Is a child's progress continuous/ does it plateau/ go in fits and starts?

[squashpie]

I've started/ read a few threads on here about a child's progress through their school life. Some people have given annecdotal evidence of children who've raced through Yrs 1,2,3 in all the top sets, only to plateau and for kids who were average or even struggling in those 1,2,3 years then coming into their own Years 4 onwards. Has anyone out there got a similar tale to tell about their own DC/ or children they know well?

In my school there is a big pressure to hot house kids to be good at everything from maths to swimming to piano lessons but I wonder if these kids will maintain this edge, or if once the basics of reading and writing and maths are in place, other kids catch up?

A think a child's progress depends on so many things.

Guy Claxton argues that spurts and dips in school performance are the rule rather than the exception - less than half the children who came in the top 5% on the national tests at 11 go on to remain in the top 5% at GCSE. (Times Educational Supplement 2006).

He says that rather than being anything to worry about these statistics are to be expected and don't mean anything is necessarily 'wrong'. The Specialist Schools and Academics Trust (SSAT) apparently drafted a plan with the DfES to encourage universities to establish links with the pre-teen students who excel in year 6 tests. The Trust's chairman was convinced that 'bright eleven year olds' should achieve 3 As at A level and wanted secondary school heads 'held accountable' if such students didn't make it.

In my experience a child that's seen as 'slow' early on is unlikely re-categorised as 'bright' later on, a child that is on the bottom table in year 2 is unlikely to make the top table by year 4 etc. Of course it can happen but it isn't the norm.

Many on here seem to suggest it does and that's really encouraging

Hi,

My DD1 - August birthday, very shy, was on the bottom table (of 4) until mid-way through yr 3. Her saving was a great NQT who joined after Xmas and took all of 2 weeks to call me in and say 'I don't understand why DD1 is in this group she is one of my best'. She has been in the top couple of the top table, for all subjects, ever since!! So IMO Yes a DC can make great progress, unfortunatley it is very hard to do this once a school has 'categorised' you. BTW my DD was coming top in tests but when I went in all I ever got is ' that table is best for a child like her, I will not move her'.

kitkat, that's really interesting and so pleased that things worked well for your DD!

My DS is young for year and I hear very similar things 'it is better to be at the top of group who have lower attainment', do you think he will be able to do X if I ask him? (He does and DS goes and nails whatever it is). I am worried about shattering confidence? What happens if he has to be moved down? It's only a trial. Etc.

I can see that a teacher may be genuinely concerned and trying to operate in the child's best interests too. Do you think they worry more about self esteem in the youngest children?

Kitkat - did your DS make a move immediately from the bottom table to the top? Immediately skipping all the stages inbetween?

How do you think schools 'categorise' pupils?

Hi Cortina,

Well my DD did not go straight to the top table but that was at my request - she spent a month or so on the 2nd table fist but the teacher quickly decided that she would easily manage on the top table - in fact told me she would still be one of the better ones on that table. She seemed to respond to the level of those around her - so when on the bottom table she just wasn't exposed to the level of work that the more able kids were doing so didn't get an idea of what to do.
I'm not saying she wasn't in the right place to start with - she had difficulty holding a pencil and could not do phonics at all - she has basically learnt to read totally by whole word recognition. She was always very good at maths but no-one was interested because her writing was so bad - in fact it was her mental mathes ability that finally got her shifted.
My personal experience was that very early on in yr R the teachers decide who is able and they get loads of opportunities. My DD got 3s in her KS1 stats except for writing (obviously!) but I have since found out that others who got 2s were able to stay on the higher tables. TBH I was very proud she did so well considering she was only ever allowed to do the bottom level exercises in class. She never got any average or 'stretch' level exercise or homework.
I feel very strongly about summer birthday children and my DD is obviously bright (we now know) but it did take her 3 years to catch up and she had a lot of support at home from us.
And yes re self esteem I was often told the most important thing for a young child is that they are happy at school - and maybe they were right as she has done OK in the long run .

Sounds like DD was well supported by the school, great. Thanks for the explanation.

My DS too is very happy at school it seems so far - which is brilliant. .

You say: She seemed to respond to the level of those around her - so when on the bottom table she just wasn't exposed to the level of work that the more able kids were doing so didn't get an idea of what to do.

This is really interesting. DS seems to rise to the level of whichever group he is put with fairly quickly. Hopefully it will mean he'll make good progress going forward.

Interesting what you say about reception too.

Kitkat couple of things I forgot to ask:

How many in DD's class?
How fluid were the ability 'groups', how much movement a term between the groups?

hi Cortina,

Back then (KS1) there were 30 in the class (more in KS2 now). And virtually no movement in the groups even from year to year as info was passed up by the teachers - I often felt that the teachers didn't want to move anyone down so therefore no-one could go up. In KS2 things do seem more flexible though.

My other DC is 'an old one' so I have also seen the other side of this - start in the top group.... 1st to get a reading book, 1st to get spellings, always picked to read in assembly and church etc., lead in plays..... it all makes a huge difference - confidence breeds confidence etc.
It used to break my heart that DD1 never (and I mean never ever in 3 years) got to read or have a part in anything and she just said but the others are better then me because I am on the bottom table. Any nonsense about kids not knowing this is rubbish.

