To think extra lessons for top students isn’t fair?

[Beepboobeep]

My DD’s state primary school has a “top maths club” and “great writers club” for the top performing students in yr 5 and 6 held outside of school hours. There is no charge for this - so it’s free childcare and free tutoring. You have to be invited. This has been running since the second week of the school year and is restarting on the first day of this half term.

By contrast, my dyslexic DD is in a group for those needing more support in writing, also outside of school hours. But they only managed 2 sessions last year and it hasn’t started back up this year. She gets ad hoc in school support; where it happens she misses other lessons that aren’t then caught up on, putting her further behind in the those.

I appreciate these children deserve challenging, but surely that could be done in class with different work and the teacher’s out of hours time, if available, used to help those struggling?

Is this even allowed in a state primary?

How can it be statistically possible that these children at 9/10 are 'all' G&T, how are you defining that?

A class of 'high achievers' is not the same thing as G&T, particularly if the establishment of the class is motivated by the desire to inflate the numbers obtaining a place at the local Grammar! Your 'B' child at 9 or 10 could well exceed the ability or attainment of your 'high achiever' by the time they are 18, as 9 or 10 is way too young to determine potential. It is so arbitrary at this age and is frankly a nonsense. It is circumstances that is driving the establishment of the group and is statistically unlikely you have a class of geniuses! It is wholly wrong to label these kids at such a young age. The idea that a grade 'B' child as you state at 9/10 is somehow limiting the educational experience of an 'A' grade pupil is laughable! When context is considered or even a child just hasn't reached their potential yet, these 'B' grade students are suddenly outshining their 'high achieving' peers at the real test of ability is A levels and beyond which is when students have to have original thoughts to attain high grades. Up until that point it is a formulaic approach and certainly one a B grade child can learn at 9 or 10, pushing them into 'A' grade achievements.

How is this approach compliant with The Teaching Standards that require teachers to teach fairly, inclusively and without discrimination?

But again, it's not going to be the case that you have a whole class of children that fit this description. It's a cynical move to get more kids into Grammar school.

Being a 'high achiever' at 9 or 10 does not equate to being G&T. Feeling lost in the 'mess' of unruly classes is going to be a problem for nearly all the children in the class, they are not immune from it because they are average or below average. Again, this sentiment is hardly complying with Teaching Standards is it? What about the majority of children who are average, above average, below average but not G&T, do they not deserve a solution to this disruption?
I know it's not a new concept, I'm questioning the definition of G&T here when the reality is it's a class of high achievers that they believe can get a place at the selective schools which will inturn boost their own reputation. It is morally wrong to lock children into these tracks of ability at such a young age.

If it's on the teachers own time and not official hours, it's like volunteering and of course it's allowed for people to spend their time how they wish.
Challenging it because you have a child who struggles makes you look jealous and as others said, race to the bottom.
Follow up for your daughter and perhaps ask the school if you can volunteer for a dyslexia group bookclub or something enjoyable for them.

If you work for a school you are representing the school and you have to uphold Teaching Standards where the stipulations equate to practicing equitable teaching. In a state school, a teacher can't just disregard this because they are not being paid for the teaching!

Usually in primary top achievers are not stretched to reach their full potential. They are taught what the of the class is being taught which is far to easy for them. The rest of the class gets priority during actual lesson time. Top achievers also need the opportunity the reach their full potential. About time to.

So you think those that are average or above average are getting prioritised in state schools?

Try reframing it. Consider being gifted or talented as a special need. Because it is. It requires different approaches, different resources and opportunities to learn in ways that meet the needs of those individuals. Just as your child needs learning opportunities to meet her needs which, from what you have said, the school is providing. You seem dissatisfied with how they're doing that so make that your mission, rather than criticising the school for taking steps to meet the needs of a group of children who are so often given little input on how to fulfil their potential. They are entitled to the right support just as much as your child is. Every child matters, including the most able.

So you are putting your child above the needs of others. High achievers also need support to reach their full potential.

But they can have a variety of clubs, which I assume they do. We can't go around banning lego club, drawing club. Likely the more positive thing to do is volunteer or ask for book/movie club, which everyone can access.

