to complain about DD being separated from her friend in her new class?

[Busybecca]

DD is at the end of reception year. She's being assessed for ASD and has been withdrawn, isolated and school refusing all year until she made friends with a boy in her class just after May half term. They play together every day and she looks forward to getting to school to see him. She's been so much happier all round and I told the teacher this and she said how glad she was and how she'd encourage the friendship as they were good for one another.

Then this week DD was told she's going to be in the opposite year one class to her friend and has been absolutely miserable since. She doesn't want to go back to school in September. It's going to be hard enough swapping teachers, classroom and routine but to remove her only friend after encouraging the friendship just seems cruel to me. Her teacher doesn't agree that DD has ASD and I feel like this move is a but spiteful.

I appreciate friendships change frequently at this age but having her friend in her class would've made the first few weeks at least so much easier for her. AIBU to complain and ask that something is done?

The 3 primary schools my various children have been to all split on ability.It seems logical to me , I don't know why people would think otherwise.

It's only logical if you believe 'ability' is fairly fixed from the age of 5 or so and that 'ability' is fairly consistent across all subjects. Neither of these are true in my experience. I've taught children who really struggle with literacy but excel at maths. Children who are top readers but only just scraping an expected for writing. Children who have gone from really low in a subject to excelling within a year. Children who came into a year group as 'high achievers' but we're decidedly average by the end of the year as other caught up and overtook them. My daughter is in Y1. At the start of the year she was on expected levels for everything, but was reluctant to read and I had to go right back to the easiest books to build up her confidence. She would have been placed in the 'low ability' set, but she is now achieving above expectations in everything. Would this have happened if she had been pigeonholed as low ability? Some of my poorest readers, who struggle with decoding, come up with the most thoughtful insights when we discuss a book.

The idea of looking at a 5 year old and saying 'this child is low ability' is absolutely abhorrent to me.

As for "It's more that the lower ability generally have a poor attitude to learning, or need extra time and help to achieve"
I'd love to introduce you to some of the inspirational children I have taught who battle against all sorts of difficulties, both emotional and learning difficulties, to succeed. Once you understand what some of them are facing, you would forgive them for switching off entirely, but a lot of the 'low ability' work much harder, day in, day out than anyone else in the class.

We split so that every class has a range of abilities. Then 1 teacher doesn't have all the lowest ability children..so an ability split doesn't necessarily mean they are lumping all one type of child together. In our school it is done to even classes out. For instance we have 2 children who have severe learning and physical needs they have a 1 2 1 each and are great friends but logistically there isn't space in 1 classroom for both these children plus all additional equipment and extra adult.

I wonder how your DD and the other child are together in the classroom?

DS1 (5) has ASD. He has one boy in his class that he likes a lot. He's not bothered about the other children. The classes are being mixed for next year and DS1 is being separated from his friend, which he's not happy about.

But, I know, from things his teacher has said, that DS1 and this other boy do not work well together in the same classroom - they're often too busy engaging in playing and talking and general silliness with each other when it's supposed to be learning time for the teachers liking. I haven't asked the teacher but I'm pretty certain this behaviour is why they're being separated.

I'm not saying this is why your DD and her friend are being split into separate classes, but is it possible that there's some reason why the teacher thinks it's better for them to be apart in class time?

My DS was moved into the other class last year. He has HFA so I was worried how he would get on but it has been the best thing for him. He was moved away from the friend he relied on. Both of them require extra support. And my son has grown so much in so many ways. It has been good for him to be away from that friendship. I am so much happier with how things are going for my DS since he moved class.

MrsKCastle "The idea of looking at a 5 year old and saying 'this child is low ability' is absolutely abhorrent to me."

Totally agree.

I wish there was more fun, and games and general silliness and less formal learning for the 5 year olds in our nation. That is how it is for the Swedish children who don't start formal school as young as our kids. By the time they leave education they seem to be at least as well educated as UK kids, and more likely to be bi-lingual.

www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029435-000-too-much-too-young-should-schooling-start-at-age-7/

"If we consider the contribution of play to children’s development as learners, and the harm caused by starting formal learning at 4 to 5 years old, the evidence for a later start is very persuasive.

This evidence comes from anthropological, psychological, neuroscientific and educational studies. For example, research on children’s play in extant hunter-gatherer societies, and evolutionary psychology studies of other mammalian young, have identified play as an adaptation that enabled early humans to become powerful learners and problem-solvers."

I have friends in Sweden and education is a hot topic at the moment. They have fallen far and fast in international league tables. It is very hard to unpick what has worked and what hasn't as they have implemented so many changes, including free schools, voucher systems and so on. I don't think any successes can be solely attributed to a later start to formal education. For example, Wales implemented the foundation phase that sees children learning through play until they're 7 and no SATs, yet do not outperform England.

Children who have gone from really low in a subject to excelling within a year. Children who came into a year group as 'high achievers' but we're decidedly average by the end of the year as other caught up and overtook them.

Then they move to the higher or lower ability class next year. The old numeracy or literacy question comes up a lot, but they are quite easy to differentiate and is only a small fraction of the day. .It is more the whole class work- the complexity of topics, the story the teacher reads , where I think children would benefit from being grouped by their ability to think and understand.

And user how do children like ds fit into your ideal then. He excels at writing, and things like geography. He struggles with maths. He can read fluently but struggles with inference. Basically he has a very "spikey" profile and is "top" in some areas and "bottom" in others - so where would he fit?

There are no benefits to setting or banding at primary school. It's counter-intuitive to parents who want their clever children stretched with like-minded peers but research after research has shown that mixed ability teaching does not hold back the high achievers at all, whilst greatly benefitting the rest of the cohort.

It is very rare to come across a school that still does this.

Rainy does Wales significantly under perform rest of UK?

Sweden is just one country among many who do things differently to UK Sweden also has one of the best quality of life.

KS2 and KS3 data in Wales has been broadly comparable with England in recent years.

I'm not sure that Sweden can be held up as an enviable education system anymore.

PISA 2015 shows the UK ahead for science, and only slightly behind for Reading and Maths.

Singapore tops the table in all three subjects. They don't start formal education until they're 7, which supports your theory, but again it's unlikely that this is the key factor.

In terms of quality of life, the Social Progress Index has Sweden 6th and the UK 9th. Scandinavian countries definitely dominate.

Rainy I've lived in Singapore and I've visited Sweden many times, I know which country does work life balance better!

Rainy the point about starting later is that it is better for kids all round, their skills, their ability, not just in one thing but generally. It's pretty much undisputed.

www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2013/dec/10/school-starting-age-five-six-uk-eu

"88% of countries in the world have a school starting age of six or seven in order to ensure that their children are given the space and time to develop all their neuro-physiological, social and emotional capacities. They must also be allowed to develop their innate theory-building and meaning-making capacities, giving them the confidence to explore their environment in a way that has real meaning and context for them."

Frankly the early start for kids is shit, sadly there is so much else going on in life I never managed to really challenge it for my summer born child. Although I did delay his entry into school a little.

www.toomuchtoosoon.org/

Anyway, OP, what's the latest, did you speak to the teacher/head?