All is well now though so we're very happy!!

Thanks for all your replies. It's very interesting and encouraging hearing about DC's educational journey.

I think my concern at the moment is that my DS is a well behaved boy at the bottom of the top sets and that because he is well behaved and doing pretty ok, he is not being stretched or encouraged enough. The teachers are concentrating on those who are deemed 'high fliers' (and who go to tuition/ kumon etc out of school) and those who are really struggling. The polite, ok kids get missed a bit, I feel (and so do other mums of similar kids in his class).

There are quite a few children in the top sets in ds's class are doing Kumon, being tutored and getting extra work to do at home from their parents. I wonder how many children in primary schools are on the top sets becuase they are being hot-housed and how many are achieving excellent results solely on teacher input during class time.

Thinking of our top table, half I know for certain have tutors after school (twice a week for an hour). They also get at least half an hour's work per day with their Mum after school.

This is at a home counties state primary (year one). Two also do Kumon twice a week (once at the weekend).

This is 3 out of the 6 that sit at the top table, I have no idea about the other 3 as I don't know their parents.

Why on earth would you want to send a year one child to a tutor when they obviously aren't having any problems at school?

I must admit when my DS changed schools in year 3 to a very nice home counties state primary half the kids seemed to be doing Kumon and I had never even heard of it before. My older DD's were both at secondary school so the need for it had obviously passed me by.

I think as kids get older their work ethic starts to influence how well they do at school as well. Once kids start secondary school I think a hard working, organised child can overtake another one who relies on their wits to get by and doesn't put the work in. My three DCs are all quite similar in ability and have followed quite a similar track academically throughout their early school careers. My two DD's however have both taken GCSEs and the difference in their performance was largely down to the fact that one worked consistently throughout years 10 and 11 and prepared properly for the exams and well the other one didn't.

Cat said:

IME, children's progress goes in fits and starts / spurts and plateaus or however you want to put it. A bit like physical growing - your children don't always stay the same number of months with the same foot size do they - they stay the same for 9 or 10 months then skip through 3 x 1/2 sizes in the next 3 or 4 monhts. That's the way it is with learning - they have 'bursts' and then consolidate (generally - there are always exceptions). That said, overall a long baby is likely to be a tall adult, and in the same way, a child that is very 'quick' to take things on board / learn new things is likely to maintain that ability over time. However, that is not the same as saying the first child to learn to read / knows the most letters or whatever in Reception is the brightest button - there are lots of complex things to factor in there.

I couldn't agree with you more! Problem is the NC isn't set up or always interpreted to see it quite this way, if a child isn't jumping forward in the prescribed sub level jumps etc each term there could be a problem (and I can see that it's sensible to check there isn't a problem of course). Teachers say children don't 'dip' on here and IME what you've so sensibly explained just isn't the mindset in the classroom.

The children working at a 2C now in year one will be the ones that it is 'expected' will end up with the highest scores in KS1. If a smart child is now on the bottom table it might be, for lots of reasons, they don't get the score they are capable of in year 2. Not a problem and they will hopefully make up the ground going forward but I am not convinced ALL do. (Of course a good teacher will spot all children's potential and escalate accordingly). Danger is that a sensitive child on a bottom table currently, that spurts, may not 'believe' they 'can' in a term's time.

If what you say is the case why do you think groupings/sets are often so stagnant?

My fear is that you treat a child as if it is intelligent, guess what you see and what happens? The reverse is also sadly true.

As for the tutoring, in our school the parents want to make sure the kids get into the higher sets next year. Success breeds success in parents view, etc.

Another problem is our obsession with putting children into age-related cohorts, and then measuring them against each other. It used to be more flexible, but now the only place you see that is in very small rural primary schools.

IMO the only thing children you need to worry about at primary school is whether children can do tables, basic spelling rules (eg i before e except after c), basic maths calculations and understand how to write and join up their letters. Parents can usefully help make sure children have done this before sending them off to secondary school - schools often seem to fritter away teaching time on things like pseudo-therapeutic circle time activities of unproven value, meaning these things are not always covered. Bright children benefit from being given cross-curricular projects to work on, that follow their own interests. Again, this can be done at home if school can't provide. You don't really need Kumon or tutors at this early stage of a child's education, and the stress they can bring sometimes outweighs the benefits IMO.

PLPus state school teachers are in some cases (not all, but some) so utterly deskilled they have lost the ability to recognise the subtle differences between children's in terms of their learning, and then diagnose strategies to deal with it. The whole focus of the state school system seems to be bringing everyone up or down to the 50th centile in achievement terms. What the point of this is I don't know. Probably some half understood Marxist ideology aimed at improving social justice, which it never seems to do.

Sorry, typing quite bad in last post, Baby on knee.

DD year 3.
I can see the children who truly struggled in reception still struggling, and a couple have had to repeat Y1 but many of the average ones have really caught up and there is less of a gap.Although the bright children are still bright the children with tutors and kumon etc are still ahead academically.
I have noticed some of the tutored children are less sociable than the "bright"