Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

PE Grouped by ability??

73 replies

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 18:52

DD is 13 yo (YEAR 9) and started a new school last week. Its a very large comp.

She came home today saying that 50 girls were put in one group for PE, then 50 boys in another.

Then a mixed group of boys and girls. 15 in total. Many were very unsporty looking and a little over weight, according to DD. She was in this group. She felt that it was clearly grouping by ability with a mixed group of no hopers.

How would you interpret this? Could dd in any way have misinterpreted this?

BTW DD is v good at dance and has loads of stamina. Ball skills are grim but her last PE report was ok and predicted B/C for GCSE (was compulsory at last school).

OP posts:

Twowrongsdontmakearight · 07/09/2015 18:56

DS's school has 4 sets for PE. The good thing about it is that everyone has chance to play against someone of roughly their level.

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 19:33

its not the setting per se that is an issue, but having a mixed group of the seemingly lowest ability makes it very unsubtle...

OP posts:

Lurkedforever1 · 07/09/2015 19:34

I don't see a problem myself. Nobody bats an eyelid at setting for academic subjects, so personally I think it's fine to teach similar abilities together in p.e too. The sporty fit kids get to do something at their level, and the non sporty ones aren't left standing out as the one miles behind/ picked last etc.
As to why your dd is in that group, maybe all new kids start in the bottom group and are moved up if appropriate, much kinder than starting them in the top group and moving them down.
I'm also unsure how a child 'is very unsporty looking' unless undeniably overweight. I would be more concerned if my dd came home describing any group of her peers as 'no hopers' than whether she had been placed in the wrong group.

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 19:39

the issue is that only a tiny minority of the children are in a mixed group.

lurked. dd did not describe them as no hopers. she was much more tactful. i chose those words in my OP to outline the way my DD felt she had been labelled as result of being in the tiny minority that was this group.

OP posts:

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 19:43

oh and I'm really happy for her to be with similar ability, by the way. its just the relative size of the group and the gender issue that i find very odd. it made her feel singled out.

OP posts:

Twinkie1 · 07/09/2015 19:44

Would you be happy for your DD to be placed in a maths set a lot higher than her ability?

Why is PE any different?

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 19:48

GAH! twinkle, did you read the whole thread? did you read my last post?

also, this was her first ever PE lesson at the school.

does no body think that this is odd?? NOT the setting issue per se, but the gender thing. and without any prior PE teaching. how can they know what they're like?

OP posts:

balletgirlmum · 07/09/2015 19:50

Have they tested her ability in a range if sporting activities at all.

Dd doesn't do PE but if she did I'd expect her to be in a low ability group. Her ball skills are appalling, she cannot run due to how her hips naturally turn out & she also won't run on non sprung floors of she cdm help It because of how hard it is on her feet & ankles.

However I bet she could probsbly hold a plank longer & has more stamina than many a so called sporty child.

It is odd though that the group is so small. Maybe they will be letting this group try different things in order to encourage them in physical activity. As a dsncer that might suit your dd.

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 19:56

ballet. honestly, this is day 2 of the new school. they've done no physical activity at all! i would expect dd to be in a low group for ball skills but she has great stamina, good balance and co-orindation generally ( but just not with ball skills).

OP posts:

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 19:57

and the mixed sex group?? odder still?

OP posts:

Lurkedforever1 · 07/09/2015 19:59

Fair enough if it's your words not your dds. Not a way I'd describe any group of kids though.
Still makes sense to me regardless of the ratio. Indeed I'd say same as academic subjects it means struggling kids get more attention in a small group.
Again, the fact the teacher has no idea of your dds ability indicates it's probably because it's better to wait till they've assessed her and then move up, than assess her and then move her down. And I'd assume they'd assess her during normal lessons.
I don't think the mixed gender thing is odd at all either.

Lonecatwithkitten · 07/09/2015 20:01

Yes ability grouping for PE which I have no problem with. What give me the rage is that the top set is called the 'elite squad'. In truth the elite squad is full of those good at ball sports, a national gymnast is the bottom set because it is all about team sports.

BackforGood · 07/09/2015 20:05

I agree that setting for PE makes sense.

I might suggest that you dd has either only told you 1/2 of what happened, or she only noticed, or was aware of half of what happened. I really can't imagine anyone teaching PE to a group of 50, for example.
If she's only been there a day or two, is it possible the group she was put with were all unknown quantities? That this smaller group are going to be assessed ? Nor am I sure you can look at a bunch of people and just decide they are unsporty or overweight - sportspeople come in all shapes and sizes not necessarily related to their co-ordination skills.

