Enrichment vs. Acceleration?

[LongDeadMotherofHorrors]

One of my kids is very able. She is in Y4 and currently working at Y5/Y6 level. Teacher says she would prefer all children to be enriched within their year group rather than accelerate. This on the basis of "otherwise she'll be doing a degree in Y6".

It's a tricky one. Any views?

an 11yo would be happier working with 16yo?s if there are no equally bright 11yo?s around
Yes.

The EPPI study had to go to great lengths to not criticise UK teachers. So you've got to read between the lines. But even the EPPI report suggests that children "make best progress" when working with ability peers. So if there aren't any in the class the child makes best progress by working with children from higher years who are on his wavelength. Though he could "get by" in a mixed ability class with the right atmosphere (whatever that is).

be introduced to number and other puzzles that will allow him to use that amazing facility with numbers to extend his thinking skills
I'm all for extending thinking skills, as long as that mantra is not used as an excuse for consciously preventing further learning of new concepts and material.

none of the kids who have passed thro my classes would be anywhere near ready for gcse at 11
That's what a lot of teachers and TAs say. What's strange is that I, a non teacher, know several children who are better mathematicians than DS - his cousins, my colleague's son and others. I don't think DS is exceptional at all and I'm not just being modest. Teachers don't see this because The System "evens out" most of the brightest children by the time they get to 11.

OP here. With my daughter I am not concerned just with boredom - happy for her to have an occasional dose of that. More worried about what I experienced at secondary school. I cruised along and never expected to work. If I found something required work I ignored it because I was not used to failure and did not wish to fail. I think it is important to learn to learn to try. For this reason I'd rather my children didn't have to sit on the hard shoulder, even if they are comfortable sitting there.

mathsmum, as I've said, it's going to be impossible not to accelerate him to some extent, since he's setting a pretty fast pace without us having to push him. His teacher wants him to join in with the rest of his class for group/practical work and I agree with her, since it's an ideal opportunity to use something he's good at and confident with to connect with his peers.

What we're doing at home is a bit of a mixture. Firstly, we're making sure that as his own enthusiasm helps him to surge ahead in number work we guide him to fill in the gaps in his knowledge as far as the national curriculum is concerned. We also need to do a lot of work on the reading and understanding a problem thing. He's a fluent reader, but he is language delayed so doesn't always link problems in words with the numbers they refer to very easily. The area G&T coordinator's been briefed to help find resources that will help him in that respect, since the necessity for learning materials to be adapted to suit him is already in his statement. At any rate, he'll have a mixture of his own class KS1 work and adapted work from year 3&4 at school (and it was a year 4 paper that was used to assess him for the record books!)

We give him chances to apply his ability, too and will continue to do so in everyday situations and in more contrived ways. He loves baking and is fascinated by my knitting. Those things alone give him lots of opportunities to "help" me work things out!

One area of the curriculum where he is always going to have difficulty is estimation. He finds it hard enough to accept that 7:43 is "nearly a quarter to eight." That's going to be a fun one!

We also need to do a lot of work on the reading and understanding a problem thing. He's a fluent reader, but he is language delayed so doesn't always link problems in words with the numbers they refer to very easily

If it's any consolation that is the case - to some extent or the other - with most kids who are good in maths, my DS included. These kids also tend not to spend too much time reading the problem as they just want to get on with the numbers! But they can and do acquire the patience and skill to fully comprehend what's expected of them before they start.

"I cruised along and never expected to work" This often seems to happen with bright children. It's one reason I think extra-curricular stuff is really important especially in areas which aren't a strength (if you can find any) - sport is one that sometimes fit the bill. It's good for children to run up against the concept of not being top and having to work at something sooner rather than later.

I don't think anyone disputes the value of extra-curricular stuff but do you believe that these children should just be allowed to cruise along in their specialist subject? That they can be allowed to become complacent by not having to ever work at this subject?

