Ds expected to “help” another pupil with work in class

[LostFrog]

Ds is 9 years old, just started Year 5, first year of new school (middle school system here).

He tells me that when he has finished his own work in class, he is required to help a boy who sits next to him. This happens every single lesson, and he says that the boy is reluctant to work, won’t write anything, gives up quickly and mutters all the time that he doesn’t get it, etc. From asking around, this seems to be the standard on every table in the class - there is one or two pupils who are “learning mentors” who have to teach the less able ones.

Is this a) normal, and b) reasonable? It’s not like ds volunteered for this role. If he has finished, Shouldn’t he be offered an extension task whilst the teacher or TA (there is one, I checked) help the ones who are struggling? I have emailed the teacher to ask them to clarify what’s expected, but has anyone else come across this?

@powershowerforanhour

Umm I was kind of interested a little bit, but not enough to work it out. In my case any spare brain left for thinking about inessential stuff for the fun of it will be spent finding out whether a monoclonal antibody has been licensed for use in arthritic horses as it has been in dogs, and if not why not, and if so then will it be banned for competition use - probably yes and if this is the case how hard will it be to differentiate the synthetic mab from the horse's own antibodies when developing a dope test. Dull as ditchwater to some, kind of interesting to me. To each his own. One of the best things about having left school is you can pick what you want to learn about, unlike poor Jaxxon.

On another note-
Again: you’re not responsible for explaining it to him. You, a ten year old maths genius, is using Jaxxon to work on your own knowledge.

Two main reasons for peer teaching have been advanced in this thread. One is both altruistic and self interested for the "teacher" child. Teacher child learns to be kind, work for the good of another and the whole class and society in general (altruism) and also learn leadership skills etc (self interest.
The other is purely self interest- using Jaxxon as a guinea pig for consolidating own knowledge- much like practising a speech in a mirror.

If you say to teacher child: look, don't worry about the outcome, just use Jaxxon as a tool to consolidate your own knowledge. It's not your fault if he clearly hates the process, fails at everything and ends up in prison. Then that is not in conflict with objective #2 but fails to fulfil #1. A kind, conscientious teacher or leader would care about the outcome too- would want Jaxxon to enjoy some lightbulb flick moments and also succeed to the best of his (limited) ability.
If you set teacher child the Sisyphean task of helping Jaxxon, unless TC is a selfish little exam robot then you'll either break TC's heart a little bit, or petrify it.

I said that above, it’s a two-way street. Jaxxon also gets to be the ‘teacher’ for his lightbulb moment.

It’s 20. We have two sets of 3 now, with six. So we need 2 (sets of three) 0 units. Seven is ( 2 sets of three plus one) 21. Eight is (two sets of three plus two) 22. And nine, we’ve run out of set numbers AND unit numbers. So we add another column. Nine is 100. And it begins again.

@TatianaBis

Trying to give ‘support’ to kids under 10 - they may be listening quietly, or they may be uncooperative.

So the supporter doesn’t know how to get round the behaviour issues to deliver information in an engaging way and the supportee isn’t being communicated in the best way to help him grasp something. So he just ‘gives up’ saying ‘he doesn’t get it’ as per the OP.

This isn’t a particularly productive use of class time.

So that’s a classroom management issue, and should be taken up with the teacher.

@TatianaBis

Ie - managing behaviour is a key element of imparting knowledge to young children.

Again though, they’re not imparting knowledge. They’re building on their own knowledge.

Pupil management is a key plank of teaching, but that’s not what peer support is. Your kid isn’t expected to manage the behaviour of another kid any more than he’s expected to teach them.

I think we're talking at cross purposes. I don't think anyone on the thread binned the idea of all peer support at all ever. In the right way- the difficult children shared around the class; very able children sometimes having esoteric discussions amongst themselves; a mixed group all helping each other; willing supporter and supported, He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother...lovely.

One quiet, well behaved and academically able though perhaps meek and eager to please child parked beside a sullen brick wall Jaxxon every lesson- not good. The original post was about the latter.

So, you concede that the OP may have a legitimate concern which she would be justified in taking up with the teacher ?

@powershowerforanhour

Pupil management is a key plank of teaching, but that’s not what peer support is. Your kid isn’t expected to manage the behaviour of another kid any more than he’s expected to teach them.

