more able child paired with less able

[hibbledobble]

I know this is something that happens frequently at school, and has done for a long time. How do people feel about it?

I don't know if it's fair to put children in a quasi - teaching role, rather than having them focus on their own learning. Otoh I know that teachers are stretched.

[Footle]

Sorry not read full thread so not sure if anyone's brought this up yet. I was talking yesterday to an E European friend who has been happy for her bilingual primary school kids to be paired up with a new arrival from their home country, but now feels it's taking over their experience of school.

[chopchopchop]

What's the basis of saying that it secures a child's knowledge and understanding? There is evidence based research saying that this does nothing for the most able and it is just busywork.

[mrz]

Scientists call it "the protege effect"

[EmpressOfTheSpartacusOceans]

I used to do this at primary school too, though I don't think it was ever made official. Other kids just came to me for help.

Do the less able children ever feel annoyed or embarrassed at being paired with more able classmates?

[roundtable]

I was 'matched' with a friend of mine in secondary school. She is bright but dyslexic and I find spelling/grammar generally straightforward.

We were a match made in heaven and really complimented each other's learning.

It does have to be done carefully though imo.

[WateryTart]

As long as it isn't all the time it can help both pupils, as long as the more able DC is still being given challenging work to do.

It can go wrong, though. My DN's DD was in this position but for every subject and was also expected to be a friend to the other DC at dinner times and playtimes. The other DC was unpleasant the other friends of DN's DD and wouldn't play with them any more.

DN eventually had to go into school and ask that the arrangement was changed as her DD was very unhappy. She had to be quite firm but it happened but then the parents of the other DC kicked off.

It really needs to be done with great care.

[Middleoftheroad]

One of my DS is often paired with children who struggle. I'm really proud when I hear how he helps them. He's not a very patient boy yet when he helps others at school or I see him explaining some homework to his twin brother, he is so patient and great at explaining. I think it's productive for him and the others.

[Hoppinggreen]

When my daughter was made to do it ( she hated it) it worked very well for the less able pupil but not for her.
As an example on joint projects they would get a B so the pupil who would normally get a C or lower achieved more but as she always got an A it really didn't work for her and as an anxious child who hated NOT achieving the best marks she could she found it really upsetting.
Also, some of the less able children had behavioural issues and so she had to deal its these as well ( once getting stabbed in the leg with a compass when she asked her "partner " to contribute)
I think in theory the system may work but not if implemented badly

[stoopido]

If my child were less able then I would want sufficient support put in place for them rather than just sitting with a more able student, which anything may knock their confidence. If my child was the more able than I wouldn't want them falling behind because they are supporting the less able! At my child's school they self mark their work with other pupils and nearly all of the time my son will come home with work incorrectly marked.

[ChocChocPorridge]

It can be done well, and it can be done badly.

DS is, in some cases, the less able child - his teacher last year used to pair him up with other kids in a wholly unsuitable way - that made him feel like shit, and the other kid angry and frustrated. The atmosphere in the classroom was terrible - it was sniping and aggressive, and that was entirely down to the teacher who didn't manage it well - she didn't handle kids that were in any way outside of the norm very well (in either direction)

This year he's with a teacher that has got to understand each child in the class a bit better - they still pair up, but it's understood that this is to be a positive pairing, that the point is to help each other, and as a result, the entire class is sunnier. DS gets help with his creative writing, and he, in turn, helps out with reading for example.

One thing that I particularly like them doing is they have the year threes come and read with the year ones - which promotes cross-year friendships, and means that the kids that are ahead get a peer to who reads the same books as them, and the kids that are behind get another pair of ears and eyes to practise with - it works really well.

[cantkeepawayforever]

I think that there are occasions when deliberate mixed ability pairing
can be very useful. IME, they work best when it is not 'the highest ability' paired with 'the lowest ability', but where the pair are somewhat different in ability and where, if possible, they complement one another. So a 'lots of ideas but little common sense' paired with 'someone practical', or someone who has lots of energy at the start of a piece of work paired with someone who likes to get everything finished off well. Or someone who is somewhat more able but gives up easily with a lower ability child who shows great 'stickability' at a task.

I would also say that it works best when the activity does not have 'a single right answer' - so discussions about a picture or book, a DT task, or a Science investigation are a more fertile ground for this type of pairing than e.g. a Maths lesson focused on Arithmetic.

Tbh, I more often use 'quite like ability pairs' within a wider 'mixed ability group', as for group tasks I find this balances different contributions better.

