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.

I hate 'ability tables' being set up so children can't exceed expectation and I actively discourage teachers doing this in my school. It annoys me when teachers state things like 'The bottom group finished too quickly, so I let them read' (I'm a Year 5 teacher, Year 6 in September).

The way I do it is:
-They do an independent input activity and mark it themselves that links to the learning objective.
-We have a set marking criteria up.
-I've taught the children to decide how confident/not confident they are with what they've got to do.
-I then explain the different teaching and activities that will be taking place.
-The children then choose which to do and group themselves e.g. I'll say 'If you feel you need extra help... come and sit here.' 'If you feel you understand this and are ready to move on, try...'
-The children are great at being really honest and it allows children in any ability group to say 'I need help' or 'I can do...'
There is not a cap put on any of them.

Proof of this, is with a boy last year, he struggled massively in Year 4, was always sat with the TA. He came into me in Sept and could barely write a legible sentence. By the end of the Year he achieved a 4C, showing that he actually was not very confident in what he was doing and that he completely understood 'how to learn'.

I hate going into classrooms and seeing group names bluetacked permanently to the board and never changing. It really irritates me!

Hello, I have had the same thoughts as you, for my 6 year old in Y2 last year, where it is the same system.

I worry my DS will always be labeled bottom table. He got 5 words to learn a week, teh top table 10, so obviously eh learned fewer words, and that is your concern too, right?

I helped with spelling this year as a Parent Helper, partly to understand the system a bit better.

I found that asking the teacher to revise the amount of words DS had to learn, and through being a pushy involved parent, his word amount got upped to 8.

Interestingly, the teacher abandoned the list last term - which is a very random list it seems to me! - and has started teaching words that are linked through phonics instead.

He is now 7, and will move to y3 next year. I practise a little bit at home, but have faith that he will catch up as he is just a late starter really. I will just have to keep in touch with the teacher, and ask her to revise his position if I feel he is suddenly improving, that may not happen straight away!

For maths he ended up in a mid table, and for reading too.

So, a long story, but just letting you know the table order seems to be flexible. People can move up or down.

This sounds to me like the issue is with behaviour in the bottom groups, rather than the groups themselves.

I'm sure you are not suggesting that the class be held back to go at the same rate as those in the bottom sets, so I am not sure how else it would be done (tho' it does seem to be do-able as a few posts from teachers above say).

Our children have always been in streamed classes but there is movement during the year (for academic reasons and if a child has a problem with another child and needs to be moved).

I would focus on making your points about behaviour to the teacher and seeing if you can agree some out of school work to get him up a group if she cannot do anything about behaviour in the bottom sets.

pinkpanettone could you explain why you think it is a behaviour issue in bottom groups?

Teacher401 - I'm in awe - can I send my kids to your class?

My DD has definitely suffered because she was on the bottom table and that table had a permanent TA assigned to it. She got far too much support, and consequently learnt that she can't do anything independently and that she needs help to do all her work. :(

Thanks, all this is really v helpful. Someone asked if I've read Outliers, the answer is yes. Can't you tell :)

Mrz - I think pinkpanettone is referring to my comments about our situation in particular rather than more generally but might be wrong.

Indigo, why is it thought your DD needs so much support? Just trying to understand the situation before I give an opinion.

Cortina - Oh my DD has very bad dyslexia and is absolutely rubbish at everything to do with reading, writing and numbers.

She got straight 1s in her KS1 SATS. (Although the Ed Psych has queried how the school managed to give her those grades, as the testing the Ed Psych did put her at a W)

There was a deaf boy in her class who had a full time TA, so they always sat my DD next to him so that the TA could work with her as well.

Richard Branson had dyslexia as do many hugely successful entrepreneurs. Your DD needs and deserves to 'believe'. Please don't say she's 'rubbish' - I know you probably don't mean it literally and forgive me if I sound patronising (I am also sure you recognise and value her strengths). Thing is I was once in a similar situation and I know if things have been handled differently I would have had a completely different career trajectory later in life not to mention more self esteem and confidence.

Most classrooms group children by ability for english and maths.This means that you can support/challenge children accordingly. And offer activities relevant to each group's skills at whatever level. As children porgress they can move up (or down if they need more support!) the groups. It wouldn't be good practise for example to give a child who found learning words hard a new list every week if s/he had not retained the previous ones. In act in terms of self esteem it would be positively damaging.

Cortina - Thanks :) I definitely didn't mean rubbish in a negative sense - more in a factual sense.

I absolutely know there is nothing wrong with her or her intelligence, and my expectations of her are the same as for my other children. (e.g. I expect her to do her GCSEs - without a reader / writer or anything for her exams)

I just need to crack whatever is preventing her from learning to read.

But needing to 'believe' she is fine, is one of the reasons why I say she has had too much support.

I do think that some children become reliant on TAs and some TAs (and teachers) spoonfeed children which isn't good for anyone.