I think we're talking at cross purposes. I don't think anyone on the thread binned the idea of all peer support at all ever. In the right way- the difficult children shared around the class; very able children sometimes having esoteric discussions amongst themselves; a mixed group all helping each other; willing supporter and supported, He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother...lovely.

One quiet, well behaved and academically able though perhaps meek and eager to please child parked beside a sullen brick wall Jaxxon every lesson- not good. The original post was about the latter.

It isn’t though, that’s two totally separate things. The idea that there’s a disruptive pupil in the class doesn’t have any bearing on peer support, it’s disruptive for everyone.

And it won’t be one kid with Jaxxon for every lesson.

@opentherm

So, you concede that the OP may have a legitimate concern which she would be justified in taking up with the teacher ?

Which concern is that?

Again though, they’re not imparting knowledge. They’re building on their own knowledge.

It’s supposed to be a 2 way street? The OP’s son has been asked to be a ‘learning mentor’ and ‘help’ a boy who is struggling.

The idea that there’s a disruptive pupil in the class doesn’t have any bearing on peer support, it’s disruptive for everyone.

Jaxx isn’t disruptive per se, he’s just a boisterous 9 year old with a short attention span and a dislike of maths, like many others.

@TatianaBis

Again though, they’re not imparting knowledge. They’re building on their own knowledge.

It’s supposed to be a 2 way street? The OP’s son has been asked to be a ‘learning mentor’ and ‘help’ a boy who is struggling.

Yes - Jaxxon will have his opportunity to ‘teach’ your kid language. Or vocabulary. Or how to climb a rope.

He’ll also learn, from your maths whizz, communication, vocabulary, perseverance, and maybe even a little bit of maths! But that’s not your kids responsibility, that’s just the benefit of your kid sounding off to him.

@TatianaBis

The idea that there’s a disruptive pupil in the class doesn’t have any bearing on peer support, it’s disruptive for everyone.

Jaxx isn’t disruptive per se, he’s just a boisterous 9 year old with a short attention span and a dislike of maths, like many others.

Again, classroom management. They shouldn’t be bored doing this, it’s not a boring activity.

What is, or isn't , a boring activity is vey subjective,

@opentherm

What is, or isn't , a boring activity is vey subjective,

Not in a classroom. They need to know stuff, if it’s boring then the lesson has been planned poorly or it’s been pitched too low, or too high. Its rare to see bored kids in primary school these days.

But if you read the OP, no-one is learning anything. Son isn’t able to use him as a tool to explore his knowledge as he won’t write anything and gives up; and Jaxx needs to learn maths in a maths lesson, not vocabulary or communication, or he will end up among the 20% of London kids who leave school at 16 without having mastered basic numeracy.

It’s 20.
I don't really care
a) that it is 20
b) why it is 20
and thus didn't read your explanation thoroughly enough to understand it.
But that is no reflection on your mastery of base 3, or your ability to teach it.

If Jaxxon says to OP's child - in words or deeds- "Excuse me dear boy, I rather think you have mistaken me for someone who gives a crap" then as you say- management issue. The OP wanted to know if this was a) normal and b) reasonable.
The gist of the thread seems to be that
a) yes*
b) no

*"normal " in the sense of "common"
(As when some of my vet clients protest that a smashed face effect is normal for a pug. It is "the norm" for a pug but not normal for a dog).

@TatianaBis

But if you read the OP, no-one is learning anything. Son isn’t able to use him as a tool to explore his knowledge as he won’t write anything and gives up; and Jaxx needs to learn maths in a maths lesson, not vocabulary or communication, or he will end up among the 20% of London kids who leave school at 16 without having mastered basic numeracy.

I’m not really sure how I can say this any other way: Jaxxon is learning maths. Jaxxon may never reach the heights of A* kid, but he’s still learning maths. Jaxxon, under this method, will leave school with basic numeracy skills, maybe even slightly higher! He also gets loads of additional skills that he absolutely would not get from his teacher making him rote-learn the 8 times table.

If there’s an issue with classroom management, or if the OP’s son thinks he’s there to teach Jaxxon then the OP should head up to the school where they’ll explain all of this to her. If he doesn’t want to work with Jaxxon any more, I’m sure they’ll accommodate that. But he’ll definitely have to work with Sarah, in that case.