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 20:07

Ok lurked, I'm trying to get a point across and am just too tired to be delicate with my words. it MADE DD FEEL as if she was a 'no hoper 's she felt singled out as one of the tiny minority, empathised by the gender thing.

but whatever, this is MN!! and i am clearly on another planet thinking this sends an appalling message to the children in this group.

and as far as everyone starting here and then moving up goes...how many new children would be put in a tiny struggling group for an academic subject then moved up? it doesn't work like that! middle group then move up/ down surely far more likely.

OP posts:

Lurkedforever1 · 07/09/2015 20:11

But there isn't a middle group? And surely to get round the gender mix you'd need to split that small group further?
I really don't see the issue myself, what exactly is it you'd prefer them to do?

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 20:15

i'd prefer them to set based on some kind of assessment.

and there should be a middle group!

unless we are saying that this group need so much support that they needed to be in a tiny group. if this is the case, how can they know my dd is best placed there? based on no assessment or observations?

and i actually think differentiation shouldn't be provided along different gender lines to other groupings.

OP posts:

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 20:17

'emphasised' not empathised (auto correct fail!)

OP posts:

balletgirlmum · 07/09/2015 20:17

It seems a sure fire way of denying childrens confidence.

Lonecat - that's exactly how dd felt about sport at her old school. Like netball & hockey was all that mattered.

yeOldeTrout · 07/09/2015 20:22

um, so are kids never moved between PE groups at the new school? If it's not right ability group for your DD I think she'll be moved, maybe? She's new & they gave her room to be who she is, is what I would think.

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 20:23

sorry lonecat, i managed to miss your post. i agree totally. schools have a very narrow definition of athlete.

i agree, ballet, a real knock to confidence. dd feels a total failure based on PE lesson number one, yet few on this thread seem to think the school are sending the students a dubious message with their groupings. there's more interest in how dd and i are labelling/ discussing the unsporty kids, which is kinda ironic really!

OP posts:

Original poster

NoonarAgain · 07/09/2015 20:29

yeolde, room to be who she is? based on what? sorry to drip feed, but there are lots of new children in the year group (over 100) as the LEA has weird age phases from different county areas. they are not is this tiny group.

i'm going to bed now as i'm tired and a bit frustrated due to feeling some posters are missing the key points of my argument.

don't mind dd being in the bottom group IF THATS HOW SHE WAS ASSESSED, but his isn't the case.
i don't think 'bottom groups' should be so obvious to others by having an obvious visible criteria e.g. gender

OP posts:

WanderingLily · 07/09/2015 20:34

Why not ring up and ask on what basis the children are setted for PE? I take dozens of similar calls every year and just tell them. If they want to argue about the teacher's evaluation I transfer them to the HoD.

madwomanbackintheattic · 07/09/2015 20:35

Can you email her form teacher or head of year and ask how the pe thing works? In a faintly baffled manner?
I'd like to think there is some sensible plan at work, but the whole thing looks bizarre. Are the same sex groups in further sets by ability?
It all looks pretty bonkers. I'm not entirely against setting for pe (in individual sports once assessment has been carried out - actual ability assessment as opposite to 'x looks fat ergo must be shit') but this all looks slightly odd to me. I'm actually not particularly against gendered setting either (there is nothing more frustrating than having a group of teenage boys telling you that you must have cheated because no girl could possibly have beaten them at x,y or z, let alone even the silly ogling that is part and parcel of the uniform regulations)

Anyhoo, I'd ask. It looks nuts. But it is possible that the plan just hasn't been communicated with the new kids..?

yeOldeTrout · 07/09/2015 20:36

Well then ask, if she's the only new kid put in the odd-balls group.

And if she's unhappy there, then say that too.

DC's secondaries have upper & lower ability groups for PE, DS is at top of bottom group so quite happy (lazy toe rag).

TenQuidProQuo · 07/09/2015 20:39

OP, I see what you are saying and I agree that it's an odd way to do it.

Nothing wrong with streaming kids in PE but you would have thought there would be better ways of doing it.

I would wait and see what happens in the next PE lesson and if you are still concerned then you could email the school. There might be a good reason for how they streamed the DC.

Flip

1 2 3

Swipe left for the next trending thread