We allowed the school to let DS cruise for the first three years. We only went and spoke to the Head about DS's maths at the end of Y2. One of the main reasons was that he was getting cocky. That's a major danger with letting them "coast" or telling them - effectively - that they are so clever at maths that they can go do something else instead.

If working to their highest achievement is good enough for other kids in the class it's good enough for more intelligent ones too.

To be honest DaL, I think it can work OK sometimes. I only have my ds's experience to go on, but he's cruised along in maths since day 1 and I don't believe it's done him any harm. He announced the other day he wants to study it at Cambridge when he's finished school, so evidently it's not dinted his enthusiasm for the subject (though of course I worry slightly that he may change his mind when he gets to the stage when it becomes difficult for him). I don't think he was ever as out there as your ds though and I expect what works for one won't necessarily work for all.

Fair enough, he's your DS, it's your call.

But there do seem to be a lot of parents who, like LongDeadMotherofHorrors, would rather their DCs "didn't have to sit on the hard shoulder".

I think it is critical for children to fail and pick themselves up again with a "try again" attitude. I this is especially difficult to manage with children who excel at everything (including sport). It's hard enough with children who do not excel at anything. Confidence is a fundamental to success and if we don't learn that we can confidently experiment then we become narrow and fucntionally rather ineffective.

Absolutely agree about each individual being required to work to their full potential. I suspect that no high achiever will work to their full potential unless they are challenged beyond their comfort zones.

I'm beginning to seriously doubt that the school where my daughter goes has any idea of her potential.

It's our duty as parents to worry about our dcs education DaL & we all struggle to find the best way through. Ideally the curriculum would be such that all (or very nearly all) children were appropriately challenged throughout and there was a widely accepted path for bright mathematicians to tread. Sadly this isn't the case & we have to make the best what's there. My worry about acceleration is that there really aren't all that many places to go if you get too far ahead too early without starting degree level work at school, which imo is unlikely to be taught well or enjoyably in the school environment and I consider best saved until university. Even if your ds is 'only' GCSE level at 11 (which I actually think is quite achievable for a number of children) that still leaves 7 years to cover maths + f. maths. + whatever else you can find that isn't degree level & can be taught with GCSE/A level knowledge and hasn't already been covered in primary extension work. Maybe it will work out - I honestly don't know how much extra maths there is out there that fits the bill, but I would be concerned that it would run out. (F Maths network ran a team challenge last year that required the year 10 participants to learn complex numbers, a further maths topic. You'd have thought they'd have chosen something right outside the curriculum if there was much else to choose accessible at that level?)

I actually think a childs 'full potential' is often so huge it's almost ludicrous to consider working them to it.

At least 10% of children could comfortably do GCSE at 11 if they were allowed to proceed at their own speed in maths. And it's not just because GCSEs have been dumbed down.

Your worry about acceleration is misplaced. Is DS going to run out of maths? I doubt it. Stephen Hawking knows a bit of maths and he is still learning a few things. 99% of the reason DS is where he is in maths is because of his keen interest, not some genius ability. And interests will change. At 14 it may be the guitar he's crazy about. Or basketball.

Given a choice of letting a child learn things when his interest is at its peak or slowing down the delivery, waiting till interest has ceased and then introducing the more demanding stuff ... I know where I stand.

I suspect that no high achiever will work to their full potential unless they are challenged beyond their comfort zones.
Yes. Work should be just as hard/challenging for everyone. Why should some get an easy ride and never have to put in any effort just because their abilities are in academic areas?

my gut feeling says it's nearer 1% than 10% going at their own speed - more than about that & I think you'd be in the realm of pushing kids to do stuff they didn't really want to and quite likely at the expense of other areas of their lives.

I agree there's a lot of maths to learn, but if you don't want to learn university level maths before going to university and you want to go to university at the usual age, then the choice is much more restricted. I am I think more concerned about the social isolation aspects than you seem to be.