What do you think about this 'system' and would it bother you?

[Cortina]

The facts are these, in our school we have had virtually static ability tables in year one. We have also had the poor behaviour concentrated towards the lower end of the ability table spectrum. The ability tables are all equal groups of 6.

I've come to terms with this and hey, year 2 is another year and a hopefully different system! DS is in the bottom end of the class. He's done well and I am pleased.

I discovered towards the end of this academic year that the various tables/pupils were given words to learn depending on what is was decided they were capable of learning and remembering at the time. Upshot is top table finished all the 'word lists' and perhaps others at tables in the top half of the class. No formal spelling tests but when you receive a word list you also receive an exercise to try at home using those words. With me so far? Top third all moved on to trickier more challenging stuff in the last term. On to Y2 key words plus etc if that's what they are called?

DS had completed about half of the lists by year end and to be honest the words and exercises never presented a problem, he ended the year at level 2C. Great, not a reason to be concerned. I realised that he hadn't covered most of these words though and asked for the words/exercises for us to do at home, no problem. He read all the words to me no problem when I presented all the left over lists to him.

He was on list 3 out of a possible 20 at the end of the year after completing some other alphabetical lists of words/different system that went first. We haven't done much work these holidays so far and the other words he can read perfectly well but hasn't learnt them as yet. The words on list 20 are the months of the year to give you an idea.

So this isn't important at all is it? It's just I fear I see a system here that creates the positive outliers of the future as the top half of the class pull further and further away from others whose potential may be the same or similar?

(A similar scheme operates for maths by the way).

I fear I see a system where teachers and others could subconsciously 'believe' that X must be more capable than Y and this might have negative consequences going forward. I know that I find myself thinking this way, human beings like to label after all, to create order out of disorder etc.

I fear I see a system where the top half of the class are the only ones that believe they are capable of more and have the potential?

I fear that other systems will be operating, like this one, which disadvantage some of the children who are not on the top table/top half of class?

Or are my small concerns all unfounded they are only 5/6 after all! :)

So my question/s are would you just think this was ok and not worry? I feel I 'should' do work with my son this holidays or I will be disadvantaging him due to this system.

Are you sure the class is managed as you described? 2a is a high score for someone towards the bottom of the class. Has the teacher actually said your DS is on the lower table?

I suggest with a 2c result you have enough ammunition to push your ds onto one of the top half tables anyway. Go in at the start of the year and say that's what you want as ds is now ready for it.

Hi SuSylvester, I am pleased of course, especially due to what happened last year.

BUT I don't like it when I see something which doesn't appear to be a meritocracy in the classroom. When able kids are 'chosen', creamed off and accelerated early. This means only the odd 'late developer' will have a chance of catching them at least during the early years, or this is my fear. The Govt a few years back decided what children at KS1 and KS2 'should' achieve in public exams going forward based on early promise. If not then they were being 'failed' rather than having plateaued or tailing off in any way.

It seems my son's year is quite an able year group so this may skew things a little, those at the top table seem to be way ahead anyway and have particularly high current attainment.

SuSylvester, I will do but I have a pretty good idea the top half has kids who are at higher levels than 2C. It's a very able year group. What's interesting is that the children seem to rise to the average of the group they are placed with over time. What's also interesting is the split in the behaviour in the top half and bottom half of the class, no one wants their child in the top half to move groups. I can't say I blame them.

Surely the children can't be arranged into the same groups for all subjects?

Take for example DS2 (yr 1). His literacy skills are fantastic and he has to fetch his reading books from the Yr 3 classroom. However his maths skills are way behind that and pretty average for a summer born 6 yr old. Differentiating all work on the basis of his reading ability would mean that he was given maths work which was far too difficult for him.

Oh yes they are domesticsluttery. It is assumed, I think, that a child has a general 'sump' of ability that is roughly the same for everything, general IQ I think.

I wonder if it has been an unusual situation as the class are all quite able it seems? Although those perceived more able/top half seem to make more progress as their half of the class is much quieter and calmer shall we say.

For humanities type work, music etc they don't work in their ability groups.

