UK schools (have they changed in terms of years)

[Joop557]

When I went to school (DoB 1987), i went to these (ages are approx)
primary 7-9
middle school 10-12/13
high school 13-16 (though they also had a small college there with age 17/18).

however my nephews is different. From what I know it’s been
first school 6-9
secondary 10-16

the elder one just joined secondary.

I’m aware of the key stages but I have a few questions:

1. Did it used to always be like my experience around the country 20 years ago?
2. Are most public schools in Uk set where it’s primary 7-9, secondary 10-16. All in the same school building?
3. Why did they join the middle and high schools up - was it mainly cost cutting?

The main reason for the demise of middle schools was the introduction of the National Curriculum and its associated tests in 1988. They chose the testing points to be 7, 11, and 14, which fitted well with the more common Infant/junior/secondary and primary/secondary structures, with the tests being in the last year of each phase. It worked much less well in schools with first/middle/high school structures, as the kids would be tested in their second or even first year at the school, depending on the age divisions in that particular area. The school would then be judged on those results, although they had only been responsible for the last part of the teaching leading up to the tests.

Rising 5's to year 3 = First school
Year 4-6 = Middle School
Year 7 - 11 = Upper school
Although we called upper school years 1-5 again 😂

I should add I was also born 1987

That said I used to live in Somerset for a while and they do it differently where they're have first schools then you're at middle school until year 8 then do 9-12 at high school

That happened to me - born in 87 - they went from 12+ to 11+ so we went up with the year above

Kirklees still has a 3 tier system. Leeds used to but changed back to 2 tiers years ago.

15/16 are still kids theirselves, growing up. They may not have fully learned why it’s wrong to punch/kick etc, and if a 10/11 os nearby, incredibly vulnerable, I see huge potential for abuse.

I think that is very much a problem with the individual school, not the system itself. Some of the benefits are that the schools attract teachers who are more specialists in their subjects and whilst they will teach yr7s, they would choose to teach older children. Secondly in my dc school the older ones act as role models for the younger ones and are looked up to. It also means that when choosing GCSEs (generally around January of yr9) they have been in the school for over two years and have a good idea of what studying that subject in that school will look like.

It changed in 2009/10, until then the head teacher could decide when to admit children who were young in their year, so some started after Christmas. Even though in most schools by then the parents could choose at my dc school the head still dictated this. By the time my second child started the parents could decide.

My memories of Secondary were the Yr9s being the worst. By Yr10/11 they had grown out of terrorising the Yr7s, and Sixth form kept themselves to themselves unless they were prefects on duty.

Now DD is at Secondary I find it a bit odd it only goes to 16. The Yr11s have their common room (the old sixth form one from before they moved to the college), and lunch time is split so its only Y7 and Yr9 on her lunch break... a lot less than the 1500 people I had- her school only has 1000 pupils)

Her only complaint is corridors between lessons but they try to combat that with the one way system

They were all 4 when they started but a May child couldn't start until Jan.

Having different systems across areas was tricky. I was born in 1986. Where I lived, the schools were split 4/5-8, 8-12, 12-18 (although some probably went 4-12). In the next area they moved up a year earlier I.e. 4/5-7, 7-11, 11-18. This meant lots of people left my school at 11 to go to schools in the next area so they decided to change it.

Saying that, some areas still have middle schools 9-13 ish. It's probably a good idea in many ways - the 10/11 yos have often outgrown primary, they aren't thrust into secondary at 11. The downside is they have to settle quickly at secondary before GCSEs start.

I went through a three tier system which was common locally back in the 70/80s.

First school: 4-9 (equivalent to new reception to year 4)
Middle school: aged 9 - 13 (new equivalence is y5-y8
Secondary school: aged 13-16 (equivalence y9-11)
Sixth form (for me this was same school as my secondary but not all secondaries had sixth forms) - 16-18y (now y12-13)

I teach in infants which is 4-7 (R-Y2)
Juniors is 7-11 (y3-6)
Secondary is 11-16/18 (y7-11 or 13 if sixth form)

^ "Kirklees still has a 3 tier system. Leeds used to but changed back to 2 tiers years ago.^"

Re: middle schools - Wiki tells me that there are about 150 in the UK. Kirklees has two, which each have about 600 pupils in years 6-8 each. My DC are going through this first/middle/high school "pyramid" system. DS left middle school in July, DD started in September. The high school at the top of the pyramid has around 1300 students, including 6th form. Because usual entry is at Y9, very few pupils who aren't already in the pyramid join at high school age. The rest of the borough has the more usual primary/secondary system. There are 21 first schools (including some tiny rural schools), 2 middle schools and 1 high school with 6th form in the system. I love it; it gets the 10 year olds a bit more independent and a bit more grown up earlier, and separates the big, smelly teens from everyone!

We still have this system (it was common in England up to the late 60s I understand) due to the distribution of buildings at the various school sites. Before all the schools became academies about 5 years ago, the council would periodically try and come up with how they could use the buildings to change the schools to a primary/secondary system. The sticking point was always that the first schools would need an extra classroom for Y6 (and class teacher). The was a huge cost, ineffective in the tiny rural schools, was never justifiable. Also - huge protests from parents who'd been through the system - the three tier system locally is now on about its 4th full generation, and people love it.

a bit more about middle schools, scroll down for UK

OP, there is no way you only started school at age 7 in the U.K.

7 is not an "approximate" for 4 or 5.

As others have said, middle schools were never a universal thing.

How would it have been a cost saving measure to close a load of schools and have to expand others to fit in all the younger kids?

Why don't you ask someone who went to school 20 years ago in the same area as your relatives? You won't get any helpful information from surveying a widely-distributed population on Mumsnet.

First post refers to "public schools". The poster probably means state schools (in the K public schools are a defined small group with the category of fee paying/private schools - very different from the USA).

I don't think that one single person responding has been confused by what OP meant @Xenia - all the advice is about the state sector, nobody has advised her about the structure of Eton and Harrow!

Most of kirklees definitely doesn’t have middle schools, and hasn’t for at least the past 25-30 years.
The demise of middle schools was really before the introduction of the national curriculum tests, and mainly that “on average” ( before a random poster jumps on me with a sample size of 1) students did not make consistent good progress in the middle schools, and “on average” would be behind a dual tier student on entering y9.
That isn’t terribly surprising, no real senior role models to look up to, Very few subject specialists want to only teach y5-8 so most were taught by primary teachers, where obviously it is really hard to deliver a good quality education across all subjects. ( A recent STEM survey found for example that 30% of primary teachers thought all metals were magnetic and so were continuing pupils misconceptions rather than correcting them, I am sure you could find a corresponding misconception in my ability to teach eg English or German)