Ability groups in reception and why would a teacher 'lie'?

[whysogrumpy]

How much of an indication of future academic success are these? I hear from dd that she is in group 3 - I think for both phonics and maths, though she's not completely clear that she's in the same for both. I didn't think about it too much when she first said it and didn't even mention it at a recent parents' evening but then a friend with a ds in the same class mentioned (she REALLY wasn't bragging) that the teacher had told her that her son is in the top groups - leaving dd in the third 'set'. I must admit, this worries me a little.

Anyway, dh is a sahd (he thinks I'm being ridiculous btw) but he agreed to speak to the teacher and she told him that the groups were not set by ability - the complete opposite of what my friend said. This friend is someone I have known a long time and she honestly wasn't bragging and I cannot begin to imagine she would lie so I don't understand why the teacher is telling us both different things.

I have always been told dd is 'bright' (whatever that means) by family and friends (didn't go to pre-school) she spoke early, loves being read to and is generally articulate and interested in everything. I'm afraid I'm about to make myself sound ridiculous but we live in a deprived area and the school OFSTED states that many of its pupils are below expectations when they come in at reception. Now I can't help thinking that if my dd is in a third group in such a school she must have problems of some sort - though I know in my head she doesn't.

She had no interest in letters before school but now knows all letters of both cases, all the sounds they've done so far (don't know what pahse they are on) and is on level 2 books, though does very well with some level 3 charity shop ones we've got too. She is obsessed with Ancient Egypt, among other thinga and can tell you all sorts of stuff about it but she hates writing and just doesn't want to put pen to paper - I think she struggles with the physical act of it and worries about spelings and won't do it unless she thinks it'll be perfect.

Overall, I am quite worried that she is behind her peers (many of whom have had a disadvantaged start in life) and that she is considerably quieter at school than she is at home and her ability is not showing.

Her teacher says she's doing 'fine' but always sounds so vague, dh thinks I'm being ridiculous and would probably disown me if he read this.

Any words of wisdom?

I would be incredibly surprised if the teacher had told your friend that their son was in the "top" groups for everything. Our class R teacher told us at the start of the year that she'd really appreciate it if we parents didn't try to work out how our children are placed - as she mixes and matches, sometimes by ability, sometimes not, sometimes to mix certain children, sometimes because a group of children all have a common thing they need to work on.

Think it's worth talking to the teacher, but sorry I think your friend is definitely boasting.

I think you need to talk to the teacher again, be honest about your concerns and say what the friend said, you don't need to name the friend.

As far as I know, most reception classes are put on to tables or in groups based on ability now. This happened to my DD in reception and I was shocked and couldn't believe they would start to group children at such an early stage according to ability. Also, how do they asses ability at this stage. It seems deeply flawed to me.
My DD is 10 now, but the whole thing still gets to me.

Framey- it isn't about grouping by ability, it is more about grouping by what a particular few children need to learn next to move forwards.

Why on earth teach a whole class exactly them same thing? It would leave some bored as they've already achieved it, and others struggling because they haven't yet achieved the previous steps on which the new learning builds.

How do they assess abiltiy at this age? In exactly the same way as when they are slightly older- observation of processes and end results.

Excuse typos- the not them and ability not abiltiy!

of 4 year olds? The danger is that these ability labels get stuck. Maybe start doing this at 7, not 4!

I go in to a reception class to listen to reading and there is a huge range of abilities. Some kids can bearly read a word while others are racing ahead. Fairly sure they are grouped on ability for reading, writing and number work...it would seem very odd not to considering what some kids can do and what others can't and need to work on....

FWIW it's entirely possible that your friend has misinterpreted what the teacher said and is equating x table with top table. By this I mean that the teacher might have said her ds is at the top end for literacy/numeracy, but that doesn't mean that the group he learns in is defined by ability rather than by personality/groupings that work together etc.

OUr school is in the process of binning setting for maths. At the moment the year group of 60 is divided into 2 sets once in year2 and KS2 for numeracy and literacy, spending the afternoon topic time with their mixed ability form classes.

