Work differentiation

[user1483972886]

DCS go to the village primary where there are 2 years in a class so about 20 children in the class.
They do well at Yr 2 SATS but the progress between YR2 and YR6 SATS was below average last year in all areas with overall pass of 25%.
I understand that DC's class is divided into 3 levels /streams where the lowest stream is the combination of the year below and those in her year who are really struggling /developmental issues. DC is in the 'top' stream. But it seems a fairly coarse differentiation? They have several good readers but some in the 'top' maths stream would probably be doing well to be 'average' in a larger school.
Is it normal that a class of 2 including 2 year groups only has 3 levels? A friend of mine suggested it should be more like 6!
It would be interesting to know how things work in other schools.

At DS's school (one class of 30 per year) there are 6 tables, whereas this means 6 levels of differentiation I don't know, neither does DS for sure, as it would mean checking what kind of work they do at every single table to see if they are all different and how different.

But from what he tells me, the tables are fluid, children have moved up and down at various times, and the tables are different depending on the subject.

There must be at least four levels of differentiation, as I know there is a top table, then a table of two students with more advanced work in maths, then the table that has the easiest work, and the other tables must be something in between.

The teacher has two teacher assistants.

My concern is the 3 groups covers 2 school years. So potentially some kids are nearly 2 years older than others? And a wide range of abilities. And we are saying we can tackle this in 3 groups?

Potentially you'd get a similar range of ability in a single year class

"And we are saying we can tackle this in 3 groups? " you can tackle it in a single mixed ability group if you know what you're doing

A good school/teacher (and most do) will also differentiate within the groups,be it with extra resources or different expectations within the learning,depending on ability,pace etc. A kid with no issues writing 3 correct sentences would not be enough or acceptable. A kid who still struggles with phonics,spellings,fine motor skills,poor concentration etc writing 3 correct sentences that meet the learning would be fine.

I teach a mixed year group - there is planning for this so that all the objectives/targets are covered. Differentiation is a subtle thing. Can't imagine having 6 different ability groups within my class.

I've found that some of the most able at calculating struggle with explaining more complex problem solving, sometimes because they have missed out on those early steps or been moved on to harder number work while the others are spending vital time with hands on activities.

going

"I've found that some of the most able at calculating struggle with explaining more complex problem solving, sometimes because they have missed out on those early steps or been moved on to harder number work while the others are spending vital time with hands on activities."

I find it totally teacher's fault if that happened. Good teacher should be able to spot the problem.
My ds's reception teacher was a maths specialist, and she was great.
She made him show working for everything, since he calculated everything in his head. He struggled at the time, but made his life so much easier for now with more complex problem to solve and show how he worked it out.

Irvine, I agree - sometimes, however, we just have to take up the slack for less good early years teachers, or instill confidence later on in those who've moved from other schools. Better to learn to show thought processes now rather than at A level! I really like the focus on understanding and greater depth.

I have 4-5 levels of differentiation in my class, we don't stream though.

Don't worry about the progress last year, when those children were in year 2 they were working to a different curriculum. Many schools had poor progress/attainment results last year although admitted 25% is low.

I think there is a confusion - old fashioned at best, dangerous at worst - that the only way of meeting children's different needs within a classroom is to put them into fixed different groups with different work to do.

The vast, vast majority of the time, that isn't the best way to meet children's needs, and in many cases will cap the progress that can be made by children throughout the class.

Think about a 'typical' week of. say, English. On day 1, we might read a text, or might have some type of experience about which we are going to write - no need for groups, mixed ability discussions are by fa the best. Yes, some individual children might have had the text pre-read to them as part of the previous week's plan, or might have previously discussed key vocabulary, or might have key vocabulary in their home language with a translation, or might read the book again with an adult later in the day, or might have it simultaneously signed, but there is no need for groups. Equally there is no need for groups as the class is taught as a whole and tackles a new writing objective linked to the text the following day, or gathers new vocabulary, or re-enacts part of the story. There MIGHT be a need for groups the day that objective is repeated - flexible groups, responding to the previous day's marking. there might be a couple of children who revisit the basic objective, others who hasten on, others who apply it in a different context. Then back together as a mixed class to discuss characters, plot, setting, whatever is going to be the output, and individual work when writing - supported by materials, people, resources, additional input as needed.