To think it won't help me or ds to know he's in the bottom 10% of children

[Minifingers]

when he leaves primary? Or my oldest ds to know he's probably in the top 10%?

This is what the government is suggesting - that children are ranked into 10 ability bands when they leave primary.

I know how able or otherwise my children are - I read their school reports, I look at their SATS results, I talk to their teachers.

What will ranking them in this way do other than give them an overwhelming sense of failure or complacency?

I know his written work isn't good enough only because of the job I do. I could look at his writing and think that what he produces is all that's expected of him at this age, especially if he's getting a good SAT score and the teacher is telling me everything is fine and he just needs to remember his capital letters. Y6 teachers have so much pressure on them to get good SAT scores, it's understandable that the children who are good at passing tests are going to have less direction given to their parents.

So if your dd's report says she's pleasant, popular, imaginative and confident, and is working at level 5s in year 5 (for example), that's meaningless unless you know whether she's better than most other 10 year olds or not? Even though the level 5s (still just an example) already tell you she's bright?

What is it that you need to know?

And how is it stealth boasting when I have said that the test result clearly means nothing?

There is no point in having a good test result when you can't actually do the thing that is being tested unless its in a test!

"There is no point in having a good test result when you can't actually do the thing that is being tested unless its in a test!"

It would be a bit unfortunate if this inability put your child in a lower band than he should be in the proposed new scheme, wouldn't it?

Not all children are cutout for exams / tests, I know I wasn't and I hated school for it. I had to work really hard at school after being kept down a year due to illness, then I was thrown in the bottom sets because I had to prove I was capable enough to progress and it was shit. I was bullied for being the oldest and being stupid. This whole ranking thing is counter productive.

I know that when my DS starts school who, what, why, where or when won't matter as long as he's happy and healthy and doing everything that's being asked of him. Children are people, not robots...

understanding of that child's strengths and weaknesses. Which of course a test can't do - because it only tests that child's knowledge and skills on that particular day.

and more importantly it only measures the things they test - which is the problem with SATS.

Maybe if teachers weren't run ragged trying to get their class to jump perfectly through the particular hoop that the powers that be have deemed important, they would have more time to work on giving each child have a chance to improve - across the board - in things they are good at and things they struggle with.

Humans work on positive feedback - you get a buzz achieving something, especially if it was hard work. But if you start with the attitude that you won't be able to achieve it, because it is too hard for you then you are likely to give up without any effort.

Ranking to the nearest 10% is going to discourage far more than it will encourage I think. Knowing you need to put more effort into something to improve is important. Even more important is knowing that if you make the effort, chances are you will improve - yau may never excel but you will improve.

worriedmind what does she like doing and what is she good at?

It would be a bit unfortunate if this inability put your child in a lower band than he should be in the proposed new scheme, wouldn't it?

Not really. Not if the end result was that he actually got the input he needs from qualified professionals rather than his Mum who isn't around at the time that he is doing this type of work.

It would be a good thing.

Yes, he could, but then at least I would know that he was achieving his own potential rather than being left to get on with it because he's good at passing tests.

Maybe if teachers weren't run ragged trying to get their class to jump perfectly through the particular hoop that the powers that be have deemed important, they would have more time to work on giving each child have a chance to improve - across the board - in things they are good at and things they struggle with.

Totally agree. I think OFSTED are in many ways to blame for poor education compared with other countries. Who actually gives a fuck about 'community cohesion'??

Its a competitive world out there and if you're in the bottom 10% then frankly you're in trouble

What rubbish. So you think only the most academically able can go on to have happy, successful lives?

There's too much emphasis on academic achievement the be all and end all. Some children are more academic, some aren't, some are good at sport, some aren't. Why pretend to be something you're not?

I remember some of the children I went to school with who struggled academically. As far as I know, they didn't end up 'in trouble'.

Teachers already know EXACTLY where kids lie within their cohort : the predicted fine scale points can usually be found on a year 6 classroom wall
and at secondary, they test them and set them anyway on arrival

I reckon its a money making scheme by the external testing companies

Well why on earth can't they share that information with parents talkinpeace? If my child was at the top, in the middle or at the bottom, I would want to know to give me an accurate idea of their abilities and how best to support them.

Who actually gives a fuck about 'community cohesion'??

that was a couple of years ago, last year it was safegaurding, not sure what current must do area for schools is.

I generally like Clegg - but I think he has got his message very confused here. Are we measuring achievement - and do you need to know you achieved in the bottom 20% , or middle 10 % or whatever nationally ? Or are we attempting to get kids to go to secondary school with the right attitude to learn well ? Not sure how the 10% banding is going to show that at all.

Surely we need to nurture good approach to learning (not just academic learning) all through school (and into adult hood too) ?

who actually gives a fuck about community cohesion?

How depressing.

Dancergirl
if you child had severe dyslexia, how would being told they were in the bottom 10% for reading help?

if your child was in the third decile for maths, would you tutor them like crazy to get them to the top - in the knowledge that you are setting them up to fail against naturally brighter kids when the spoon feeding stops

(Oxbridge are quite open about the fact that kids who have NOT been tutored/ spoon fed do better when they get to Uni and a no fly zone for helicopter parents)

Abilities are relative. Your child has to do the best for them. You cannot control the abilities of others.

I think the problem with the proposed banding is that it won't be used to help underachieving children, it will be used as a stick to beat the children with, who are probably underachievers through no fault of their own, whether it's because of lack of support at home, through learning difficulties, through not performing well under pressure.
Too many people lump children together. You cannot fit all children into one mould, as they are all different, with different capabilities.

Not all children are academic.not all adults are academic.
Of my children, ds1 is highly unacademic, I suspect he would be in the bottom 10%. However, he is very practical, and at 12, could probably take an engine to bits and put it back together, yet he is judged on his academic skills alone, and feels crap about himself because of it. When he leaves school, I imagine through his practical skills, he will have no problem getting a job.
Ds2 is quite academic, probably not top 10%, but definitely in the top quarter. He gets more encouragement than ds1 ever did at school, because he fits the mould and the curriculum suits him and the way he learns.

I feel so sorry for children who lag behind at school, particularly primary school, as there are no rewards for skills that aren't academic. It's no wonder so many children disengage from schooling. By banding children at such an early age, I believe it will be disastrous for those who come out on the bottom.
A country needs people across the spectrum. It needs the drs and lawyers, the outstandingly clever scientists, but it also needs those in jobs that are not valued by society, which are often carried out by those that have not done well academically.

I listened to the Jeremy Vine show, and heard the following quote from Albert Einstein - "EVERYBODY IS A GENIUS. BUT IF YOU JUDGE A FISH BY ITS ABILITY TO CLIMB A TREE, IT WILL LIVE ITS WHOLE LIFE BELIEVING THAT IT IS STUPID.?
I agree with this wholeheartedly.

worriedmind she sounds lovely and I'm so sorry to hear she's finding school hard. Have the school been supportive with the bullying issues? Does she go to any school clubs such as computer club or art/pottery etc so she can spend more time using her talents?

And that's the problem isn't it deadlydonkey that academic success is seen as the be all and end all, and children who aren't academic but are good with practical things aren't given the same kudos.