TO THINK THAT INSTEAD OF SETTING BY ABILITY...

[icymaiden]

.. schools should set by behaviour.At least in the first instance so that all the kids who can't or won't behave , can be in a class together, so that everyone else can achieve their best.Once you have separated that lot out, then the remainder could still be set by ability

I wasn't writing anyone off for being naughty. Quite the opposite.

I totally understand that children have different needs and behaviour issues. I think children should be supported not compared constantly to their better behaved classmates. And EBD schools, PRU's and the such offer a day to day environment that is non judgemental.

but Revealall you referred to PRU's as being schools for badly behaved kids - they aren't - but those views serve to stigmatise those who attend

You can Cat.

Reveal, for me it was the labelling of all kids as badly behaved which I found difficult to swallow. Given the demands on a lot of the kids termed as badly behaved, their behaviour is bloody amazing!

Frankly give me a kid who is brimming with energy, struggling to concentrate, fidgety and distracted over one who is a superficially a paragon of virtue but unkind to other kids any day. I know which I would consider to be the most badly behaved.

And DS1's EBD school isn't for badly behaved kids, either. It's for kids who suffer from extreme anxiety in a school setting, many of whom tend to externalise their reaction to their environment, hence the E and the B. For kids with such difficulties who can not channel their reactions appropriately, externalising is often preferable, as the alternative dysfunctional reaction is turning on themselves, which can be much harder to undo.

Whilst no child should be feeling a need to swipe everything off their desk onto the floor, it's a much better reaction to stress than chewing their hand until it bleeds, or pulling all their eyelashes out. Similarly, having a really good rant, even if that involves swearing, is a much healthier reaction to hiding in a corner and not speaking to anyone all day, even if, superficially, it's harder for an onlooker to handle.

Cba to rtft and cba to engage brain either. Why bother?

Whats

On what grounds do you say what you said in your last post?

Do you realise the sheer range of additional needs that exist? Additional needs which can exist alongside startlingly high ability. I doubt it, because if you did, you would not write children off so readily.

jesus I hope you aren't a teacher What's

well now that makes no sense

Here's a radical idea. How about we just stop labelling children and treat them as individuals, with individual learning needs? Every single child has different needs from the next child, and deserves a learning environment which will identify and respond to those needs.

Even those children who prefer a certain environment for learning can change day by day. One day they want to work alone, one day they want to work with others. Some need quiet, so have the At-Work folders, quiet work spaces in the classroom for those students. Some thrive on group work settings, so a worktable where they could chat and discuss the work they are doing. Some need a seat near the window for fresh air, some children do better with special seat cushions, some prefer to sit on the floor, some prefer to stand at the work benches at the back. Have items that they are allowed to fiddle with for concentration without being told off (I'm a fiddler, no child in my class will ever get told off for fiddling lol!). Change the visual learning environment regularly. Change the setting regularly - sometimes in the classroom, sometimes in gym, the art room, the music room, or just sitting outside under a tree.

Stop trying to teach the label and start teaching the child.

Midnite - please tell me you're a teacher. You're exactly what schools need.

what MrsStarlord said!

having a really good rant, even if that involves swearing, is a much healthier reaction to hiding in a corner and not speaking to anyone all day, even if, superficially, it's harder for an onlooker to handle.

Ouch, Ouryve. I spent a fruitless evening last week trying to help DS to calm down and stop swearing randomly when he was very upset about being unable to do something, but given that he spends far, far more time hiding and not speaking to people, I'm probably handling this wrong, poor kid.

Midnite -- I like your plan as long as you recognise that some kids hate changes to their environment (and indeed can't readily transfer learning from one setting to another)!

Starlord. I think Midnite's approach was tried at the Willam Tyndale school in 1975.

When they reach the workplace, Glitter, they go for the job that suits them. Someone who thrives on open space and fresh air is unlikely to choose an office job. Someone who can't deal with people in their face, all the time, will probably avoid the front line customer facing side of retail.

Kitties, DS1 does both extremes, too. We're selectively deaf with the ranting (thankfully, he disapproves of most swear words) so long as he's not unkind to his brother, who also has ASD. We have an enormous pile of cushions and blankets for the hidey moments. The sensory input brings him round from those quicker than when it's not there. The cushions are also a good physical outlet for him to throw and slam.

Yes I am a teacher, and that is how my classroom is set up.

KittiesInsane - it's about choice for the students. They can have the same task, but choose where they want to work. I've only ever had one child who did not want to work in different parts of the classroom, and he had a desk which was solely his, and there were some seats around him. He could choose to put his folder up if he wanted to work alone, or if it were not put up then others could come and work with him. No one approach works for every single child. It's about recognising what each individual child needs and responding and adapting to it as those needs becomes apparent. And also is allowing the child to understand that it is ok for them to learn differently and want to work in the way that is best for them.

Glitter I teach in primary, however, I believe that allowing children to recognise their own individual learning and working styles is what will stand them in good stead for the future. I was a fiddler in class. I had to be fiddling with something, many a paperclip met its demise in my hands, and I was constantly getting in to trouble for it. It was many years later (when I was in the corporate world before becoming a teacher) that I went to a seminar that talked about getting the most out of your employees and talked about learning styles, and I found out that fiddling was actually something that I needed to do in order to work at my best. It really changed my thinking and how I saw myself. Understanding your own way of working best will translate to future workplaces when it comes to choice of career and how to get the best out of yourself in any workplace - do you like working in a group, on your own, do you need to be hands on to learn/work, or are you a visual learner, auditory learner, etc?

