Grouping according to ability in Reception

[FunnysInTheGarden]

Is this usual? DS is 4 and has just started Reception. He joined an established group of children who had all been to the schools nursery and so has taken time to find his feet.

They were all put into groups according to age in September, but have now been regrouped according to ability. DS has been moved 'down' a group as he 'wasn't doing very well' in his words. This seems all wrong to me and far to young to be grouping the children according to ability.

I spoke briefly to the teacher about it and she curtly told me that we knew this was going to happen and yes he had been moved down.

I'm actually quite cross, because she didn't mention it at parents evening last week, and the report she gave me didn't seem to reflect my little boy at all. His target was to learn to write numbers 1-5. He has been able to do this since he was 3, which I told her, and in fact when we got home he wrote up to 20 without any problem at all.

I will speak to the head I think, but just wondered if 'setting' them at this age was normal?

I've never come across it apart from having reading books graded to ability. A bit to see this happening, unless it just means they are getting more attention from a TA?

well hoe else do you ensure all the children make progress? some children will enter reception reading, others don't know any letters, some will be able to count to 20, others to 3...

it is not fixed for ever

It's about current attainment rather than ability. Although most seem to use the word 'ability' to mean current attainment I don't like it. It could infer we are talking about how permanently bright or otherwise a child may be.

I wouldn't be too concerned, although I am not a fan of the system, as long as the groups are totally fluid. I would be concerned about your son's negative views.

I think teachers can get very defensive about setting. They fear interfering parents. We had all sorts of problems in Y1 last year. I would make an appointment with the teacher to let her know how your son is feeling about the change and that this is your main concern.

I think it's quite common for reception targets to not reflect a child's capabilities at this stage, we faced similar situations. I wouldn't worry at this stage, although I know this is easier said than done especially if it's your first child.

Thanks Cortina, and yes you are right he is our first child! Never realised I'd be PFB when it came to education

I think the use of the word 'ability' is what has irritated me. Current attainment is a much better description. The teacher he has is disliked by most of the parents, and while I approached her with an open mind, I think I now know why!

I think that I have to get my head round the fact 'its not fixed forever' and just see how he gets on.

DH is a teacher (no doubt the worst type of parent!) and is going to have a word with the head about it. I really don't want DS to think he is 'not doing very well' right at the start of his time at school. He told me quite categorically that his teacher had said those who 'weren't doing very well' would be moving groups. I couldn't believe she would have used this terminology, but having spoken to her, perhaps I can!

Thanks for your comments, much appreciated

We had similar with the table setting but only towards the end of reception.

Can I just reassure you that my dd was in the lower groups reception/year1 and has certainly not stayed there.At the time I was devastated that my 'bright' dd wasn't doing as well at her school as lots of other children.

Just carry on reinforcing at home and it will come together.

I think it is also quite usual also for children to not show what they do at home at school.

The hard thing with the table setting is it makes the parents feel very defensive of their children.
Remember it isn't a race as they are so young and some just are quicker to pick up the basics.

Everything you do with your ds will show longterm.It is his own achievements that count.

As others said, tables are not fixed forever so you need to chill out about him moving down. My oldest started school on the bottom table but over time moved to the top.

I'd be annoyed that your son knows that he was moved down though. My son is in Reception and is aware that some children can read better than others and I'd be furious if anyone told him that he wasn't doing well. Even if he was bottom of the class, the teacher should be talking about it with me not him.

I think it is quite normal for a class of 30 to be split into "attainment" groups however this should not have been done in such a way as to make you son feel he'd been moved down. If he'd simply been told he was now going to work with the apples rather than the oranges and Fred was going to be an apple instead, he probably wouldn't have thought twice about it.

In my opinion the groups are necessary in order to help each child at the right level. I helped last year in my dd's reception class and the range of attainment was huge - some writing sentences while others didn't recognise letters, some doing calculations while others were learning 1-5 - It just wouldn't be practical not to group them - how the teacher handles it is a different matter....

yes, I think the issue is how the teacher handled it. Will get DH to mention this to the head.

I should chill out about it really, but I know he is a bright little boy and I suppose a bit sad that he's not flying ahead from the off! Bit like you wetandwindy.

I wouldn't be too concerned and I'd bs minded that what dcs can do at home isn't always reflected at home. You get used to this last point by the time your dc is in year 2 and it is still an issue! I'm still waiting for the day when my Ds does what he can in class.

I really would not be too concerned. My DS was in bottom group in reception and really needed the extra attention that he got as a result. He was just a late developer and now in Year 6 is top groups for everything. If he is in a low group he will get loads more attention and will fly as a result if the school is doing its job properly.

My DD has been bottom group and is beginning to move up in year 2 and again she has had plenty of extra help.

Both my DH and I were academic children and it was a shock having both kids in bottom groups. They are both young in the year but to be honest I cannot remember how good I was when I first started at primary school and to be honest it makes no difference now. I would far rather they put them in groups than just let them flounder which happened to a friend of mine when she was at primary school and has never forgotten this.

not usual at all to have 'sets' IME

BUT very unusual to have this really explicitly talked about with the kids. Am quite shocked at "He told me quite categorically that his teacher had said those who 'weren't doing very well' would be moving groups."

