Boys 'improve in school from feeling top of class'

[weekendalmostover]

Saw this on the Beeb and thought it was interesting. Does it tally with experiences?

I know my naturally competitive DS gets a buzz out of being top, keeps a mental league table for just about everything, and quickly gives up on anything he feels he's not very good at.

Also curious as to how the effect plays out in selective grammar schools? Do all those high flying boys get a wake up call once they're among others with similar attainment, or does the fact that they've been 'selected' in the first place carry them through on a high?

Very true for DD very untrue for DS. I think that demonstrates precisely... nothing.

It's been true for DS. He was happily coasting along at the bottom of top set/top of middle set boundary when a lot of the top children left to go to academic private schools at 7+, and suddenly his performance rocketed -- he found himself within spitting distance of the top of the class and has been very motivated to stay there. Teachers have been using words like "diligent" and "great work ethic" which had never featured in the same sentence as DS's name before .

But I'm not sure that it's anything to do with his being a boy so much as with his personality type -- DH and I were both similar, I think.

I would say it depends on the individual child. It always does. There are boys, who couldn't care less about their performance in relation to their peer group. That said, I have kept boys in middle ability sets (there was an overlap with the top groups anyway) and their confidence increased a lot during the time I taught them. The needed to be the big fish in the little pond and it was usually those children, who had performed poorly in previous years due to confidence issues. Generally, they moved into the top sets without issues afterwards and continued to perform well. At the same time, children, who I thought would have benefitted from being in a lower group due to confidence issues, made no progress at all in their top set. That could just be coincidence, though.

In general, however, a lot of "my" boys do well because I tell them quite frequently that they are bright and capable and are doing well. For some reason, they seem surprised that...and it takes a while for them to realise that I am being serious. (I'm also quite honest when their work is rubbish and they performed poorly, so it's not as if I'm just praising them for no reason.) I like teaching boys, though. They are fun and mostly quite easy to motivate.

The problem is that being top of the class can only to one child so you would have thought that the advantage of bigging up that child for that child would be more than outweighed by the disadvantages for all the others. If that research is true.

DS attends a super selective school.

I think it's hugely important that he is taught amongst other outliers like him. That he realises he aint all that and has to work very very hard to stay not even at the top.

Of course all the boys know they are very clever. But the atmosphere at school means they also know they're not speshul .

Very true for both DSs, apart from in sport which they cared little for.

Both were in an accelerated stream in a comp and fought to be top dog. DS1 was successful DS2 less so but he still tried.

They have the least competitive parents in the world, so no idea where it came from.

Absolutely untrue for either of my boys, at primary level anyway, as they have no idea where they are.

My DS1 is particularly odd as he is and has always been very academic, working a number of years ahead and often tells me he is "well below average" and "bottom of the class".

My DS2 is in the second group from the top one but has no idea what this means at all.

My DD1 on the other hand is fiercely competitive and has been since about reception and can tell you what book band just about everyone is in the class as well as clocking every group and every child in each group etc....

I hate gender stereotyping!

Not sure it works for DS - where we used to live he was definitely top of the class but he didn't have anyone to bounce ideas off and was in danger of stagnating a bit.

We moved house and he started at a school where there were a lot more clever children and he had to work harder and so did work harder and achieved more.

Both DC know where they are compared with others - DD probably knows where all the children are although DS has a pretty good idea as well.

lso curious as to how the effect plays out in selective grammar schools?
I was talking to my mum this morning about this and she often tells me she was "average" at school. I had to point out to her, not for the first time, that she went to a selective grammar school and that she would have had to be a lot better than average to get in. She is 76 and went to secondary school in the 40s and 50s.
My dd came home to tell me that she came second in her class for history mock gcse yesterday. She performed much better when she was in the 2nd set than when she was in top set for maths. The trouble is they put her up where she was in the bottom 1/3 rd of her class, then put her down when they split to smaller classes for gcse, where she flew again, so they moved her back up again, where she is doing ok. She definitely had more confidence when she is at the top of the class rather nearer the bottom.

My DS is a high flying dyslexic so is often near the top of top set, but struggles in other areas. I know his DT techer was pleased when he chose to take engineering as he felt he would pull the others in the class up to his level.

DS1 is an achiever. His personality is what drives that although as he is in the top sets I think there is an element of competitiveness. He is not great at spirt and football but practices all of the time. When people described him as clever I often think he us studious. He claims he is "rubbish" at maths. He isn't - he is almost 8.

DS2 thrives with praise. I don't think he knows but his teacher who he loved last year commented extensively about his interest in science and maths and now he gravitates towards those subjects. He is almost 6. He claims he can't read every single day- he canand well.

Ds3 is only nearly 3.

I like being a big fish in a small pond. I went to do a French course recently and went to beginners. I have a good accent, find languages easy and have a modicum of knowledge from school. I should have gone along to intermediate. I am an adult and really should know better but I do understand what this is about.

I don't think it's gendered though.

unless you have a child that has experienced schooling where they've been top as well as schooling where they haven't you can't really know how they'd have been in the other setting.

alone of my dc dd2 has experienced both and being top definitely suited her better - she tends to give up otherwise. Not sure you can conclude all that much from this, but it's certainly not exclusively a boy thing.