to be shocked that it's common in the 'best' primary round here for children to have tutors to get the through SATS and then the children are streamed on ability (ie test scores)

[wotnopulling]

i can't believe this. it's so depressing. are tutors for SATS common (thought they were meant to test the teaching not the children). Do all schools stream according to ability?!

YANBU - I didn't think it was common to use tutors for SATs, unless a child is really struggling, which is different. Having said that, it wouldn't surprise me at all if children ARE being tutored to get a 5c rather than a 4a, or whatever.

The secondary school that my DCs attend, uses results of Y6 SATS to set in Maths and English from Day One. In the case of my DS, he was placed in the top set for Maths and, quite honestly, should NOT have been there (not many parents would admit to that!). Now in Y9, he is in Set 2 and MUCH happier, ie, not feeling like the class thicko he is struggling to keep up any more.

Contrary to opinion on this thread, I'm guessing that quite a few secondary schools probably DO use the SATS results to set the Y7s (but I could be wrong).

I'm not sure on the difference between setting and streaming either. I thought streaming was when you were lumped by over all ability in all subjects. While setting was being taught by ability in 1 specific subject.

MillyR - that's my definition of setting and streaming too.

That's what I thought MillyR. Dd's school has 2 classes of 30.

Would seem mad to have them streamed rather than setted, because one child might be in the "top" 30 for literacy, but not in the "top" 30 for maths. Less room for acknowledgement and development of individual strengths and weaknesses. And the advantage at dd's school is that she knows lots of children in both classes rather than only those in her class.

I see. I think I prefer setting if that is the case. My DCs have always had strong and weak subjects. Very clearly so. DD is top of the class for literacy, but not at all for maths. DS#1 is streets ahead for science.

Aren't SATs results used as guidance for streaming when children start secondary school? If so I assume it is similar to 11+ tutoring in parents wanting to ensure their dcs are in the best class etc. Aren't SATs about to be abolished for this age anyway?

I have no problem with setting or streaming as it makes it easier for the teacher to teach children of similar ability. I was in the near bottom class for maths at grammar school which is exactly where I belonged and I had no issue with that. No bullying afair and I would have struggled to keep up with those who eventually went on to do maths and further maths A levels.

Not always mollie. DS#1s new school didn't know his SATs scores when he started Yr7. They use their own CAT tests and review his progress regularly.

I agree that it is probably preferable to use setting rather than streaming where possible. As other posters have pointed out, some children are very strong verbally and weak numerically. Only a lucky few, IME, are "good all rounders".

The tutoring thing is unbelievable. I think it is sad that there is tutoring at such a young age, and that people feel the need to push their children that hard.

Streaming is entirley different. It is completely necessary to put children together to work atthe same level. However, there are ways to make children lessa ware of what stream they are in. A friend of mine is a teacher and her children are split into groups with animal or tree names, or whatever they choose to use that year. As the children get older they have more of an awareness of ability, but they are never named in groups so as to define their ability, like the earleir example of low, med and high. I find that appalling

I know of many 11 year olds who are or have been tutored for SATS and also with one eye on the grammar schools. Even the school does "booster classes" to get some of them up to a level 5 if the school thinks this can be achieved.

I think even the most stupid of children can suss out the groups in reception. I think that stream/ setting at such an early age can stigmaise young children and shake their confidence. Especially as most of the top group children are september born girs and the bottom group are summer born boys.

Why do you think tutoring is sad at a young age? If it is done for a good reason by a sympathetic tutor it can help a child's confidence. Not all parents feel confident enough to help their children.

I find it really hard to help my son with maths as I am worried about showing him the wrong methods. I am just relieved he doesn't need my help.

I started him with a tutor to help his hand writing because a nasty little bitch girl was bullying him about his messy writing. I could not get him to practice his writing, but he will practice his writing for someone else. His confidence has improved massively especially as the tutor told him what he is good at. His tutor has worked with him to improve his pencil grip, which has dramatically improved his writing.

However I think it would be strange to send a young child to a tutor unless they are on the special needs register.

I just feel very sad for the kids going through this. I know why it happens and I do not blame parents or judge them. I just think we need to take a step back and look at ourselves.

Yes, you are right about the setting v streaming - Streaming is not small ability groups for different subjects - it is putting all tht "brightest" children in one class for everything, etc. Streaming is quite a blunt instrument and I am amazed to hear that there are primaries that stream the children like that, as virtually all children will have areas that they are stronger in.

LadyPink, what you are describing sounds like setting which is very commonly used in primary schools. BUT do NOT think that the children don't know which ability group they are in - they suss that out straightaway Just ask your primary-aged child who is the cleverest in the class... and they will definitely also be able to say who the least able are too.

BTW, secondary schools rarely use the SAT's information for grouping the children for teaching. They often don't receive the levels until long after term has started, at which point they are often amazed to find that the results the children got bear no resemblance to the ability / knowledge of the child. Most secondary schools use some sort of standardised ability testing of their own, administered under controlled conditions.
SAT's are hugely open to abuse

Dc must be stupid then, because they have been in Yrs2-3 before they started to work out that they were consistently in top sets compared to most their peers.
Our school does a kind of hybrid betweeen streaming and setting. There's the basic class which is completely mixed ability. They do spelling, topic work, etc. within the basic class group. However, for maths and English the children get parcelled off to different teachers/classrooms, where the ability range is as small as possible within that room-full. Within the separate classroom fulls, there are different sets.
A small number of the least able children have extra, small guided sessions, too.
I hope that this system suits most children, it definitely has been good for DC.

Tutoring for SATs is not in my experience, either.

Well they obviously aren't stupid

If the basic class is mixed ability, then they aren't streamed. It is streaming when the children are put into classes where the school feels they are all of a similar ability. You are describing setting, with ability groups within the sets.

The school my DC goes to uses a similar system, as do many primary schools, and it does seem to be a good system.