Have you read the OP- how likely is it in a Grammar school catchment that this school has a whole class of G&T- how are you defining this? Surely a whole class of G&T somewhat dilutes the definition of G&T.

Being high achieving is not a special need.

It isn't about "getting full marks" OP, it's about children being challenged and working to their potential.

If more able children are not stretched, they can get bored, angry, frustrated, turned off learning, and store up trouble for the future.

The most able children need & deserve every bit as much attention as the less able.

I'm sorry the school isn't providing proper sen support. That needs adjusting but not necessarily at the cost of the others.

Ex maths teacher.

i’ve worked in schools where the deal was everyone had to run an after school club but it was your choice what you ran.

i’ve run chess, philosophy for children, brass band and intro to classics depending on my mood at the time and what I was interested in. From a school point of view they want a good range of clubs for kids to be able to choose from so don’t usually control too much what people offer, except to stop clashes (and even then they’ll usually do stuff like split by age rather than make a teacher change).

they’re voluntary and unpaid.

separate to that, there is a fairly big push at the moment for providing access to maths beyond the school curriculum for kids whose parents do not have access to tutoring and ability to access other sources.

there’s a lot of funding for specialists to run maths circles for gifted and talented students at maths who are also pupil premium (in care, low income etc). Some of the teachers involved in this also run maths circles at local schools.

it’s not extra lesson input, it’s a totally different environment.

the expectation for students with dyslexia is that their needs are addressed within the classroom or by the Senco so optional clubs isn’t really the place.

in the same way that Lego therapy was briefly a thing for autism - but that is very different from running an afterschool club where the kids get to play with Lego.

State schools in primary teach to the average.

the teacher is then expected to differentiate the material to provide support for the children with additional needs and extra challenge for those who need it.

most schemes are written like this. So yes.

ex teacher.

It will be. The kids that are struggling will be talking up teacher time all day every day, whilst those at the top will have to spend time doing worksheets on their own or "helping" those behind them

Super ironic as well as private school are renowned for focusing on those who get results and managing out weak students.

Are they doing this to level the playing field for those that can't afford extra tutoring. This happened where I lived although the grammar schools themselves did it and I think (knowing the students that went) they were only provided to those who had been on pupil premium at some point in the last few years.

I bet you wouldn’t if your DC were one of those in the top group who were bored of not being stretched in class. I bet you’d welcome it.

You are getting very mixed up op.

The after school sessions these DC attend are a club. A fun activity. It is not lessons, it is not tutoring. You would find the content is extremely different from what is on the curriculum. Often things like this can be funded because:

• maths charities or universities offer grants for them in a desperate bid to reverse the impacts of 20 years of more able DC being left to fester
• pupil premium funds where these activities are provided for the direct benefit of children eligible for that money
• a teacher who loves maths & is choosing to do this for fun outside their working hours (this should be celebrated).

Tutoring/offering a struggling child intervention is not fun, for either the child or the adult. It can pressure the child to be made to stay longer after school for intensive work in subjects they struggle in.

You need to separate out the school offering this fun club, from their failure to provide more support for your DC. The two are not linked.

Yeh you’re being selfish. As a society we should be boosting the top talent so that they can go on to achieve great things, not just focussing on helping those at the bottom.

Agreed

What are you doing to help? My children struggled in years 1&2 and I realised the only person that could make a difference was me. Everyday we done English and Maths for 30 minutes after school and longer on a weekend. Both now at grammar school and flourishing. Stop focusing on others and concentrate on yours

Why not? I bet you would feel differently if it was your child that was bright. Kids that are bright and not challenged can often get up to mischief or lose motivation as they are bored while the teacher deals with getting lower achievers up to average. About time the balance was redressed

The reality is as well, sometimes the resource on the less able doesnt even help.

My siblings DC has discalculia. Years and years of intervention & expensive tutoring basically have not really made much difference, and they still have not reached the expected level. It hasnt increased their confidence and they still hate maths.

In the nicest way, it has probably been a waste of time & money and its probably frustrating for other parents that so much resource goes on that child over their own.

Not all parents can pay for tuition. They are probably trying to level the playing field for those that can't. Why would you object?