While I think that there are occasions when 'explain this to X' is a useful task because it provides a real audience for a key skill (very able e.g. mathematicians are sometimes reluctant to write down an explanation for me, because they know I know, whereas given the task to explain it to someone else, they will do the job properly), I don't in any way think this should be a routine strategy in classroom management.

[Gileswithachainsaw]

What stoopido said

When I was put into a group with more able children at school all that happened is they did the work and put my name on it as nothing I could produce was good enough. Teacher thought all was OK as there was my name on a fab piece of work yet I understood no more than I did before because I'd not been allowed to continue tribute.

When I was sat next to a girl who's spelling was appalling I spent all my time having to tell her how to spell things and at times had to stay in at break as I hadn't had a chance to finish my work.

Kids are not TAs

[hibbledobble]

Lots of really interesting comments.

I spoke to dd today again about this and she said they did do harder work today. It's good to know she is sometimes stretched. She is a child who genuinely loves learning, and picks up the workbooks at home by herself. I don't pressure her at all.

She said she does like teaching the other child, but can find it frustrating as the other child does not always listen to her explanations and works slowly.

Interestingly, regarding the comment about complimentary personalities, I wouldn't think it would apply here. Both the children being paired are very feisty and talkative. Dd's teacher last year described how they would 'not listen together!'.

[nonicknameseemsavailable]

One of my daughters has been paired with one of the children who really struggles to understand anything even when the teacher or TA explains it, my daughter has no chance at all of getting the child to understand and has completely given up even trying. In principle and used correctly it is a method which can work well but used incorrectly it is a waste of time, neither child will benefit and in our experience both children get frustrated and upset. I did moan to the school about it and the next time the groups were changed after the holidays the pairings were still mixed ability but with a smaller gap in ability and this seemed to work much better all round.

[Misstic]

Hiddledobble, presumably you bought the workbooks and not your daughter?

If pairing leads to the bright child falling behind then there is something seriously wrong going on. The bright child's understanding should be deepening and should not be getting worse. If the issue is about breadth then surely the class as a while should be covering the same things.

I do wonder about the benefit of kids racing ahead. I am not convinced it leads to better educational outcomes for them. Nothing beats depth of understanding. If the building blocks are solid, progress will be equally solid and rapid enough.

[Gileswithachainsaw]

Comprehension and "depth of understanding" seem to be things that are frequently trotted out to excuse the fact progress has been missed or to justify these situations at times when it is back firing a bit.

Not saying that's aways the case befire anyone jumps in

[Misstic]

Equally, being kept back, missing progressing, work bring too easy, etc seems to be things that are trotted out to excuse ...

I am not a teacher and I sometimes wonder at the methods used. However, teachers often come under unnecessary attack. Their competency challenged frequently challenged by parents who place great value on their children racing ahead of others. There are lots of threads about 'my child is nor being challenged enough'. I am mindful that there are lots of poor performing schools and plenty of incompetent teachers. However, I expect they are in the minority and not the majority.

OP, I am not saying that is true in your case. I think you should speak to the teacher and keep an open mind. Peer to peer learning sounds like a good idea. Something has to be seriously wrong if your DD falls behind because of it.

[user789653241]

Umm, sometimes racing ahead comes naturally. If the child learnt how to calculate area of square or rectangle, isn't it natural for them to want to know how to calculate triangle, circle, composite shapes etc., and move on to calculating volume next? Sometimes you can't stop them just because it isn't in the curriculum for the year group.

[Misstic]

... but being able to calculate a circle without an understanding of what they are doing or how the underlying logic is the same for a circle, square, etc is of little use long term.

I believe it is a teacher's responsibility to ensure that students understand and are able to apply what they learn. Reading is a good example. A child can be reading level 13 books at the age of 4 but may understand very little of what they read.

[Gileswithachainsaw]

.. but being able to calculate a circle without an understanding of what they are doing or how the underlying logic is the same for a circle, square, etc is of little use long term

Well they aren't going to find that out either if all they are doing is explaining the basics to another child...

[Gileswithachainsaw]

If it's topic work and they are researching say dinosaurs. There is always going g to be something else they can find out no matter who they are sat next to the different conversations will lead to different thought processes and researching different aspects every time.

Maths on the other hand if they are merely passing on what they know then they already know and understand that. And if another chikd isn't then 10 times or 20 times its still leading no further.

[Dozer]

This happened to me at school (as the higher achieving child) and I hated it.