Do bright children do better with an able cohort?

[rebus1]

Bit of an academic question really as I'm not really in a position to change anything for a year or so.

DS very bright and is just finishing year 2. According to the school's data the %s of level 3s very low- works out at 2 or 3 per class.

Should I be concerned - does this mean that the expectation for the Y3 classes as a whole next year will be quite low? I realise he will get appropriately differentiated work but I'm concerned he will spend lots of time listening to whole class input that he knows already.

Would he learn more in a school with a higher achieving cohort? I'm thinking faster pace, less need for constant revisiting etc.

Or am I just over worrying- he's only 7 and I can do stuff at home with him.

[mrz]

I was actually talking about the research

[Lurkedforever1]

And I think one of the main problems with mastery is that it doesn't always take into account that a high ability child doesn't necessarily need to spend lots of time repeating what is basically the same concept, because they've already mastered it.

[mrz]

If they've already mastered up why would they be working towards mastery?

[Lurkedforever1]

Thats my point.

[Millymollymama]

I would look at the KS1 data for progress in this school, OP. If the vast majority on the Ofsted data dashboard are making expected progress then the school is ok. It will also give you some idea as to the starting points of the children. With my children I felt they did prefer working with similar children but their friends were from a wider group. Some children don't always want to compete with the best in the class. They actually like being top of their table. Any good school will be making sure all the pupils achieve at least the minimum and many should achieve a lot more than this. If a child has gone from a level 3 to a level 4/5 in one year, that is stonking progress. Few children will ever do this in one year and I wonder if the new curriculum and assessment is embedded at this school?

[mrz]

My point is that as a teacher you should know your pupils and mastery doesn't exclude challenge

[mrz]

"The sentence: 'Pupils who grasp concepts rapidly should be challenged through rich and sophisticated problems before any acceleration through new content’, directly discourages acceleration through content, instead requiring challenge through ‘rich and sophisticated (which I interpret as mathematically deeper) problems’. Engaging with ‘rich and sophisticated problems’ involves reasoning mathematically and applying maths to solve problems, addressing all three curriculum aims. All pupils should encounter such problems; different pupils engage with problems at different depths, but all pupils benefit.
The NCETM is employing the phrase ‘mastered’ to indicate the stage at which a pupil has grasped an element of curriculum content well enough to build from that content, using it as a basis to progress to other areas of the maths curriculum that depend upon that content.

Secure mathematical understanding is developed through doing maths in ways that engage pupils in deep thinking. In Shanghai,"

[Tapasfairy]

Yes it makes a massive difference. The teacher is much more likely to do stretch work if she has a small group that need it. The children compete and push each other. Personally I find the benchmarking that they do hilarious. ( this crosses years not just inclass)

A very bright cohort in our last year 6 group scored some of the highest sat results in the country.

[mrz]

Why wouldn't a teacher stretch any child? I really don't understand that point of view

[CharlesRyder]

I am currently teaching a child who has been brought home from Shanghai because the parents could see that the school had no interest at all in differentiating for (relatively minor) SEN.

[enderwoman]

Depends on the child.
My son seems to want to rise to the top of any group he is placed in for competitive reasons but my daughter is naturally very self motivated and even when sat on mixed ability tables made great academic progress.
They were at schools where half of the year achieved straight 3s in ks1 SAYs.

[mrz]

Much better a child learns to compete with them self than with peers (which is limiting regardless of peer ability) it can be quite a shock to discover being the best in the high ability group/class in one school makes you decidedly average in another school.

[rabbitstew]

It depends whether the school is any good or not. If my child had to be at a bad school, I would rather they were with a group of similar ability peers. At a genuinely good school, I would be far less bothered. My dss' school started out good, then became dire for a few years and is now excellent. The peer groups didn't change, but teacher attention to and assessment of actual needs and abilities and desire to treat the children as individuals, not groups, changed massively. Ds2 was bored to literal tears in KS1, but is now happy and well integrated in year 4. A well run school that knows it's children can do a lot. If you find the school lumping children together into groups and talking about your child in that way, then you know they are catering for the groups, not the individuals, in which case you have to hope there are other children of similar ability, or expect your child to be inadequately catered for.

[rabbitstew]

Where did that annoying apostrophe in its come from?!

[rabbitstew]

In fact, some schools aren't even catering for the groups they've created, as they have no real idea of the average ability of the group, let alone the individuals within it.

[rabbitstew]

You also know you are onto a bad thing if you are told the school would give your child more challenging work, but he/she isn't completing the really simple worksheets they've been given as quickly as some of the others, because they are looking out of the window, or are not wanting to use a number line because they want to work it out in their head. It rather betrays a lack of interest in the child's actual ability and motivation.

[Tapasfairy]

Mrz because they are overworked/tired/busy/ struggling with those who are not achieving.

There isn't the time to stretch the children that are two years ahead in maths. These children are lucky to get any stretch work never mind work that is appropriate. The reality is we do it at home. Teachers don't want to explore concepts that are not on curriculum for another two years, especially if only one child understands them.

And our school is one of the best!

[mrz]

Not a good excuse

[rabbitstew]

Oh, and another chestnut is that the school is trying to challenge your child, but they haven't found anything tricky enough for him, yet - it doesn't have to be a stab in the dark!

[wonkylegs]

I think it depends on the teacher, the school & the child.
We moved DS due to a house move and so have experience to compare.
His first school was on paper an ideal environment, lots of able children, nice class sizes, very little obvious problems mainly due to the socio-economic circumstances of the area it was located in (posh), his new school is pretty much the opposite, poor area, lots of kids from difficult backgrounds, huge school with multiple class year groups.....
DS has done so much better in this second school. Fab teacher, fab leadership in the school that recognises all strengths in children, supporting and encouraging both those that need extra help and those who are doing well and can be stretched.
Although DS excels at maths, science and reading, they have pushed him in all these subjects whilst also pushing him to be more creative which was something he always was reluctant to do as he found it more difficult. This year he has excelled across the board and I believe it's been good for him.

[rabbitstew]

Interestingly, the current HT of dss' school, who has brought about all the improvements, has come from a school in a deprived area. I guess she's used to having to take responsibility and not rely on the parents to fill in the gaps.

[rabbitstew]

She also knows how to retain good staff...

[Lurkedforever1]

And some teachers need to grasp the idea that more able children don't need to spend time working with a concept at a very basic level, particularly in maths it's not unusual for them to take the concept and run with it.