To think state schools should do more to push academic pupils?

[PickleM]

I've worked in both state and private schools. My observation with my own dc (in state schools) is that those who are very able academically could be given better opportunity to excel, but aren't. I see it as a great shame.

It seems like in order to tick the 'inclusive' box or help those who need more support, the children who are more capable aren't really given very challenging work.

An example would be that my dd is put in a very mixed ability group for maths and English. However, previously the class had different tables depending on level of work - those most able were given more challenging work. Those less able were given less challenging work. I've now been told by the teacher that this wasn't 'inclusive' enough for the slt. Apparently my dc is learning through 'coaching others'. I think she should give a higher level of work to those most able, I'm not interested in my dc 'coaching others' when she could be learning more complex work.

Private schools seem to have no issue with streaming children. Perhaps I've just been unlucky, ultimately it doesn't matter as I help my children learn at home, but what about capable children who don't have home support?

Mixed ability grouping has been proven to have a positive impact on lower attainers but no detrimental impact on higher attainers.

Explaining methods to others is also an excellent way of embedding learning, improving understanding, improving mathematical vocabulary and stretching quick learners.

Having said that, it should just be one tool and not the only tool so if you are concerned that your child finishes the core lesson and is not provided with extension tasks or challenges, you should ask about that.

"but what about capable children who don't have home support?"

What are the GCSE and A level grades like at your school? I'd expect capable children who are flying through their lessons to get A* results even if they're not being tutored at home.

If you've worked in both, I'm sure you've noticed the greater resources and higher staff to children ratio in private Vs state. And the fact that private schools have very few children who struggle to access the curriculum.

With limited resources, the goal has to be to support the majority of the children to reach the minimum standard. Unless you think the less able children should be left to sink?

A lot of private schools don't stream children any more actually because they've read the same research that PP mentioned.

There are lots of state schools supporting and pushing pupils. If all the schools you've worked in are rubbish and so is your DCs - that seems a very odd coincidence.

I agree, OP. My bright child is bored in school. She is lucky as she has lots of support at home but it makes me very angry that kids that don’t have this support are not being challenged and supported to make the most of their talents.

@Clymene why can't the more capable children learn together and be given more challenging work though? My dd used to be taught like this, so those children did 'extended' maths etc. Now they are in mixed ability groups. The 'extended' work has been shelved in order for them to coach other pupils. It just means that unless tutored, the state pupils can't compete with private school pupils.

Have to say I agree. I teach in a private school and our more able children do very well, because if they can already do something, they are given something more challenging. This IS happening in the majority of state schools too, but the definition of ‘more challenging’ will vary. The maths national curriculum, for example, specifically outlines that children should not be given work from the year above, but be given work to broaden their understanding of their own year groups objectives and apply it in more challenging ways. At my school, this isn’t enough for a significant minority so we also press on with the year aboves work. (If we didn’t parents would pull their kids out!) All in a mixed ability class by the way, one form entry so no streaming.

In my opinion, coaching has its place and has SOME benefit to the higher ability child, but not a huge amount, and it definitely shouldn’t be the only form of extending or challenge.

I disagree that mixed groupings have no detrimental impact on high achievers. They slow down the rate of learning for a start. I think the best you can say is they need not be catastrophic.

I doubt many or any private schools have the range of achievement in one class that you get in a state school.

I think state schools vary hugely - all but one or two in the city where I live are very mediocre and have low expectations for pupils. (And of course the ones that do are impossible to get into.) I am a huge supporter of state education but my child going to secondary has been a real eye opener.

This is only anecdotal but the state secondary school my eldest attends is really pushy. They are streamed from an early stage and most academic children are hot housed in a manner akin to the best private school (from my own experience attending such a school). So from this experience it does happen. Just not across the board maybe. This doesn’t seem to happen in the state primary but I’m not sure that it’s necessary at primary level. Just my thoughts.

We used to have it in the Gifted and Talented provision, introduced in 2002.

It was one of the first initiatives scrapped by the Coalition government in 2010.

@MissDollyMix that sounds excellent. I can't afford private school education, but with streaming then academically strong pupils in state schools can perform as well as their private school peers. With 180 pupils per year it's perfectly feasible to have different sets for academic subjects and high expectations.

The problem for a bright child is that they can easily get bored and frustrated and switch off. My child (ordinarily bright, not a genius) get very frustrated and angry.

I 100% agree that the priority should be supporting disadvantaged children - but it’s a shame that children with academic talent are not supported in the way they would be if they had a talent for e.g. football

I was a high ability student and never got any stretch assignments - I spent 12 years of education doing no studying, got good grades and went to uni without the habit and ability to work hard and apply myself.

It is so easy for able children to become lazy if not challenged, and it persists through life, turning them into underachievers.

It also costs no more to stream children vs mixed ability. It may be less 'inclusive' but would surely improve the outcomes and social mobility of academic children.

I absolutely disagree with the policy of brighter kids coaching others. This helps those less able but does not help the brighter kids.

It does cost most to stream children.

If you have mixed ability classes then the teacher is able to support the group of children who cannot access the curriculum. If you stream then you have a full class of children who cannot access the curriculum. Therefore you need lots of support staff in that classroom.

*cost more

Your thread title is misleading - some state schools operate in the way you describe and I agree that it doesn't help the very able. Many absolutely do push their very able pupils. My local state school (very mixed catchment, really not leafy) had multiple GCSE support sessions available, all aimed at taking groups of students to the next level. Nobody was allowed to coast. Maths and the sciences were set, humanities and the arts were not - it worked very well. One of DD1's best friends started Yr 10 expecting to scrape a 3 in maths - she and her peers were stretched, challenged and enabled and she improved to a solid 5, just off a 6. You can't tar all state schools with the same brush.

I think the coaching is ok up to a point but it can’t be the only way of dealing with bright pupils. I wouldn’t want everything to be streamed, I think one of the brilliant things about state education is having to run along with lots of people who are very different to you. But as the OP said, providing genuinely challenging extension work is a must. My child is always complaining about being given work that takes 5 minutes and then having to sit there bored for 20 minutes doing nothing.

Yanbu. That's the whole reason my ds is at an independent school.

Ds had been at the same 'good' state primary school for 7 years. Mid-year 6 his form teacher 'wasn't sure' he would pass his SATS. How could they not know after teaching him for 6 years?
He got 110,112 and 114 and they were so surprised they gave him a prize 😀but I'd lost faith in the state system. They seemed to pay no attention at all to the mid-class kids.
A year at independent school and he got 119,119,119 and is so much happier & more engaged.
I'm a single mum and it's a huge stretch for me but worth it to know he isn't bored..

I prefer mixed ability groups and a little bit of 'coaching' is really good to really embed the work for high achievers. But I agree it shouldn't be all the time and shouldn't replacing teaching from the actual teacher. The teacher should be differentiating across the class. An example is in my DD's maths book there is a 'challenge' section that the high achievers can work on while others are still completing the first section.

I have few friends who are teachers at State Secondaries, some SLT.
They all say that while this practice certainly helps less able children it can be harmful to higher achievers, especially if there are behavioural issues in the class as well.
It was one of the reasons why we chose Private as our State Secondary doesn’t stream.

The G and T programme was just lip service, to be fair.

Schools should stream vigourously, and should not hinder pupils with high potential at the expense of low-achieving disruptive kids. The whole ethos of "inclusivity" has been an absolute disaster, which is why so many people are desperate to privately educate their kids, even if it they get into heavy debt to do it.