Can someone explain me the british system please?

[Pitchounette]

Message withdrawn

Pitchounette - I'll have a go, but since I'm in Scotland I haven't actually experiences the English system myself. (I'm assuming you mena England, because you mention "reception" which we don't have up here).

You can find out what the children are expected to cover from the [http://curriculum.qca.org.uk/ National Curriculum website]]

SATs are only used to grade the schools and teachers, but some make so much of a big deal about them that children and parents get stressed.

G&T stands for "Gifted & Talented" - each school is supposed to identify the top percentage of their children and make special provision to ensure they are properly stretched. But in reality it varies between schools - some don't do it at all, because they think it divisive, others label the children but don't make much special provision.

Skipping a year sometimes happens, but secondary schools often will not take childern "out of year", so they might end up having to repeat a year later in primary school, which would usually be more difficult for them socially, so it doesn't happen very often.

National Curriculum website

Children who are maturer/adavanced are still placed in class with rest of age goup.

SATs are used by govenment to understand how a school is performing. They are also used to indicate how each child across the country is performing against a nationl benchmark. EG, a child in Year 6 should be at a level 4 at end of that year. They may be higher, or lower, but that is the expected national average. SATs are also used to indicate future GCSE prformance in secondary school, and to set targets. However most teachers don't really think much of them, but they are useful for assessing ability

I've been teaching 12 years and have never known a child skip a year, they all move up to the next year together

Message withdrawn

OUr chilren went to fee paying schools and there the system can be a bit different. I skipped a year but I was in the private system where you pay but even there it is fairly unusual. My children in schools which perhaps are the top 10% - 15% by IQ so you tend in that sort of school which is selective even at 5 not to get some who are much further ahead than others.

Most fee paying primary schools are 1 - 2 years ahead of state schools but most parents cannot afford to use them. You do not do SATs in most fee paying schools either.

No child should be bored at school. I d not know if you work but if you can earn enough to pay fees it's worth it. 50% of UK parents say they would pay if they could afford it.

Message withdrawn

I think every state school should be able to keep a clever child interested, and, in my experience, good schools are very able to do that. My DS3 is 6 (Year 1), bright but not outstanding - the last time I was helping in class he and 3 other boys were doing some maths problems (symmetry, etc) that the teacher said was aimed at end of Year 2 children, so state schools can easily find the resources to push clever children. The key point is that you have to be lucky enough to have a good school with an enthusiastic teacher who is able to meet the needs of all the children. Certainly the whole "Every Child Matters" policy framework for early years education deals with looking at children's individual needs.

Re SATS - yes, they were introduced as a means of identifying failing schools or teachers. While they still have that purpose, they are also a useful tool for streaming children as they move into the next stage of the National Curriculum, and picking up on any extra help individual children might need.

Message withdrawn

IME there is quite a bit of 'streaming' within classes, even if it is not described as such. So for example the 'orange group' will be expected to write a story using their own vocabulary, while the 'green group' is given a word bank to use and produces a simpler piece of text.
This also takes account of the big age variation within a class - regardless of 'cleverness', a year 1 child born at the start of September is at a very different stage from a year 1 child born at end August.
Lots of parents on MN seem to worry a lot about this, at either end of the year, but of course the teachers have to deal with it all the time.

That's why parents who can pay will pay. That's why the private system which educates 6% of children is responsible for 50% of successful applicants to good universities because many schools in the state system do not really do well with the very clever children. We used to hvae a very good system 30 years ago where children who passed an exam at 11 went to special state schools for very clever children and that worked very well. But then the left wing took over and those who cannot afford fees end up all brought down to the lowest common denominator.

I know people who use the Lycee in London but again but they pay fees.

Hmm, Xenia, I think that's a wee bit of a sweeping statement. At my university (which I went to from a boringly average state school, not generally considered the 'good' one in town) I remember learning that very important mantra 'correlation does not imply causation'.
Just for example, attending a private school correlates highly with oxbridge entry. But equally, being middle class correlates highly with both private school attendance and oxbridge entry. And so on & so forth.
Personally, Pitchchounette, I wouldn't be alarmed by all these doom sayers. If your child/ren are bright, they will bob to the surface anywhere apart from an utterly sink school.

Private schools have a high proportion of children from middle class families, who would do well in any school, and many are also selective by ability. It is therefore not possible to show whether the high rate of university places has been influenced by the school or not.

Decent teachers in decent state school should be able to differentiate the work so that all children can achieve to their ability. When the children go to secondary school, they are likely to be in different ability "sets" for some subjects from quite early on, to ensure that they can all continue to work to their level. Don't worry - all schools want children to get the best results they can, and will make sure that children who are ahead get every chance to do well in exams, and that those who are behind are given the chance to get up to a level where they get the qualifications they are capable of.

When they get into secondary school, they are usually "setted". Put together with similar children doing same subject.

Eg my school has 12 maths sets in each year. They are setted in Y7 based on SATs results. So really bright ones go in set 1, bright ones in set 2 etc

The ideal is that kids are kept in social/age groups but that all abilities are catered for. Very hard for teachers, and parents it sounds like!

Is your son gifted in many areas at school? Are you in communication with his teacher?

Ideally he should be being strestched within the same learning objectives of that lesson.

hmmmmmmm

But many many fewer poor children get into the best univesities since we abolished the state grammar schools with selective entries.

Either private schools are now teaching better, poor children are getting thicker or universities are preferring children who are posher (which is unlikely).

Message withdrawn