Just read the Mumsnet info on proposed N C Changes

[Sittinginthesun]

Am I reading this right? The plan is that a class can't move onto the next level, unless the whole class are ready?

How is this going to work? My dcs school has very mixed ability within a class, as I'm sure most schools do. In Year 3 maths, for example, around a 3rd of the class go up to Year 4, and a good handful are working at Year 5/6 level. Others within Year 3, are working at Year 2/3 Level. If the class have to wait for everyone to catch up, it would be chaos.

Hope I've completely misunderstood this.

I think Gove is saying that schools could do more to bring on weaker students because other countries manage to. When you look at Pisa comparisons with other countries I think he might have a point.
On the other hand individual teachers are generally trying their best and so just telling them they should be doing better, as if teachers are lazy, isn't going to help - the problem must run deeper and some fundamental assumptions that our methods are based on must be at fault I think.

"But doesn't that cause problems if they are not emotionally ready to move up? or if they get to year 6 and are working at year 8 level?"

Yes, and emotional readiness is a key component in the decision taking criteria to move a child up.

However, a child cannot get to Y6 and be working at Y8 level - how would they have covered the curriculum (unless with parents) and how would the teacher find out if they had?

My year 5 has covered most of the year 8 curriculum in maths ( as well as extension activities on his way!) with me, rather than his parents because that's the level he's working at!

I mean, be aged 10/11 and working at Year 8 level. A good handful in DS's class are working 2 years ahead of their peers. I assumed it was fairly normal. How does that work in France? Do they move to secondary earlier?

Can anyone clarify for me whether these plans will apply in Wales? Can't access the linked document on my phone.

DS is in a small village school, his class ranges from reception to Y3, he is in reception. I can only imagine differentiation is enough of a challenge, without adding this to the mix!

No one knows what the eventual new curriculum will look like MrsKitty at the moment this is only speculation based on the recommendations of the review. Hopefully we will find out before 2014 ... unless of course we get a new government before then as happened with the last proposed curriculum change.

There are problems with the current system. Not at all sure what he's proposing, so no idea at all if it sounds better or not.

But, while I am a huge fan of differentiation, and an even greater fan of not keeping kids back or moving them up......

I have found that low expectations of LA kids hamper them. What I mean is the expectation is for all kids to make 2 sub level progress - but there is never ever any expectation that a child will catch up to the expected level.

This has to be wrong.

I didn't read anywhere that children would be moved up or held down a year- maybe I missed it.

From what I can gather the proposals are that it will not be acceptable for children to be allowed to continue to work at their own level if that level is below expectations for their age. Thee will be more emphasis in bringing all children's achievement up to a certain level. Those that achieve above the expected level will not move on to the NC next level, like teachers allow them to do now, but will be given work to broaden and deepen their understanding, rather than learning something new.

"it will not be acceptable for children to be allowed to continue to work at their own level if that level is below expectations for their age."

I just cannot imagine how this will work, given the level of SEN that some of our pupils (in mainstream school) have. My newly-arrived Year 3 child currently works at the level expected of a child in Reception. Intensive 1 to 1 and small group work, as well as external assessment, is revealing the extent and nature of this child's special needs. To say that such a child cannot be given work at the appropriate level to move them on from where they are, but instead to expose them to a curriculum completely unsuitable for their needs (e.g. to teach the 8x table when actually the next step is to learn to add 1 reliably) is just thoughtless,. There is huge emphasis on moving such children forward - several sessions of 1 to 1 or small group work each day. However, it is simple common sense that not all children will achieve a single arbvitrary level at a single point in time.

Equally, it is not possible to 'hold a child back' until they are the 'right age' to learn something new. My DS discovered negative numbers, and how to add and subtract them, in Reception. It would have been appallingly bad teaching to say 'oh, you're not allowed to know about those until Year 3, so you MUST NOT carry on with working out all the goal differences in every football league in the country, you must go back to number bonds to 10'.

Children vary in abilitiy and aptitude. A balance needs to be struck between setting an ambitious target for all, and acknowledgeing that some children will 'over shoot' this target and others, however hard they strive and however much progress they make, will not reach it at the 'correct age'.

I do not wish to imply that an 'age related' target should not be borne in mind for every child. As Indigo has said above, it is easy (and lazy) to apply an 'SEN' label to a child and thus limit the progress and levels they are expected to make. However, nor is it right not to celebrate enormous progress by a child even if the level achieved falls below a 'magic threshold', or to fail to take genuine physical and mental barriers into account when setting expectations.

Next year I'm going to have a gorgeous little boy with DS in my class. He's non verbal, not toilet trained, has monocular vision which means moving around the room is a problem as he can't distinguish depth from shadow, hyper-mobility which means even sitting upright is a problem for him and he wouldn't be able to work at his own level

Equally, mrz, I will have a child with exceptionally poor vision (can see objects greater than 2 or 3 cm high but only when very high contrast), moderate learning difficulties, limited speech and physical difficulties that affect his balance..... and I am proposing to keep teaching him at the EYFS level that is absolutely appropriate to him whatever any government edict states...