IndigoBell - Have you flagged this to teacher (am sure you have). Rusmum - not sure they are the only/best way to teach a class but when they are there they must be completely fluid IMO. My limited exposure has shown that they often aren't (looking at experiences of friends with children in other primary schools but admittedly it's a fairly limited group).

I have a problem with the word 'ability'. Surely it should be 'attainment'?

The problem is the damage done by early setting which sets personal limited expectations in the childs mind, other childrens minds and the teachers mind at a time when the approach should really be be "reach for the sky" at such a young age.

It is just common sense that if you give some less knowledge and give others more knowledge then even when the child given less has developed she/he will find it very very hard to catch up as what you simply dont know you havent been taught and by the time you are taught it the others have moved on again, hence why a lot of tables are static. So potentially by a combination of age and/or late development they have been penalised.

Differentiation could be done but in a much more sensitive way at this young age, so as not to limit their own expectations, be able to see what other children are doing and potentially think "I could do that", and be inspired and learn from "good learning behaviour".

In answer to the statement "Oh they will be put off by seeing more challenging work". Children usually rise to a challenge and this could be handled anyway with sensitive differentiation of work as mrz has said.

The worst scenario is static ability tables where the later developers are lumped together giving no chance for inspiration and a feeling of limited worth.

If ability tables were flexible then this would be better, but the fact is far too many are not for the reasons stated above (they wont move as it is too difficult to catch up), therefore it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy - and this definitely does lead to labelling and self esteem issues right the way through primary.

In other words I dont believe the benefits do not outweigh the disadvantages.

Vess, I completely agree and posted not long ago about why we call them 'ability' tables. I prefer they be thought of as current attainment tables for all the reasons Mumgo so eloquently outlines. That's what they should be.

Mumgo - I hear you. You make some brilliant points. How I hoped that I wouldn't be faced with all you describe when my children came to school. You could be describing our school. You also describe my experiences in the 70s. I have never believed I am capable of much at all, it's a constant battle. When Oxbridge was suggested much later I thought it had to be out of my reach, surely? Why, I'd been 'set 3' material or lower for most of my school career. No one had seen my potential, or so it seemed to me. This must surely mean I didn't have a great deal.

It's only been one child that's shown absolutely exceptional progress that's been moved up in our class last year. The other movement was from the top group to second from top group as the child although still considered very 'bright' took too long to complete the tasks. You can see how these labels creep in early.

My DD is taught in a system like helenwombats and it has worked brilliantly for her.

It sounds like your DS has done very well, and that you are getting caught up in 1 part of their curriculum. My only concern from what you are saying is that the groups arent fluid - which takes no account of development surges.

Thanks, MNTotoro. Mumgo, please may I ask a question? If you were faced with a system as you describe what would you say in a meeting with the teacher? If you were starting in Y2, where another teacher may have a different system, how would you flag any previous concerns? What in particular do you think it would be important to mention? Thanks.

forgot to say - dds groups are reviewed 2 x a term and there is often movement.

I can see why having your son in a disruptive, noisy group would be worrying and that you might fear it will hold him back (which it might) but this is such VERY early days in his schooling that I would try to let it go.

Much more important to not let him see you worrying (or school might become an issue and give him a negative view) and just do other stuff - cycling, swimming, baking - to help build a confident capable boy who will shine at secondary school and be popular and outgoing at college or university.

Josie - Very good advice. Thanks :)

Even though I know nothing much matters - it's very hard to relax about school and let it go.

So thanks for the reminder.

"Read outliers for a complete discussion of why. "

If you find the cult of Gladwell hard to stomach, try reading a numerate critique of it, for example this. Like a lot of Gladwell's writing, his hands are waving so fast it's no wonder his hair stands on end.

I was taught in mixed ability classes in primary school and hated it the teacher concentrated on the middle ability group and left the top ability kids to help the lowest ability groups as we had finished the work set. I remember doing the exercises from the same maths book for 2 years as the teacher had no time for the kids who could do the work without help.

Luckily I got the top ability set at secondary school and it was great I had challenging work and the competition in the class was keen I'd never worked so hard before and felt I was at last fulfilling my potential.

At my dc's school children are set by ability for numeracy and literacy from year 1 with mixed ability for topics. My dc are in top ability sets so personally it works really well for them. They like the challenge of harder work and the are very competitive with the other kids on their table and will work harder as a result.

I have on the whole found the poor behaviour in dc's classes tend to be in the lowest ability sets which usually has the most support from the teaching staff. From personal experience bright children in mixed ability classes also have the tendency to coast due to insufficient challenge and attention.

I think it is too simplistic to say that bad behaviour tends to come from the lowest ability set - perhaps in secondary schools where the children know they've been written off by -most- some staff but I've seen some of the supposed -high- -fliers- gifted children in streamed classes display horrific behaviour and even worse allowed to get away with it because they are clever.

In a good mixed ability class all children should receive equal attention. I never sit with one group but move around the class supporting and challenging where needed. When I have a TA working in the class we both work this way. I know our Y5 and 6 classes work in similar ways very effectively

it is not only Top set children that progress- ALL children make progress but to different targets to suit them............