Same children always picked - why?

[carocaro]

Out of a year of just under 60 the same children are always picked to do speeches in assembly, be on the school council, take the lead in plays, be on the school teams. No one else ever seems to get a go at anything! I have asked why only to be told 'children have to learn to accept disappointment'.

Why is this the case?

Because some children - like some adults - are better at some things than others.

I am sure some parents feel like that about my dds - particularly dd1. They are both articulate and confident in speaking in front of people. This is in part just how they are and dh and I have the same skill set. It's also because they've both done quite a bit of drama and reading out loud at Church. Some of their contemporaries are inaudible. In a public setting you need children who can actually be heard. Mind you neither of them are sporty really so the school teams are safe.

Perhaps the ones who are picked are the ones who are perceived to be good at public speaking?

I have mixed views on this - my dc's school has a prizes for all philosophy, so everyone gets a role in the school play and to have a go playing at the school concert, regardless of whether they are any good or not. On the one hand, it's nice to see all the children getting a chance, but on the other there is no genuine recognition of hard work or excellence because you get the same opportunities what ever you do. Not sure this is a good life lesson.

I think the best way lies between the philosophies of our 2 schools. Every child should have a chance to do a speech if they want to, but if they don't do it well, then next time, the chance should be given to someone else.

At DDs it is to do with volunteering. If you get your hand up, you get to do something in assembly.
She is in the cross country team. Of four. Only four members of the club so not a lot of chance she'd miss out.
Her teacher also seems to rotate the star of the week thing. DD hasn't worked it out yet, but she will get it at least twice this year.

I believe that if someone wants to have a go, let them. There was a girl in ds's class that was a truly excellent writer. From reception till half way through yr6 she did all the writing jobs. Then she was ill and was off for 3 weeks. The teachers were forced to let other children do the minutes for school council, write the bits for assemblies and edit the school paper. They were surprised to find that once given the chance others could do the jobs equally as well.

People should be given the chance to find out if they can do things, rather than just be told they can't.

DS's school has a definite merit-based approach, and different members of staff will be picking for different things, so it is more than possible for the same "golden children" to be picked for everything - which, I agree, is tough - but is also life, unfortunately. The school does try to find something which every child can shine at, but not at the cost of an inaudible speaker in a play or a sub-standard team. My DS shines in some things, but tends to be "close" in more - so he makes the finals of lots of things but never actually wins, which he is painfully aware of. If I could fix it I would, but I can't.

Oh and in YR - Y3 the "star of the week" definitely gets rotated, albeit quite subtly (DS never twigged in 4 years ) but that would not be visible to all parents in the same way speeches, etc are.

School council is normally voted by the pupils. So they didn't get picked, they got voted in.

But what you are describing does not sound good, and is def not how it'd done at my school.

Although there are a lot of children they wouldn't pick for things like speeches, because that would be beyond the child's comfort zone.

I think it's a difficult one.
There's an aspect in which if a child is good at something, then it should be celebrated and used. In dd1's year in infants there was a child who was a brilliant singer. She sang solo every time they could... and deserved to.
In some ways it was hard on dd1, who had a nice, but not exceptional, voice and would have loved to sing, and I'm sure there were other children as well. But this child was so good she deserved the accolade she got.

I was talking to dd1 who now (in juniors) does get picked a disproportional amount of time. She's lucky because she's both academic and musical, and also does a certain amount of performing so does it well. She's also very reliable and responsible and will almost always be happy to volunteer. This means that she does get picked for some things (eg sport) not because she's good at it, but because they know she will do it without making a fuss and finish it as well as she can, even at short notice. For example she didn't have a speaking part last Christmas because she'd had a big one the previous year. However on the day someone was absent, so she was asked to do it.

Otoh in infants they did a play joint with y1 and y2. Now to me, no y1s should have an individual part until all the y2s did. (except probably the girl who sang so nicely, but you can argue that one out). However every year there would be some y2s who had tiny chorus parts and some y1s who had reasonable sized speaking parts. Sometimes there would be a y1 and y2 next to each other and the y1 would have the line to say (and not always well either). Used to upset me, even though my dds were some of them getting a part in y1. Of course if you got a part in y1, then you almost certainly got a good part in y2 too because they chose the perceived to be best.

Oh and the other thing that winds me up is when a child is given something like the leading part of a play and then gets a headteachers (or equivalent) award for doing it.
They've been chosen/voted etc. for it. Others would almost certainly have liked it. They will have the accolade of doing it, they don't need a second award to rub it into the rest of the class.

I do think they all should do public performance of some sort to a certain extent. My DC's school is very hot on this - and it seems to work well, because there is such a presumption that everyone will perform in some way that it never seems to occur to even the shyest child not to do it (starting with non-speaking, short, appearances for preschool class and working up from there) - and there is a certain amount of "fair shares" - in the summer play for YR - Y3, everyone in Y3 will have something to say, and they will be lauded as a group for taking the lead (no extra awards for the leading roles except the extra applause).

This approach never struck me as remarkable until parents of children who joined the school in Y4 remarked on how confident all the children who had come up through the school were compared to theirs - so clearly it does work (helped by a superb drama teacher who somehow brainwashesconvinces them all that they can do it).

Children have a very strongly developed sense of fair play and merit, though - if someone were picked for something because it was their "turn" rather than because they would do it best, their peers would be the first to complain, IME/O.

There is the argument that a child with a gift for public speaking or singing should be allowed to use this gift but similarly, there are other children who have a lesser gift who would then never get a chance to improve or take part.