The head (new) has very persuasive arguments against the division of 60 kids into a top half and a bottom half, saying it does no favours to the middle 20 kids and does a disservice to the 20 kids who aren't achieving. The top 20 can still be stretched apparently. We'll see how it pans out. When I was at school we certainly never learnt in ability groups to the same extent. The same 30 kids were taught in a group, with the teacher having more fluid groupings at certain times.

Honest opinion? I would ask the teacher, saying that you forgot to ask at parents' evening. Certainly at our first parents' evening for ds1 in Reception his teacher gave us a printout of the list of EYFS goals and ds1 had been scored against these goals, with a 10 being the max, I think 8 plus being performing above expectations and below 3 as below expectations (apologies if this is not remembered correctly - was last year).

I think the teacher may agree that children are put in groups according to current levels of attainment, which is different to "ability" i.e. they are grouped according to what they can currently do and what they need to learn next. In Reception, I would be very, very surprised if the teachers thought levels of attainment were necessarily linked particularly strongly to "ability" (whatever that is - but that's a whole other thread). For example, some kids are a whole year older than their classmates and at age 5 that has a massive impact in terms of their experiences of learning and therefore their levels of attainment.

Incidentally, I think how quickly kids learn to read has limited predictive skill for what they are going to achieve further up the school. My dd could barely read "cat" at the end of year 1 (she's a summer born) but in Year 3 her levels of attainment are comparable with the best performers in her class.

Are you sure that your dd means what you think she means when she says "group 3"? I'd very much doubt that (if there was setting of any kind) the teacher would call the "top" group "group 1". They'd be called the red group (hauling that one out of my memory - the top group in my P1 class, 30 odd year ago was the red group ), or the purple group, or "blueberries" or something like that.

Framey- but by not teaching at the right level for each child (as far as possible within a whole class) you are just disadvantaging children more!

Either holding back those who are advanced at their age, or missing out on consolidating the building blocks for those who are at an earlier stage. Or worse, both! This can have a massive knock on effecton later progress and on attitudes to learning.

Surely you can see that targeted teaching is better than a blanket ''you will all learn x on y day''?!

Not too helpful this observation, sorry, but I feel it really weird that my yr 6 son's literacy groupings are numbered 1-6 with 1 being the top (and all the children know who's who) whereas for maths it's colour coded groups (and again they all know who's who!)
Hope you get some info and reassurance from the teacher, OP. Your daughter sounds lovely.

Oh and the perfection about writing thing is really common. My son was an early reader but barely put pen to paper til end of yr 1 and then worried about mistakes for a while. He's a perfectly good writer now, amazing punctuation, amazing creativity, not so good speller:-(

Most of the schools in my area do group children in groups based on ability even in reception ours certainly does.
Our school sounds much the same as yours most of the children come from a deprived part of town and the ofsted report states that children enter reception below expected levels. However, I have two children who have had exactly the same experiences and opportunities to learn one entered reception at above age related expectations and has stayed that way, she is now in year 3 and expected to get NC level 4s at the end of year 3. The other my son entered reception at below age related expectations and stayed that way throughout reception. He is now in year 1 and we are now seeing a transformation in him which I would not have thought possible a year ago his teacher told us recently that he is the most improved in the class and is no longer in the bottom group but secure in one of the middle groups. Ability groups are very fluid in primary and children are moved around a lot. In my dd year 3 class there are only 3 children in the top group who have been there since reception the others have dropped down and been replaced by others in the class. Talk to the teacher if you are worried but I wouldnt be worried about what ability group your child is in just about what progress is being made.

Why do they all have to sit together at one table though? Surely children can work at differentiated levels and still sit next to each other. It seems so segregative. I'm always surprised when people think it's a good idea to do this with 4 year old children.

I'm a teacher and also have two girls, in Year 1 and Nursery, so have done the Reception bit once!

