Conservatives plan to make 'failures' resit last eyar of Primary

[Peachy]

yes, because my poor SN DS1 needs to be amrked out as a 'failure' at 11, separated from his friends and held back with his younger (NT) bother....

Cue, I suspect, one angry child who becomes even ahrder to teach and engage

In Itlay, unless you are competent in the year, you don't move!

I was schooled in NI, and was kept back for a 2nd final year in Primary school, not sure of the reason, but I was fine, it was never mentioned by anyone...and I have had no esteem issues since!

I think its not a bad idea, it mightn't be the best one, but at least its an idea!

better than the current Govt policy of improving standards by getting teachers to fil in more and more and more froms ...rather than letting them teach!

There's not enough special school. My eldest goes to one nearly 20 miles away. She's due to leave that in 2 years time. The next school that i want her to go which is 45 miles away, but cannot see the LEA agreeing to it. Have a friend who's going to trubunial in a couple of weeks as she wants this school for her daughter but the LEA have said no.

Middle child goes to mainstream with a statement (out of borough) got the teachers predictions for the time she leaves and they think she's only going to get 1 level 4 grade. Can you imagine how much that is going to do to her self confidence. The school is having a hard time getting her to try things that are remotely difficult as it is.
Got told by the LEA that they want to take remove her statement when she hit secondary. The thought of secondary school scares me. Have told hubby that she needs to go to an independent dyslexic school but even those like her older sister school are thin on the ground and are very expensive.

Thanks Lizs

In Holland we also got held back a year if you had not reached the required standard. It never happened to me, and it was a huge incentive to work hard to ensure I could stay with my friends in the same class.
We did not have TA's, just a class of 30-ish children and 1 teacher. All children were taught at the same level, if someone could not finish the work done in class, it had to be finished as homework.
I don't recall any children with SEN, so I assume they were at a different school.

I personally can see the benefit of keeping back a child. For instance, my ds turned 8 a mere 9 days ago, yet tomorrow he starts in Y4. He struggles with every aspect of the work. He has a lot more in common socially and acedemically with the children starting Y3. I wish ds could repeat a year. At the moment he frequently tells me he is 'stupid' because he is bottom of the class. It effects his self-esteem and his desire to learn. If he re-start in Y3 tomorrow, I am sure his confidence would grow imensely as for once he will be able to keep up with the work.

If he could re-start in Y3 tomorrow.

god there is SO much wrong with the school system atm

Much of which can be reduced to

FUNDING

Its not bloody rocket science, pay for additional help and early identification of kids having problems and sort it asap.

These half ar$ed measures make me mad. Its the kind of crap you can ONLY come out with in oppositon. I hope.

It is actually unworkable though.

parentign classes is whats needed - not cockhead fuckmonkey like DC and his fruity right wing plans of terror

the lack of specialist school seems to be the heart of the matter.

the lack of intelligence in politics, i don't know, i despair

oh and peachy, would they seriously keep a kid with statemented SN back, do you reckon?

thats bloody obscene if so.

(i do know not all -prob most- kids with SN do get the statement they ought to have, and then they don't get the support again due to FUNDING)

Ah ha I have an idea

DON'T cut taxes

Tax the richest 10% to the feckin hilt and spend it on education

(this is where debates with my db disintergrate quite quickly. According to him, rich people should not be taxed because, and I quote, "they work damn hard for their money")

It really is down to getting the extra help needed when it is needed, nit when it is too late.

And LEAs are really cutting back on the numbers of kids who have got a statement in primary, at least they are round us.

Which sucks and is so fucking counterproductive

i really cannot understand in this day and age, how something so simple could be so mucked up. by a bunch of old inbred politicians.

we really need to pull in the reigns with this country, it's going to the dogs.

i tell you

I have not read the whole thread, but I know that here in Germany it is not uncommon to make children repeat a year if their grades are not good.

There are rumblings at the moment in the area where we live about changing that as it is such a huge feeling of failure for the child to cope with. I read today that 60thousand children in this area (population 18 million) are held back each year)

We do have special needs schools though, so that SN children get specialised teaching.

Making a child repeat a year is completely demoralising, I cannot see it helping, especially a SN child. He needs specialist teaching not a kick in the teeth.