@powershowerforanhour

It’s 20. I don't really care a) that it is 20 b) why it is 20 and thus didn't read your explanation thoroughly enough to understand it. But that is no reflection on your mastery of base 3, or your ability to teach it.

If Jaxxon says to OP's child - in words or deeds- "Excuse me dear boy, I rather think you have mistaken me for someone who gives a crap" then as you say- management issue. The OP wanted to know if this was a) normal and b) reasonable.
The gist of the thread seems to be that
a) yes*
b) no

*"normal " in the sense of "common"
(As when some of my vet clients protest that a smashed face effect is normal for a pug. It is "the norm" for a pug but not normal for a dog).

Ok. You seem quite engaged for someone who didn’t care, sorry for the unwanted explanation.

Don’t you think it’s a bit interesting that you, an adult vet, struggled with the concept of relearning what 10 meant? That’s a concept that a lot of very young children would find unbelievably easy, that groups of 10 can change value. But it’s so much harder to relearn things as an adult.

This was standard in DD’s primary school. It helps them learn. I would only be upset about it if it was hampering DD getting her work done.

It seems your son has the wrong end of the stick with it, if he thinks it will be his fault if the other boy doesn’t work.

In my DD's school they switch who they sit with every few weeks, so they aren't over reliant on any one individual supporting another.

Probably the best comment in my DD's report last year was that she "effectively scaffolds her peers learning". That involves higher level thinking skills, to break something down and then offer gradual support to help another child reach a final goal, rather than just give them the answer. It also means that she's thinking about the misconceptions that other children have, which is a step beyond just being able to get something right yourself.

That said, if she thinks her partner isn't bothering to think for themself or listen to the teacher, she's pretty tough and will tell them that they need to pull their finger out. If they are distracting, she has also occasionally moved away to a spare desk and her teachers have accepted this.

The system seems to work well for my DD, but she's an assertive child so doesn't get left in crappy situations.

So - when you read the OP:

the boy is reluctant to work, won’t write anything, gives up quickly and mutters all the time that he doesn’t get it, etc

You think ah bless, that’s Jaxx learning maths. Effectively.

In which case it’s hardly surprising that so many children leave school numerically illiterate.

@TatianaBis

So - when you read the OP:

the boy is reluctant to work, won’t write anything, gives up quickly and mutters all the time that he doesn’t get it, etc

You think ah bless, that’s Jaxx learning maths. Effectively.

In which case it’s hardly surprising that so many children leave school numerically illiterate.

No, I hear: Jaxxon is not engaged in this lesson, we need to work out why.

What would you suggest instead for Jaxxon? What works better than peer support?

A teacher.

Right I’m off to bed.

@TatianaBis

A teacher.

Right I’m off to bed.

He has a teacher. How should his teacher teach him, if not using peer support?

Don’t flounce now, you’ve convinced me! I need to work with Jaxxon, how should I do it?

And it won’t be one kid with Jaxxon for every lesson.
In the OP's case, it is. It seems that the practice doesn't always follow the theory.

Jaxxon will have his opportunity to ‘teach’ your kid language. Or vocabulary. Or how to climb a rope.
In theory. And sometimes in practice. The mantra is that nobody is good at everything and everyone is good at something. This seems "fair" and a kind and moral universe would ensure that it was so. In practice it's not always the case. A friend who is a teacher notes that some children do seem to have been handed all the goodies and some, none. Like the movie "Twins" - if Arnie's character also had the street smarts and Danny DeVito's character was naive.

@powershowerforanhour

And it won’t be one kid with Jaxxon for every lesson. In the OP's case, it is. It seems that the practice doesn't always follow the theory.

Jaxxon will have his opportunity to ‘teach’ your kid language. Or vocabulary. Or how to climb a rope.
In theory. And sometimes in practice. The mantra is that nobody is good at everything and everyone is good at something. This seems "fair" and a kind and moral universe would ensure that it was so. In practice it's not always the case. A friend who is a teacher notes that some children do seem to have been handed all the goodies and some, none. Like the movie "Twins" - if Arnie's character also had the street smarts and Danny DeVito's character was naive.

In the OP's case, it is. It seems that the practice doesn't always follow the theory.

Classroom management then.