It sounds like your daughter is doing really well, so please don't worry about what your friend says. It's not uncommon for children to not write in Reception, but from what you say, I wouldn't be surprised if she suddenly takes off with it when she decides she wants to.

But there is massive natural gap in ability between children in reception. My DS is a July child and his best friend born at the beginning of September. DS could read or write although he recognized some letters when he first went to school but his best friend could do all those things and more.

They were in different groups (moon, star,sun and sky so completely meaningless) which makes complete sense. As they get older the age gap ability closes. DS is now in year 3 and he's doing fine and I'm sure your daughter is.

For practical reasons. It is much easier if the ones doing the same work are near each other. Then they can work together and it is easier for the teacher to look at a group of the same work together rather than jumping from one to the other. Maybe explain something to 2 or 3 at a time rather than explain it to them individually.

I suppose if you've never worked as a teacher/ta it is hard to appreciate the day to day practicalities.

Don't forget one child may be just 4, another in the same class almost 5. A year at that age is a massive portion of their life. Why try to pigeon hole them and make them all the same- it just doesnt sit right with me.

Like it or not, attainment varies massively at that age, and does not always match up with what those children will achieve 4 years or so later. So why hold some back and overstretch others- it would just be daft.

Try to think about them as 'developmental stage' groups or something other than 'ability'. My dd's school differentiates for some phonics work, which is the only way they could teach it meaningfully after the first few weeks as some children are pretty fluent readers and others have just started learning English.

It doesn't mean that those who are racing ahead with phonics now will always be better readers. Babies who crawl or walk early don't necessary turn out 'sporty' for example - things will level out in time.

If you are concerned, then do ask your dd's teacher what her next steps to progress are and how you can help with this.

If what your friend said it true then I wouldn't expect your child to be in top group based on what you say about their ability.

Groups are fluid so don't worry about her being in group 3. My sons were in low ability groups in Reception but ds1 was in top groups by y2 and ds2 is in y1 and second group. They were not interested in reading and writing in Reception where there were children who could read simple chapter books and do double digit addition etc.

In practice I bet lots of the groups do similar work.Say there's 2 advanced children in a top group then there might be 4 groups of 7 to cover the rest of the class. Children in group 2 and 3 might be equal in ability but divided based on gender, personality... Don't get hung up on the group. Learning is a marathon, not a sprint and starting later doesn't mean that her future is decided.

I have a daughter who was top groups in Reception. She is still in top groups but the gap narrowed really quickly.

I recall from my DS's Reception days (he is Y4 now) that he was in "Group 1" but I know this was NOT the "top group" as DS is autistic and very behind his peers academically. So although your DD might be in Group 3 this might have nothing to do with her ability.

I think if you are worried that she is behind her peers then DO have a chat with the teacher and ask what she thinks about this but I would not be worried about group numbers - group three could be the top set for some things and focus on those or maybe all her group are youngest in the year.

My son did not want to put pen to paper for a long time either (not saying your DD has my son's problems but just saying some children don't like writing until they feel ready to do so).

This always makes me so cross. A parent has a right to know which ability group their child is in if this is what the teacher uses. The teacher should also tell you, if you ask, whether your child is above, below or average within the class. Of course they aren't going to give you information about exact rank compared to others, but how are you supposed to gage how well tour child is doing if they can't give out basic information. Of course it's about comparing a child to other's, how else do you get a measure of achievement though?

It doesn't matter, kids move around a lot in early years and some keep moving around right thru into the teen years.

DD's teacher numbers her reading groups 1,2,3,4,5 ... but in random order of attainment and changes the order frequently. Makes me laugh to watch the competitive parents try to work it out.

(and on a more helpful note, will point out that my DS was "below average" in Reception and "well above average" by the end of Y2, so you really shouldn't set a great deal of store by Reception groupings. Is your DD happy at school? Making friends? Is she making some progress? That's why the teacher says she is doing fine. )

making it easier for the teacher is the key here.

Kids get stuck with these ability labels and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

I'm against grouping children by ability when they're only 4/5. It's totally unfair and the only benefits are for the teachers.