cut-off of 14 that was discussed earlier makes a lot of sense.

As for not supporting the below average - that gets a from me - it's unkind, unjust and makes no economic sense whatsoever - since everyone needs a functional level of literacy and numeracy, this is where a lot of the extra support should go so that everyone can lead independent and fulfilling lives.

I really hope that the OP is not a teacher.

Oh dear, IndigoBell- sorry to confuse you. That comment of mine was a tad sarcastic. I tried to express that through the utter obviousness of the statement and also the emoticon at the end.

There seems to be a misunderstanding of 'average.'

For may social measures, average is based on the median.

So 50% of children are not below average. Most children are in a median ability band, and a few children are above or below it.

There is no reason why any child, other than those who have a very severe learning difficulty (caused by serious brain damage for example) should be unable to reach the average ability group.

I think a lot of parental worry is caused by the idea that ability is innate and that children are either bright or not bright. A child who is bright at 5 may not be the brightest at 11. Some people may not start to develop an exceptional intellect until they are 25.

As for dyslexia, I thought the controversy was that, research done about 5 years ago had demonstrated that the methods used to help dyslexic children read were equally helpful to those children with poor reading skills for other reasons. In which case, resources should be given equally to all those who have problems with reading, and a diagnosis of dyslexia should not be needed. Another poster earlier was suggesting there was research demonstrating the opposite - is that new research?

There is of course, no actual link between intellectual ability and reading ability in primary school children. Children who have low intellectual ability due to Down syndrome can still be taught to read well.

There seems to be some misunderstanding about the whole thread.

Anyone who falls in the "average" ability band - whether high or low in that band - will be served well with a good teacher in the mainstream classroom. They will be able to make progress at a rate appropriate to them, and enjoy all of the benefits of the being in a social situation with their peers.

A student with exceptional ability will, with a good teacher, be given opportunities to be extended. They may also benefit from extra extension outside the mainstream classroom, but not necessarily.

A student with low ability (note: not low average ability) will need extra support. That might be in the classroom with a teaching assistant, and/or a withdrawal group. Or a variety of other things depending on their particular needs.

Cornsilk: I am a teacher. Consistently rated outstanding when observed. But just in case these observations are skewed, my students make above expected progress. And in the students' own words (yes I do ask for anonymous feedback, like any professional would) - my subject is now their favourite, the lessons are fun, the homework is fun, and they feel confident about reaching their potential and some even feel quite excited about this new found confidence, feeling that it opens doors for them. And I have a wide range of ability in my classrooms - average of 3 National Curriculum levels.

But I didn't even need to ask. I can tell by the way they respond to the lessons.

Please realise the point of this thread: some kids just aren't going to be the top of the class, and that is ok. It doesn't necessarily mean that they need a SEN label. And in some cases, for the parent to insist on this, the subtext for the child could be: you aren't good enough as you are - there must be something wrong with you. That is my point.