To think that all children should have the same amount of resources available as another child in the same year ?

[Snowfedup]

My ds is average to below average in reading, he is young in his year and didn't really 'get' phonics for a long time.

Now I understand that all children should be taught to their own ability but last year at the end if the year I found out that a lot of the other children had been given extra books home to read at the weekend, I found out from other parents the teacher never mentioned it. I thought this was a little unfair but didn't complain as we have loads of books in the house and visit the library regularly!

But this year all parents were told that the children would have access to a computer programme where the teacher would allocate books appropriate to each child's level and once these were completed (they read and do puzzles related to the book) more would be allocated.

So I waited and waited and last week got a note with the password. I mentioned to another mother how good I thought it was only to be told that other children had had access 4 weeks earlier and had read 12-14 books on it ! I sent a note in asking for more books as ds had finished the 5 he was given and got a note back that he isn't allowed any more until after Halloween .

I just think this is grossly unfair and unequal distribution of resources.

If it was PE and they didn't have enough equipment so decided that the strongest children could take part for 50 mins and the rest for 10 mins there would surely be an outcry!

This is the same school that a parent asked why her child hadn't moved up a reading group to be told there weren't enough books - she complained and her child came home with a photo copied book the next week!

Is there not some sort of rules around treating children equally ?

I'd certainly query why his progress in reading is being artificially limited and want to know the reasoning.

If they can't come up with an academic reason behind restricting the number of books he has available to read (e.g. working on comprehension or expression) then I'd question the value of the programme.

Rather than jumping to conclusions/assumptions and kicking off, why don't you just go and ask how this system is set up/working. You might find that there's a perfectly sensible explanation, and then you will be able to decide to response based upon facts. For instance, the teacher may be limiting your child's books in order to help her/him in monitoring progress at a closer level. I don't know the scheme or your child, so I have no idea, but more often than not, there is a sensible explanation when things appear 'unfair' Your question is not unreasonable, but your response may well be.

I agree with you.

The problem sounds like it's not that they aren't all being treated the same, but that they aren't all being supported to the same extent by the resources available. It's not right that your ds isn't given the correct number of books for him if he really can manage them.

I know I schools often like children to read each book more than once to ensure that they really have got as much from it as they can before moving onto the next, but you are probably better placed to judge whether that is happening than the teacher.

Things like this are why I don't like the pupil premium the way it is. If children need extra, then give it to them based on their need, not on their parents income. The FSM thing is such a blunt tool to use to identify which children need extra resources and there are too many exceptions to the rule that children from low income families automatically need extra academic support and those from very slightly higher, or even much higher incomes don't.

Things like this are why I don't like the pupil premium the way it is. If children need extra, then give it to them based on their need, not on their parents income.

Except we have to prove to OFSTED that pupil premium money has been directed at pupil premium children and not at those who might need it more!

I agree with the pupil premium suggestion.

OFSTED want to see clear, measurable differentiation for all students identified as pupil premium (or 'disadvantaged' as it's now known - terrible IMO). This will be their way of ticking the boxes and justifying where the money has gone.

I agree it isn't fair, the whole thing is stupid and doesn't guarantee that the students who have the bigger need are given the resources. Parental income should really be a factor in every day teaching and learning, additional activities yes, but not normal classroom practice which is inclusive by nature anyway.

Pupil premium is a very blunt tool for identifying students who will then get extra support, however I was quite surprised to see how poorly pupil premium students performed as a group in my high achieving secondary school. While our a*-c inc maths and English is in the 70's as a school for pupil premium students it's well below 50%. So it does appear that although it's going to miss students who need support and possibly identify students who don't, in general, it does seem to be that what ever identifies a student as pupil premium also goes with an increased risk of underachievement.

I was sceptical of its value until I saw the figures.

It would be worth finding out why he started 4 weeks later than some other pupils.

But as the number the other mother reported was 4 books per week, then he's getting rather more as he had 5.

And depending on where you are, half term timing could mean that 'no more until Hallowe'en' just means none to anyone during the holidays.

I know that spanieleyes, that's the problem, and that's why I disagree with it.

In primary schools, I think school staff are generally aware of which children are in need of extra educational support and which ones are well supported at home financially and emotionally, so I'd rather see a system that meant teachers could easily access extra monetary support for every child they identify as needing it.

Why don't you just make an appointment to go in and see the teacher?

Sending notes backwards and forwards is time-wasting and frustrating.

Face-to-face so much better!

I have arranged a meeting next week I just wondered if "fairness" is something I should expect in schools or will I be laughed at for even having this notion.

The children get points for completing each book so by only having 5 he will not be able to gain as many points. If I don't say anything will he be given another 5 while another child is given 12 more ?

I think every child that needs extra help deserves it. I don't want extra for my child I just want him to have the same as everyone else.

I

Of course there should be fairness- but you don't know there hasn't been. Maybe the children will be accessing the programme in rotation by alphabetical order of last name. Maybe they can only do them in batches of 10. Maybe the company supplied the harder books first and they had to wait for the rest of them. Maybe they tried it out on the more able readers first to see how it works. There are loads of reasons- it seems very unlikely that your son has been singled out for unfair treatment.

Ok, now that you've mentioned that there's points to be won and that children aren't getting equal opportunity to score the same number of points, 'fairness' is a very valid point.

It's basically setting children up for failure if they simply cannot earn as many points as the next child for no real reason. Points matter ALOT when you're four and you've just started school. Things like this can really make a difference to a young child's confidence and enthusiasm for learning, and the school shouldn't have put you in a position where you have to point out how obviously unfair their practice is.