DS1's classes have been grouped since reception but I've never sensed the kids having any clue that one was 'better' (as opposed to 'more difficult') than the others. The parents on the other hand...

My ds was in bottom groups at start of reception. I remember crying about it just after christmas last year. Got to about feb and he was moved to middle then to tops. Wish i'd not wasted time worrying. Now in year 1 in top groups plus doing extension work in phonics and literacy. I am now glad he started at the bottom as he worked right through from the beginning and got a thorough grounding.

In my DS's school they put Reception children into four groups very quickly, four groups for phonics and four groups for numeracy. The groups are called by different names which change regularly so that parents and children don't start to work out which are the top, bottom, second and third etc. They tend to have names which are totally nothing to do with hierarchy such as birds' names or shapes or vehicles or whatever. It makes perfect sense to group children according to ability so that each group learns at the pace appropriate to them, those who are new to phonics start right at the beginning, but those who already have a good knowledge would start learning about digraphs and trigraphs and blending much sooner. I can't see that there's any problem whatsoever in the concept of grouping according to a child's current level of understanding. They change the groups names almost termly so that if you were in "Chaffinch" group one term and then "Tractors" the next..there's no way of working out whether you went up, down or stayed the same. Provided there is no obvious public display of where a child is positioned in the class in terms of ability it works perfectly well.

It is usually better for the kids to be sitting with children of similar abilities. Children can get very upset if they cant do something and the children around them can, for example write six lines of correctly formed letters - they might have only managed one line.

Teachers find it easier to talk to a group of similar ability children about whatever they are learning, and will change how she presents it to the next group

It really doesnt matter which group your children are in and never ever make an issue of it. The kids dont care until their parents do

I'm upset for your DS that hes said he's not very good :( that's awful. I remember being set for ability in yrR but i didn't know what it meant at the time, I just thought it was random IYSWIM.

tonight as he was going to bed he said "mummy I'll do really good work at school tomorrow"

I could have cried and told him he always does really well and not to worry about it at all.

I am so cross with the teacher and am going to speak to her tomorrow, or else punch her, who knows

I know that children will work better if placed in groups according to attainment at the stage they are at. I don't have an issue with that at all. It's just the approach that is all wrong. Very tempted to look into private with small groups, even though we can't really afford it and it goes against some of our principles.

What are they doing having "tables" in reception anyway? It should be child-led play activities at this stage!

I had thought that reception would just be like nursery, but with a bit more formal learning. He went to a great states nursery, and I am now beginning to appreciate just how good it was.

Pixie DH is a teacher in a states secondary and he/we are firmly of the opinion that just because you don't pay for your child's education (out of your own pocket as opposed to the states pocket) you shouldn't have to settle for second best.

There are other states schools in travelling distance, and that is an option, but we don't want to disrupt him any more than necessary at the moment. Sorry talking about 'states' in the plural as we live in Jersey and 'states' means anything done by the States of Jersey.

We will see, and if this upset carries on then I will be looking at another school for him. Just feel so sad that his start to formal education has started like this.

Oh and another tiny bugbear, on the first day of reception I was told, in no uncertain terms, that DS needed to have a 'healthy snack' in his lunch box. They can only have fruit, vegetables or seeds as a snack. Breadsticks and cheese just don't cut the mustard. Homemade banana cake would not do and had to be kept for lunch. DS won't eat fruit and so he survives on raisins until lunch. Was annoyed about this for a multitude of reasons.

Maybe I need to look for another school.......

Thanks folks, and Pixie, come and visit do!

DH has sent an email to the teacher outlining our concerns. Got a very defensive email in reply, which we also replied to, so we shall see. At least the school now know we are unhappy about the teachers attitude.

No doubt we are now labelled as awkward parents, but who cares

Funnys, go in and talk to your teacher. Email can be the work of the devil sometimes as you can't read the emotion behind the text.

My reception does split the class at different times depending on what they know at the moment. These groups change as neccessary. It makes sense to me for teachers to do this because children who know roughly the same will pick up pointers from a teacher talking to another child.

At dd's school, children are grouped by ability in third week since starting school. I don't see any problem with that as long as they can move group if appropriate.

with respect to the healthy morning snack, in most UK schools I have been you don't even have an option in reception. School provides fruit and veg and that is it!

Oh, at her previous school dd was told by (obese) teacher when they had to make their own sandwiches as part of the learning session, not to use to much cheese because cheese is unhealthy for people!!! I was furious at the time as she came back with some not very nice slice of white bread like goo with some salty grated cheese (we make our own bread and I select cheeses which are low salt for my family) ... I suppose these type of things just happen. Everybody has opinions about what constitutes a healthy diet but a lot of people have limited nutritional knowledge and don't understand that the nutritional needs of children are different from adults etc etc