Smart children suffer in mixed ability classes.

[SusieQTip]

My daughter goes to oversubscribed secondary school which has quite a defined streaming system and recently this has caused furore going into the second year.

Within the one year there are five tiers grouped according to ability in key subjects and there is a lot of difference between what a student in the bottom group studies compared to one in the top tier. For example the top group might read A Midsummer Night's Dream in the class and go and see a traditional performance while the bottom set would watch it video and then go out to the forest and have work groups about the material.

A number of mothers of children in the lower tiers have really started kicking off about wanting everyone to be taught in groups of mixed abilities. Apparently the current system is unfair, elitist and ends up with their children being written off at a early age.

Am I being unreasonable to think that any change would end up being highly detrimental to children in the higher groups? I admit that my daughter is in the top group, but I still think that the more able children would be the only ones to suffer.

I think you're right about streaming being better for brighter children but I also think its better for lower sets too, or should be as rheres less danger of them getting left behind. I think mixed ability is just a compromise where nobody really benefits.

However, the difference in your school between the sets & the way they are taught what is supposed to be same thing, seems pretty extreme! I would probably be abit annoyed if I found out my child was watching a video of shakespeare instead of rather than as well as reading the actual play.

I also think its a shame that all sets don't get to go to the theatre. They can go separately if the concern is about one disruptive class ruining it for everyone, surely?

The more able children would not be the only ones to suffer, they would all suffer because none of them would be taught according to their needs.

I think streaming is a good thing, but I see this mothers point that it is unfair that less able children don't get offered the same opportunities. They should all get to see the play, and should be excluded only if there are issues with behaviour.

I think that's horribly unfair and like Queenofsuburbia's suggestion.

other danger with streaming is that a bright child gets stuck in a lower set. they tend to perform at that level then and never reach their full potential.

so if your child sits next to someone who plays with their phone and talks all through their lesson, or your child has 8 teachers in a subject rather than one e and your child doesn't perform well one year they are put down and then its very hard to move back.

whats really needed is inspired leadership and time for the teachers to do their jobs properly.

I tend to find in my DS's school its the middle of the road kids who suffer TBH.

Agree with Betty, the children in the middle are probably the ones that are likely to suffer the most.

I would not be in favour of changing to mixed-ability classes, but the current system sounds a bit odd too. Seems like there are low expectations for the lower sets (i.e. not reading/studying the text at all). And going to the theatre and acting out scenes in the forest both sound like fun activities that needn't be restricted by ability.

I don't understand why all sets don't have the theatre trip? I think that's rather insulting. Live performance can really be very inspiring.
I'm in favour of streaming, but I do think in this case the lower sets are getting a very shitty deal, so am not surprised the parents are getting irate.
I don't believe mixed classes are the answer, but there certainly needs to be thought than is being shown here.

I think everyone with half a brain knew this already tbh.

The workshop in forest actually have actors acting out portions of the play and students get to interact with the characters and then they go through portions of the play.

I agree that there is an extreme between the two group, but it is case of polar opposites. It is more a case of the middle three groups being top, middle & bottom and the lowest and highest groups being made up of students who need a lot of assistance and exceptional students respectively.

I hope your Midsummer Night's Dream example is hypothetical and not a RL example.

It would worry me greatly if that was the case.

Apologies if my English is a little choppy as it is not my native tongue and I am on my mobile telephone.

I see their point.If the groups were fluid ie lots of ops to move up or down then great but if you had a late developer then yes they're pretty much written off and not being given the same ops as those in the top groups at the moment.

If there is continual assessment and real fluidity then it wouldn't be an issue.Is there?

x post. Wow. So it did happen!

Actually the forest workshop sounds really good! Presumably they were able to explore motives/themes/character in a more practical way than just reading the text to identify them.

Differentiation is about enabling all children to meet a common learning objective but in a way that is appropriate for them and meets their learning needs. Not about offering a 'better' or 'worse' learning experience.

All children should be challenged and given the opportunity to excel, whatever level they are working at.

is the top made up of exceptional students though? I wouldn't mind betting there's a very high proportion of girls - from what i see they tend to be more conscientious and get better results because they revise more for the tests.

boys tend to coast and so get put into lower sets, which ends up as a viscious circle, ie lack of expectation=lack of work= moving to lower sets.

I can see the point in setting but not in streaming.

It is completely unfair that somebody's attainment in maths should be a reason to put them in a low set for art, for example. That is what happens with streaming.

If children are set, it is very important that there is a lot of movement between sets. If parents are complaining about setting, it is generally because children are not being moved up and down enough. Children should be moved every half term through KS3.

As I said the three middle groups (2 3 4) are the are the majority and other two (1 5) are for kids who need the most attention and assistance or are exceptional and are working at a higher level.

In the middle groups I believe those who wanted to go to a performance did but it was not compulsory.

Susie, is your daughter exceptional at everything? How has she ended up in the top stream?

Why are the school streaming rather than setting?

I dont think YABU

My 2 DC go to a secondary with a huge scale of pupils from those that get to Oxbridge to those needing almost constant police intervention

This is one of these subjects where everyone is PC and nobody wants to say maybe those mothers kicking off when Yr8 comes and their DC arent where they think they should be should have been paying more attention in Yr7 to make sure that didnt happen

I am sick of hearing stories about the behaviour in classrooms and like it or not the majority of DC in bottom sets are there because they dont give a shit about school and havent been brought up to not give one either.

Those of us that have slogged our guts out keeping the rules , doing the right thing year after year and instilling some kind of discipline in our DC dont need even more compromises to their education.

There is upward movement in sets based on results and behaviour so thats how those DC should be in higher sets

Yes top set is made up of exceptional students. Both groups have a smaller size than middle three groups with a lot of person attention from the teacher.

Also lower group has assistants to assist children.

I believe there is movement between groups but am not sure as to how much or how often. Just because a parent makes a fuss is not enough to get a change in group as it is based around the child's ability and needs and not what the parent thinks/wants.

I don't think there is any such thing as 'an exceptional student.' Nobody is exceptional at everything.

If your daughter has been put in the top stream based on her ability in say, maths and English, that doesn't mean she is at exceptional at art, drama, music, or geography.

But under streaming, her maths ability may mean that she takes a place in the top art group. That place is then taken from another child who may be exceptional at art, and given the right support for their talent might have ended up at a top art school after leaving school.

Again, if the children are streamed based on Science, there may be a child who is not good at science but is an exceptional actor. They're not going to get to go and see this play, which one day they may actually appear in, based on academic streaming.

It is totally unfair.

In my experience the middle of the road children suffer the most.

The lower and SN children have special input and some 1-1 as do the more able children. I also think the teacher is naturally drawn to the most and least able.

I am coming to the end of my DS's school career as an average student in a below average performing school. I feel he has missed out by being neither clever enough or behind enough to stand out.

That's my experience and that of many of my friends.

My daughter works a at high level in all her subjects.