Was your child's primary school experience an indication of how well he/she did at secondary school?

[magdalene]

Hello
I've been talking to lots of parents whose children are in year 8 or 9 at secondary school. A lot of them say that their unconfident or shy children are doing so much better at secondary school and finding the different subjetcs and teachers exciting. Children who achieved level 4s are in top sets and generally being pushed more than they were at primary school.

What are your experiences?
My daughter is in higher groups at primary but is shy and unconfident with teachers and adults. I don't think she finds the work particularly interesting but loves to chat at home and is curious and loves writing and singing. The teacher has predicted level 3s at the end of key stage one (she is borderline but her teacher doesn't think she has the confidence to get level 3) so she'll probably get level 4s.

Just wondering how much of what goes on in primary really tells you how your child will be at secondary school (when it really matters). Or is it about the individual? Some are late bloomers, after all.

Haven't reached that point yet but we were talking about it with DS who is in Year 6 - he has been totally unenthused by Literacy and we have always thought that it might be to do with him having teachers who are not English/Literature Graduates (and therefore aren't going to be the best at inspiring boys in particular in that area). We have every confidence that once he reaches secondary school (and hopefully is taught by teachers qualified in and enthusiastic about the subject(s) they are teaching) that he will develop a greater interest in some subjects that have failed to inspire him at primary level.

Think that often the children are not necessarily being stimulated widely enough by the time it gets to Year 6 and they need a different environment in which to flourish which is why you are hearing stories of children 'flying' when they get to secondary school!

gazzalw - surely the skills needed to teach primary school age children are skills in teaching , not degree level experience of a certain subject ?

Should the teaching of Maths at primary schools be the preserve of Maths graduates ?

I think the primary school years should ideally help children become confident ,sociable learners .
This didn't happen in my DS's case and there was no flying at secondary school ,just a continuation of not reaching his potential and having no friends .

Not really a true reflection of their ability.
They went to a good primary school which started to slide when the HT left. From then on it went downhill and so did they.
They attend an excellent secondary school and are exceeding all our expectations in results and confidence.
I feel children can only bloom if the soil is right and they are in the right flowerpot (sorry about the imagery)

Wasn't really implying that but that some primary school teachers don't seem to have the ability to inspire children in some areas (and would you be able to inspire a child in maths if you weren't keen on it yourself even if you more than had the qualifications to teach it at primary level?) - that was reallly my point!

I feel very strongly that the root problem with education in the UK is the generalist approach to teaching after the age of about 8. Mathematics needs to be taught by specialists as early as possible; English and linguistics need to be taught by those who have an affinity with it to inspire a love and passion for it. Music also needs a specialist.

This is the principal difference IMO between state and independent education.

DD went thrived academically at her cofe secondary school until about the middle of Y8. L6 for most things. She then went into a decline because of poor behaviour management and disruption and fortunately we had the resources to move her.

There are fantastic and inspirational teachers in the state sector but they are prevented from teaching and children are prevented from learning because the present system favours the dysfunctional, the ill behaved and the uncontrolled at the expense of everybody else.

DH & were both ordinary/underachievers at primary & very high achievers by end of secondary. My dad was an underachiever until he got to law school, really.

married You just said all the things I was thinking!
Yes, we do need specialist teachers in primary schools.
For example, our DDs in primary school had a teacher who did not have GCSE Maths at grade C herself. Not one teacher in the school could offer a Modern Foreign Language so they had to send someone to retrain one afternoon per week.

Am sure that all primary school teachers in the UK do need grade C GCSE Maths and English or it's equivalent e.g. CSE grade 1 and they would not be accepted for training without it. How do you know that a teacher does not have this qualification - I thought this type of personal detail was supposed to be confidential.
dd has just started Y7 and seems to have progressed the most with Maths this year. Am not sure whether this is due to better teaching but could be as she di not have a Maths specialist at primary school.

OP - I have 3 DC, the 2 eldest scored well in their KS2 SATs (Level 5s) & went on to score well at GCSE (mainly A*/As). DS1 has just started at a RG Uni after getting As in his A levels. So yes they did continue as we had hoped.
Saying that they were in a poorly rated primary school and went on to an excellent state secondary. However, they did enjoy school all the way through.
DC3 is still at primary so time will tell.....

Married I am sorry that your child had a very negative experience at school, but it's really unfair to extrapolate that the "dysfunctional, ill-behaved and uncontrolled" prevent others from learning in a state school. This has certainly not been the experience of any of my DC in the state sector. As always, some teachers and head teachers have better discipline procedures and can command the respect of the students more than other teachers/Heads. I hope your DD does well now that she has settled in her new school.

I was a swot at primary school and passed entrance exams for the best grammar / private schools in my area. By Year 9 of secondary I had completely rebelled, was bored stiff and ended up flopping my GCSEs (although I did recover my education in later years). It can work both ways.