But SEN was mentioned separately. I assume that there will be still provision for children with SEN which is different to that of the masses. I think the proposals are generally referring to those children which fall with in the parameters of what is classed as average- at the moment there is quite a difference in what is perceived as acceptable levels. For eg. anything form just scraping a 2C and a strong 2A are all considered accepted levels for Year 2. I am not saying whether that is right or wrong, but the new proposals are seeming to suggest that they are aiming for more children to get say a 2A and less to be pushed to get the magical 3, but extended side ways to be a more solid 2A.

Haha, Feenie funny.

Level 2 is currently the expected level for most children at the end of Y2 not all children.

I think what Gove actually said was along the lines of 'It pains me to think of there being any child who does not fit neatly onto my ticksheet. I shall allow some other body to think of what to do with them. Or possibly re-open the mines.'

Excuse me for paraphrasing.

Snowmaiden,

The thing is, there is not a 'magic line' between children with SEN and what you call 'the masses'. One conventional way of representing ther spread of abilities is a Bell curve - which is continuous. There is no way of drawing a line at a single point and saying 'all SEN are to the left, the masses are to the right', especially because many children have specific difficulties in one area but not another (my child currently working at the level of a reception child is, in fact, more able than expected for Year 3 at symmetry). So what is 'acceptable' will vary AT THE LEVEL OF A SINGLE CHILD.

Thinking about your 'levels at the end of Year 2' comment, i'm not sure that I really understand it. 2b is the expected level for most children, nationally set. There are some children for whom 2c would be unacceptable, others for whom it would represent miraculous success. Equally there are some for whom a 2A would be a clear failure to progress. It depends on the child. I suppose I don't understand what you mean by 'acceptable' - acceptable to who?

if it wasn't so close to the truth you would have to laugh

Anyone seen this? Wonder what Gove has to hide......

I really don't want to upset or insult any of you teachers.

But I really do feel a lot of kids on the SEN register are let down. Most of the kids on the SEN register do not have severe needs. Something like 30% of the kids are on the SEN register - but only 1% of them (in MS schools) have a statement.

So for the 29% who are having problems, but not severe problems, (or if you want to argue that more of them should have statements, than the 25% without severe problems) I have found that SEN is used as an excuse.

You also have to remember that any child who isn't making progress is put on the SEN register - whether or not they have any kind of SN.

SEN is definitely used as an excuse.

It shouldn't be. And all the teachers do try incredibly hard. But the way the system is they don't necessarily have:

• the training or expertise
• the resources, time or budget
• Any long term goals for the child
• the right mindset

If there was more emphasis on kids catching up, I think more of those 25% would catch up.

I do accept that school isn't perfect for any child, and that every child is let down in some way. But I also do think that accepting that it's OK for a child with mild SEN to not catch up is totally wrong.

I also think schools and teachers vary considerably. We have some of the best teachers in the UK on this forum. And I don't think they have this mindset - but nor do I think they are typical of UK teachers.

How do you know there are some of the best teachers in the UK on here?

I am a Special Needs teacher. I expect every kid to maximise their own potential and progress at the maximal rate FOR THEM at any given time in each different area of their learning. I don't think Gove has the professional expertise or detailed personal knowledge of each of my children to tell me what that is.

I think IndigoBell is right. I have seen this in the school I am a governor for, which is "good with some outstanding features"
In some schools if a child is a bit behind, he is put on the SEN list. When reviewing the class's progress, the fact that they are on the SEN list is quoted as a reason for their poor progress.

Like EBD, I think I'm just a normal teacher, doing exactly what everyone else does. In my experience, every teacher wants every child in their class to make the maximum progress that they can, SEN or not.

Perhaps - an alternative theory - all MN teachers are 'normal' and you have been unfortunate enough to have encountered a minority who have low aspirations for SEN children?

Strangely we have the same excuse at the other end. It seemed the school think it understandable that the pupils who were already level 5 at the end of year 5, made no or only one sub-level progress in Y6.

That said, they do see that overall it is not good enough, but I can see the same happening again this year, as they decided not to put any children in for L6 maths, as "you would have to teach a lot of additional topics".... but they should be doing that anyway given that 25% of the class are already at 5B

The BOTTOM 10% of maths students in Shanghai are 24 months ahead of those at the same level in the UK (and 28 months in the USA). And PISA doesn't test rote learning it tests mathamatical problem solving which we think is our focus.
If 2b is the expected level it shouldn't be and clearly more childrena re perfecty capable of reaching at east that level. But Gove is annoying. Lets not bash teachers who are working hard, lets work together to work out why the system has assumptions in terms of teaching and expectations that lets our kids down in their education.