That is totally crap

The school streams for maths around Y3 I think. But guess who is more likely to be in the top sets if this system continues? Or that's my fear anyway.

which froups get the most attention?

I understand your frustration OP but your ds is likely to continue doing well and thus will be challenged at his level. I suspect there are lots of pushy parents in the class and you will have to push too. You should complain about the other pupils' behaviour.

groups even

Cornsilk, this changes around Y3. It also may not be the thinking behind the ability groups, just a guess. This seems to produce a system where children score the same in maths and literacy (such as my son).

I know the results of 4 kids in the class, admittedly not a high number, DC and DS and a couple of close friends. All have the same results in all areas. Just a trial of 4 but I wonder if this 'similarity' across the board makes the group more malleable somehow? Does that make sense?

In that case it is a very strange system.

Is the set up the same in Yr 2?

If it is I think you need to have a chat with the new teacher in September about how work is being differentiated. Some children are all round brilliant at everything, but most have strengths and weaknesses.

My ds's would both sink like a stone in that system. Aiming for the same results in English and maths for all kids is bonkers.

DS tells me the teacher has spent all the time with the top group. May not be accurate, it has seemed to me the teacher has spent most time trying to manage a few disruptive pupils (I go in 3 times a week)! The teacher has done a good job this year and has cared very much about the pupils. In this respect I am v happy.

I haven't complained about the behaviour as to be honest
I am not sure what could be done that hasn't been done or tried. Yes, parents are v pusy generally, think you can see why.

That's just a guess, cornsilk, be interested to hear from teachers if this ever happens or is pushed for?

Not sure about Y2, I don't think so and I hope not.

Agree the tables being the same for different subjects is odd but I do question why you are so concerned about the fact the kids in the top group get different work. What's the alternative.

Say one of them is reading at year 3 level, they need different work.

Helen, I was feeling so reassured until your second post.:).

How did your classroom work then? Our 'ability tables' are named after animals and remain zebras or lions etc through the year.

A lion remains a lion and sits with the fellow lions for maths and literacy etc :). This seems to mean that the children see themselves as 'a little bit cleverer than the zebras but not as bright as the monkeys' etc :). My son seems to see things like this, not sure if this is worrying or not?

Did the children up sticks and move to another table for literacy and then maths?

How many at each table?

How many movements each year?

Mrz on this thread says that in some classrooms some are creamed off and accelerated, was this true in yours?

Does any of this really matter? I am interested in the broader psychological implications in this sort of 'system' and the thinking behind it all. I do know that many of my classmates and I back in the 70s never 'believed' and still struggle in part due to this sort of restrictive system. Yes, even though we were so young and went on to do ok, well even, in some instances.

My class was organised like that when I was at primary school in the 70's.

Skippy, I think it's because I fear I see a system that isn't fair, a flawed even potentially dangerous system. A system that tells certain children they can do more than others, they are believed in and trusted to do well. This again has its own pitfalls, if a 'chosen' child begins to struggle they may think they have reached their ability ceiling and really doubt that they are so clever after all. Interestingly, this is apparently true especially for women. In later life some suffer from 'imposter syndrome' - in other words a feeling they don't deserve the job as a barrister etc, what if someone sees through them? They are not particularly clever really, they just work hard, and so on...

My son is a good reader, he is probably a better reader than the school think he is. He's a quiet lad who loses focus at times. I could say that's hardly a surprise given the lively classroom but the truth is he's at fault here too (if fault is the right word).

It's believed, not necessarily by me, he is better off with a group who are less able than he is. I think if he was put in Year 2 to read and was with a higher achieving cohort, guess what? Yes, you'd see his reading 'ability' go through the roof.

Would you rather that they were all given the same level of work, regardless of ability?

I'd rather classrooms were managed in the same way that teachers on here mange theirs, Feenie, Mrz etc.

I'd prefer small class sizes where a teacher could more easily get to know the children. I'd prefer a system that rolled out the curriculum (that deviated from NC in a helpful and interesting way) to the individual child on an individual basis. I can dream.