Tell me about it, my LEA will only give statements to children that score 1% or less. Am about to tackle the LEA with my third child. (Their problems are inherited although the gene hasn't been discovered yet).
His EP mentioned the language unit (which i don't want) as it will mean all 3 of them being in different boroughs and is not pratical. So will be putting him down for the infants up the road from the middle child and pushing the stat assessment.

i really don't want to say this but the education system is becoming very right wing

I'm not a David Cameron fan, but I can see where he's coming from with this. We've got into a habit of tolerating low attainment in this country and it's coming back to haunt us. If a child doesn't meet the required standard one year, what chance do they have in meeting a higher standard the next? As other posters have already stated, this system is already in place in other European countries and it works well.

if he'd said that he would open up new schools for children with special needs that would have been something. he's a thick plank

i see where he's coming from, tbh. my italian pals aways took their schoolwork very seriously, there was a real reason to, if they wanted to remain with their friends. seems worse to me to put children into secondary when they're not ready. but obviously Cameron is still a cock.

I don't think that this is working well in Germany, they are considering changing it, citing Britain as an example of a country where keeping children back is not done.

Don't you think that the emphasis should be on helping children move up (with extra remedial help when needed) rather than punishing them by holding them back a year.

But, oh silly me, that would cost money, wouldn't it.

ah, but i wonder if more NT children in the class taking responsibility for their own learning would free the teacher to do more teaching and less disciplining and chivvying? that would mean that those who are falling behind may end off with more, better, faster attention from the teacher. and it would also perhaps help to focus the minds of chippy, disinterested parents.
i have a couple of teaching friends, their stories of dealing with the parents would blanche your hair. although, christ... cna you imagine telling people their kid is getting kept back? the police would have to do it.

But I don't think it is a punishment as such (perhaps the child will feel that it is, but it is not done for the purpose of punishing) It is done to make life easier for the child, to give him/her a chance to learn at his/her pace, rather than moving up a year every year and constantly struggeling to catch up.

I'm not going to vote for him but at the same time I can't see what is wrong with Cameron saying he will halt special schools closures and give extra funding for children from poor backgrounds.

And I am all for parents having the say in how schools are run rather than LEAs, although I don't suppose it will ever happen.

I realise that the children aren't being punished, but this is how it must feel for the child. I don't believe that it offers encouragement to keep up, if that were true why would so many children here be kept back a year?

I believe that keeping a child back a year is a lazy option, easier than helping the child achieve his full potential by giving him extra help.

Can you imagine how dull it must be to do the same work 2 years in a row, how demoralising is that? Groundhog day for a whole year.

except this time they're actually 'getting it', though?

I just don't get the point of this

If a kid has failed to learn stuff, there is likely to be SOME sort of underlying problem here. Not necessarily special needs-maybe they just don't get breakfast. But that is what needs sorting. Otherwise kids are just going to be repeating the year ad infinitum...

Oh and I suspect it won't make a lot of parents buck up and say "Whoah, my kid is failing school, I'd better turn around our family life and spend an hour a day doing maths and reading with my kid.". No. Its going to make them, in some cases, pretty bloody angry with their child and the school, especially since secondary schools usually have longer hours, don't require so much parental involement, etc.

I also think that this is particularly unsuitable at age 10. It might perhaps make sense earlier, say top infants. But to keep a 10 year old in primary for an extra year when all their friends bugger off to big school just seems cruel.

This is also so daft in another way. I'm keeping my 4 yo out atm. He would be due to start school today. He is 4 and 7 days, has NO interest in reading/writing, loves stories and talking, and has a lot of interest in playing and bike riding. In short he is a fairly typical just-4-year boy.

Round here there is NO way for him to start late. There is no split intake, they all go in at the start of september, full time, regardless of birthdays. There is no option to keep a child down a year permenantly (I think this could be a good solution if done from day 1).

For us, therefore, I think not.

I'll bring a different element in - the point of splitting children at eleven was originally to ensure that sexually away boys are not mixing with nine year old girls, yes? You will have boys who are normally and naturally wanting to discover their feelings and have crushes - and if there are no girls around his own age, those crushes might be towards a much-too-young-to-understand girl. Leading to misery all round.