This is so true. It is not difficult for schools to see a talent in a child and to help that child develop it, especially if the child is already having out of school support from clubs or parents. For me, as an ex secondary teacher and parent, one of the most important markers of a really good school is that it helps each child discover and develop the talent that he has to the degree that he is able, without always having to showcase those who already have the ability (or keen parents).

I don't think it detracts from the talented as the talent inevitably shines through and is rewarded by praise and comments. I also think that primary is to young to be forced to learn too harsh a lesson about competition. There is plenty of time for that later. Primary is a time for all children to learn confidence and to have a try at things they might turn out to be competent at.

There is the argument that a child with a gift for public speaking or singing should be allowed to use this gift but similarly, there are other children who have a lesser gift who would then never get a chance to improve or take part.

I agree with this too. I do not think primary school is the place to be pigeonholed as 'good' or 'not good' at things. Much better to encourage wide participation.

Having said that ds1 would rather gnaw off his own leg than sing a solo, so I wouldn't be surprised if he is never chosen to do so.

I have mixed feelings about this too and I think that a school can do this successfully - I think actually that our school is quite inclusive and good at doing it. If you can't speak in public you do not get a lead part in a play, however every child gets to say something/take part in some way, even if it is to design the stage or paint the scenography, or pick the costumes. Surely every child has something to contribute.

I don't buy the argument that a play should just be the showpiece of the best actors/singers in a school, that's not the point of school plays really, in my opinion!

We allow every child who wants a big part to have one during the year, regardless of how good they are at public speaking. We do try to arrange it so that children who are the best performers get the larger parts, but no one is stopped from having a go if they wish.

We also keep a list of who had which part in the Christmas play, the Harvest Festival, and the yr 2 mock wedding we do every year, to make sure that, for example, when it comes to the end of year leavers' assembly, we don't accidentally give someone a main role who's already had a major part in something else that year. It seems to work well for us.

I feel the same an yes maybe some children are better than others but where is the "every child matters" I think other children should be given a chance and at the end of the day how is the child going to learn cofidence if the same children keep getting picked. I think its terrible. Well I had word and my ds now gets picked for lots of things!!!!!! So speak up is what I say x

At dd's school they have an awards assembly for the parents to see the children get stickers / merit badges for their work.

Unfortunately, it is always the same children receiving the awards for the same thing - the parents are now having side bets on who is going to receive the most stickers etc. The assemblies have become a running joke with the parents having to avoid looking at each other to stop the laughter.

Because some kids are good at giving speeches and acting in plays?

pictish - is your response to the OP's original question?

If so, then FFS! The idea that some kids are "better" than others really gets my fucking back up. WHY should the ones who are "good at acting or givinf speeches" always be picked????? What about the forgotten middle who never do? "No, sorry, nice but dim average child, you won't be chosen even though you have volunteered because X and Y are better than you".

At what point does it become a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Iamnot - I agree, school expectations become self fulfilling. That also applies academically to some extent. When ABC streaming was in, primary schools which reversed the order with new teachers found that whichever kids were put in the 'A' stream improved, and 'C' deteriorated. Not sure to what extent, though. No doubt its the same with plays, music etc. Unlikely you can 'make a silk purse from a sow's ear'; practice won't make perfect, but it will make better.

I look at the girl who always gets picked in dd1's class and ultimately, I feel sorry for her.

She thinks she is up there with the best of them, a massive talent that the world is just waiting for.
She's going to have a massive wake up call when she realises that actually, she's just like everybody else. Very average at most things with maybe a talent for hogging any limelight that may be around :).

for plays same kids every year get the same parts. Certain kids always up in assembly for some prize or other. One parent brings in badges etc earn t outside of school so that DS goes up every week for something. To her we are all nothing as our children don't go up. Wonder what she would say if she knew we had the higher grade certificates sitting in a drawer at home.

The fact is, that all children should be able to have a turn at everything, if they so wish. No matter whether you are brillliant at doing something or not.

I agree with you OP and my dc primary school sounds much the same as yours. It was positively yawnsome going to plays and assemblies to watch same old same old doing everything.

I was talking to a mum at the year 6 play, whose son had a speaking part and was fantastic. I was telling her how lovely it was to see, and she said it was the first time in the 7 years they had been at the school, that he had been given a speaking part despite putting his hand up for one all the time. Why did it take that long. He was so good, it made me sad to think he had never been given the chance before.

My ds would have sooner died than get a speaking part though!

I once taught at a school which often chose the same children for things. My first day there coincided with a rehearsal for the Christmas play. My class of Year 1s were doing the narrating while Reception acted the play out. Only the best readers were chosen, so about 10 children didn't have anything to do. This had already been sorted before I started so i had nothing to do with it. Then, a couple of months later I was given 12 readings to give to my best readers to read during a whole school assembly, which parents were invited to. I typed the readings out again and split them into smaller parts so that all of the children could say something. When I mentioned this to a senior teacher I was told that I had to stick with the original way the readings were assigned, as 'parents at this school understand that sometimes certain children are chosen because they are good at reading or speaking.'

The upshot was that at parents evening the parents of some of the children that didnt read at Christmas or during the assembly complained to me that their children weren't getting a turn when they would like to have a go at reading. I had to diplomatically explain that it hadn't been my policy and that I would have liked to have given their children a turn.

Anyway, shortly afterwards we had a class assembly, which was completely down to me to organise. So I made sure that the children who hadn't previously done anything in the play/assembly had the biggest parts with the most to say! And sure enough, just as I knew they would, they did it perfectly!

Mary - my kind of teacher. We had an issue with pushy certificate mummy complaining about competitive sports on sports day, but that is for another thread.