Midnite your classroom sounds amazing and my son, with autism and challenging behaviour would thrive.

He currently has a teacher like you and it shows.

So perhaps the issue here is not the children but the adults; teachers, parents, policy makers, commissioners...

Though children do impact upon their own environment the very nature of them being children means that ultimately it is the adults that guide, inform, and influence them and the environments in which they develop.

And it's not just me, some randomer on the internet who says that but decades of ecological theories of child development that say it.

If you construct an environment where positive behaviour is rewarded, their needs are met, they are nurtured, they are equal and their achievement celebrated then they will develop emotional resilience, their wellbeing improves and their behaviour follow suit.

Again decades of ecological theory say so... Theory that underpins social work, health promotion, child development studies, assessment of the family..."

Or alternatively create an environment where their is a hierarchy of children; those who are superior are quiet, good and submissive to the rules of the adult in the room regardless of their own needs. An environment where, arguably no one really has a voice because they the consequence of speaking out is being sent to the naughty room.
You will soon be a position where the 'good' children begin to see themselves as 'superior' and start behaving as such to those children who are not their equal which more than likely would escalate the behaviours and reinforce the stereotype.
Institutional bullying...

Your thinking OP is not just misguided - it's downright dangerous.

I know what Glitter means, whenever I have been to stay and read or meet the teacher evenings at my children's schools the parents who have not been there are the ones on the lower ability table every time.
As a parent, I am obviously not privy to this level information but when you go in and some are reading long chapter books for their class reader and some are on the oxford reading tree books it's not exactly hard to spot even you aren't looking.,

Ha...my DS has everything he needs for school arrives in time, in uniform having had breakfast. He is lower ability as he has autism and ADHD.

He also still needs support with reading despite the fact I read to him from birth.

Generalising isn't a good thing.

There are bright children who come from poverty stricken backgrounds as well as wealthy. It's the same at the other end of the ability.

Some poorer families don't spend time supporting education, primarily because they are often just trying to survive. Then there are those who couldn't give a toss.....and yes they are out there but it isn't all lower ability by any means.

The difference is that the children of wealthier families are generally more likely or have the tools around them to study. It's also far easier to study if your home is warm and everyone is adequately fed.

I don't know what will happen to my son in the world of employment.....it's going to be crap if the level of judging and lack of understanding demonstrated here is as prevalent in real life. Sadly I suspect that this is the truth of the matter....lip service paid to disability support but in reality he will be judged as not worthy.

Some on this thread need to look at the MN This Is My Child campaign and educate themselves. My son is in there, happy and smiling with no idea about the crappy judgemental world around him. I could weep.

I would also like to add that my son is not disruptive in class or badly behaved. He is very good in class, so much so that it's hard to pick him out from the others in the year.

If for any reason he becomes upset he will simply retreat from the world by sitting quietly beneath a desk until he feels calmer. Even this is becoming less if an issue and it's been 10 months now since he did so.

The reports coming in from his Y7 key worker in a mainstream school are so far very positive.

Pick doubt he would fit the OP's view of "disruptive" unless you count the disruption of an extra adult who provides DS with support to access the curriculum.

If bullied or teased though look out as he will then become extremely upset and meltdown. The answer here is not exclusion to a class for naughty kids but to address the bullying.

This is a really really poor idea. In many schools children do end up effectively set by behaviour with those with poor behaviour often dropping down to lower sets regardless of ability due to the fact that they are often underachieving. In my school they often end up in set 3 out of 4. This can be really bad for them and the kids in the class who genuinely need more help. Just yesterday I was discussing a Y10 child with a senior colleague who many of my colleagues find disruptive, rude and aggressive. She has a predicted grade of an E but is clearly much more able than this (I'm hoping for an A)... In setted subjects she is in set 3s and is persistently disruptive, in any subject where she is taught in her form group she is underachieving and constantly in trouble already. I find her polite and compliant. The worst I could say is she's a bit chatty. What's the difference? She's in a fairly studious, high-ability group (coincidence rather than setting- it's an option block) where she is thriving. We need less behaviour-based setting not more!

What worries me as my DS goes up the school is that he may remain in lower ability sets with other children who do have poor behaviour and are lower ability as a result of that behaviour.

The issue here is the lack of support for many children who may have a whole plethora of issues going on but no support in school to deal with this. My son has a Statement of SEN and as such has defined levels of support to help him access the curriculum. Many of these other children will not have this same support :-(

All I can see at that point is that school will cease to be enjoyable for DS

glitter I am secondary and that is where children will end up before entering the workplace - increasingly heterogeneous with, for example, call centres and open plan offices and lacking for many in a large degree of autonomy.

They will need routine, to take orders, work in groups, recognise authority, be target driven, aware of performance management, solid numeracy, effective literacy skills etc.

Alternatively they will go on to university or jobs where they are expected to be individual, self driven, creative, motivated etc, the current approach to teaching at secondary level just doesn't support this. Not through the fault of the teachers I hasten to add but because of education policy. Our kids are being squeezed through the machinery of education to make them conform to an 'ideal' with a uniform idea about what people need to be and do which is determined by people with an incredibly narrow view of the world. Because of this creativity, individuality, self determination (unless it's to make loads of money) are frowned upon rather than the value of the individual being understood and appreciated - which is entirely reflected in some of the posts in this thread.