Rezolution and married - I agree that there should be specialist primary teachers and would go on to say that there should be specialist teachers in the infants. After all, primary school is where children learn the basics and if these are not taught properly then it's difficult to catch up later on. To enthuse children teachers need very good subject knowlege even when the children are little. Perhaps PGCE courses should last longer than a year and only graduates with very high qualifications should be able to train.

Sorry there was a typo in my post - my DD is not predicted level 3s even though she is given top group work.

Rezolution - totally agree that the school environment can make a huge difference. There are a handful of disruptive kids in my DD's class as well as very loud and confident kids. They get a lot of attention, of course.

I came top in my 11+ and never got into the habit of working hard for anything, mainly because most of the time I didn't need to and could just coast along doing the bare minimum. Bad thing.
Consequently I got to quite hate school and rebelled against working in general.

I do think some children appear to flourish once they get secondary school because they are suddenly being marked for subjects that they did not get marked for in primary.
We didn't realise just how good ds was at science until we got his KS2 result. He has a dyslexic type from for which he got extra help with spelling and was not really in any of the top groups, but once he went to secondary school he was put straight into top sets and he thrived especially in humanities and science.

My experience would agree with that of your friends. Ds is loving secondary so far and since he started he hasn't looked back once.

I think the added responsibility for themselves and the fact that they can see what there is to aspire to through the older students has helped a lot.

My son suffered at primary, he was diagnosed with dyslexia and was put on the SEN (bottom) table. His maths and science were neglected, although he was doing his older brothers computer maths/science games and loving them (approx 3 yrs ahead). Was given TA level 4s at KS2, how he got a level 4 in Written English i'll never know.
Now in an Excellent rated state secondary (non grammar area) he is flourishing in everything apart from English were he's doing Ok. Took him 2 years to rise from Set 4 to Set 1 in maths and science on his own merit but it took an Ed Psychologist to shout discrimination to get him into set 3 (she wanted him in set 2) for english/ humanities. He desperately needed to get out of set 4 and should never have suffered the bottom sets in primary or secondary (very disrupting) It was the primaries lack of understanding that caused his misplacement in the first place we were told that he had to sit on the bottom table and given the easier work although they knew he was brighter than the others there! (others were probably suffering too), they simply didn't have the facilities to help.
Now his predicted end of KS3 levels seem be cranked up this year from 5s to 6/7s. He's still slow to finish his classwork but gets extra time in tests and that's enough for him to get by. Secondary teachers all seem to know him well even though they change from year to year and have over 200 kids in the year. The secondary you chose makes the difference, my older son went to a crap secondary and in hindsight I can now tell the difference. If only ?

I strongly disagree with lots of specialist teachers at primary school, and that is one of many reasons why I wouldn't want to go private.

The more teachers you have, the more kids they have, the less they know your kid and how to get the best out of them.

And the less communication you get with each teacher. It's hard enough communicating with the teacher and SENCO. If I had to get the same message to 5 or 6 teachers it would be impossible.

My kids State primary has specialist teachers (part-time) for French, Maths, Music and PE. But some groups in these subjects are taught by the normal class teacher (except French). So it isn't just private schools, the one thing they have moaned about is how nice it would be to have a proper Science lab.

However my kids have all done much better at secondary because: friendship groups/cliques are split up; they have different teachers for different subjects, so can get away from a bad lesson, and there is less pre-judging; they have grown up a lot; they find the subjects more interesting now its not just doing the basics again.
The faster pace of secondary seems to suit them too.

Yes and no!

THey all did fine at primary and found year 6 a total waste of time. At secondary they unfurled their wings and flew.Seems normal for good secondary schools.

Could you have predicted their achievement at secondary from primary results- no because the "level 5 SATS" are a very blunt instrument just because that's the highest they could achieve- you didn't know if it was just inside the mark band or full marks and could have shot much further. THe predictive tests they do at secondary (CATS/Midysis or what ever they are) seem to be fairly accurate though year on year, and key stage on key stage they ace the targets. Suspect targets are set well inside what is achievable though. We have yet to have a child come out of a review day with academic targets they are things like "be more organised" (for DD1) LOL.

If looking at schools (primary or secondary) be very careful to look at the statistics in depth for added value etc. A school that took my 3 in with admission levels of say level 6plus across the board and didn't get them to 7a/8 at the end of KS3 wouldn't be doing their job. But if the majority admissions were at level 4 and they were getting most to a 5/6 and some to a low 7 they'd be doing better as a school even though the absolute values were lower. Also watch languages- no child who enters secondary from a state primary will be more than a 3-4 in MFL generally at the end of year 7- this simply reflexts little knowledge of the subject beforehand.

Totally agree although primary teachers to a hard job they are a jack of all trades and a master of none

My sons teacher in year 6 was fab but it took the head with a masters in maths with one to one to really help pull his grades up

My son seemed to do really well in what they call topic in primary school which in compasses history/geography/re and sociology

And low and be hold these individually at high school are his best subjects

My ds has a number of different teachers at his prep. All of them, without exception, know him and know exactly what he's like - his school report was depressingly consistant on that!

He has yet to find anything in school that inspires him but fortunately lots outside of school that does.