Secondary School that doesn't set: any experience?

[Tomatillo]

I was at an open day for our catchment secondary this week and was surprised to find out that they have just moved to a system where there is no setting at all for any subject in any year. Has anyone had experience of this? Does it work, especially for the brightest?

The teacher who is leading this at the school said that the research showed that only the top 10% benefitted from setting and that removing setting was neutral for the middle band and beneficial for the bottom half. They also talked about the benefits for self-esteem, behaviour and teacher expectations. Assuming this is all correct (I've not yet looked it up in detail) then I can completely see why a comprehensive school (which this is) would want to do this for the benefit of everyone. The difficulty is that we're pretty sure that DD is well within the top 10% for the core academic subjects. Whilst I appreciate that things can change at secondary, her primary have made it very clear that they consider her to be exceptionally able. My own schooling was very heavily set, with sets for almost everything and quite finely graded with 12 levels for maths. This meant that we progressed very fast and I've always thought that helped me go from my very average comp to a 1st at Cambridge. I'm pretty concerned that she'll be disadvantaged if she goes to this school. I asked the teacher about the top students and they essentially said that there were issues for the top group and they appreciated our concerns.

Does anyone have any experience of this? At the moment we are feeling that it would be the wrong decision for her.

Thanks!

We do have differences in the difficulty of the work expected, but the topics are the same for everybody. So if the topic is percentages, for example, top sets are taught mental and calculator methods to find a percentage of an amount, increase and decrease by a percentage by using a multiplier OR adding on at the end and may (or may not) touch on reverse percentages. The middle sets will have written and calculator methods for finding a percentage but will only increase/decrease by adding/subtracting at the end, and the bottom sets will have mental methods for finding 50%, 25%, 10%, and possibly learn a calculator method for finding other percentages. And there is a definite overlap between the sets, so if you are near the top of set 3, you will have seen almost all of what the set 2s have done, but there will be a little bit extra that you would catch up on next time it's covered if you move up.

multivac how big are the classes? I suspect MA is easier to implement in smaller classes, but in a class of 30+ how can you be that personalised to every pupil? Without teachers burning out I mean.

I have experience of a diamond model - top 10% in top set, bottom 10% in bottom set and the rest taught in mixed ability. So far (3 years in) it is working well and I think it is this kind of model that the research supports. It's not ok to lump in the very top and very bottom together - their needs are too disparate imho.

I just asked the kids, who say there's 'about 24' in their maths class. It's a medium sized school, with around 1000 pupils. The teachers work phenomenally hard, but also make good use of technology (it's just been awarded 'Apple Distinguished' status).

multivac please can you ask your kids what 'make good use of technology' means in maths?

isn't diamond model a form of streaming?

noble only the actual book and then another 'pocketbook' (really great!) about gender.

Indeed, a lot of the discussion is about fixed mind-sets and maths!

There is some interesting stuff about how to give feedback to boys as opposed to girls which I had never really thought through before. too.

A diamond model isn't streaming. Streaming is the woeful model described earlier used at my DSs' school.

Devil's advocate says diamond model is used by kindly souls who don't want to set but have an elitist core which tells them the 'most able' need special treatment and the 'least able' can't cope. I prefer it to setting , though. I have always thought that the bottom 10 or so of a tope set would do better in mixed ability grouping s where they shone rather than fade, or develop a fixed mindset (sorry!) of being not as good as so and so, which is actually quite damaging.

15 years ago , we had a 'weeble model ' (I made that up. ). One top set and the others mixed. We actually got more, and better , TA support that way. One thing that has forced setting in our school is low availability of TAs.

I am confused piggy. if son is in set two for maths surely he could be in set 1 or 3 for English or vice versa ( using a 3 set model)??

noble - specifically in relation to maths, it would be to do with the range of resources they can access via the iPad they all have; the ability to book one-to-one tutorials; and a good understanding of (sorry if this sets your teeth on edge!) flipped learning. In fact, as I type this, my younger son is watching a tutorial on loci that has been made by staff at the school and shared on the VLE, in order to do his homework.

Mostly, though, I'd say the 'good use of technology' isn't so much about using it to deliver teaching; but rather, managing the learning environment in such a way that maximum teacher time can be devoted to, well, teaching

Piggy related to your boy problem, I read this great article the other day about a guy who was the go-to person for improving boys' engagement and results then he realised that everything he was saying and teaching about improving boys' attainment was bollocks and has since completely changed his mind about 'competition' 'boy-friendly curriculum' 'male teachers' and other usual interventions.

markrobertsteach.wordpress.com/2017/07/03/rethinking-boys-engagement-my-talk-from-tllleeds17/amp/

Jayfee - not at my DSs' school.

They are placed in a set for English - this then means they are taught in the same sets for history, geography, French , RS (!) which is the same as this! If they move English set, they move the whole lot.

In DS1's year this also applied to PE , food, Spanish, business etc but now those are options.

They are also placed in a set for maths which then dictates their set for IT and science. DS2 is struggling with this as he is a capable ish mathematician so in set 1 but he sucks with computers and can't cope. It's genuinely stupid.

I'll definitely look that up noble. As a mother of two very different boys, I think most of what is spouted about teaching boys is utter bollocks.

Thanks for this : am researching gender!

watching a tutorial on loci that has been made by staff at the school

There's a real workload issue there, isn't there? If staff are having to make a load of video tutorials to make up for the fact that they can't just teach loci to the class in front of them, then that's an additional out of hours task to teachers who are already overburdened. TBH I was a bit worried from the point where you said that the teachers work phenomenonly hard. I guess you could argue that once the tutorial is done it's done, but I don't teach the same topic the same way to every class.

You'd have to speak to the teachers about workload; but staff retention is incredibly good, and morale is excellent. The tutorials don't replace class teaching, but they do enable learners to access topics at the right point in their personal learning journey for them, and revisit them as often as they need. Naturally, as the children of a mumsnetter, my two are exceptionally able - they've just started Y8, and their experience of maths so far at the school has been, imo, an excellent mix of reinforcing concepts they were already familiar with, and exploring new topics that have challenged them. The secondary school started sharing resources with them in Y6, so they are very used to this way of working.

Just read that research noble : it's exactly what I need!

I like the bit about setting and challenging staff on their aspirations. made me think...

Ha - I've just checked with him, and the tutorial series he's using today is the same as he was using in Y6. So no one's been working after hours to make them for at least three years...

Using a tutorial in Y8 that was used in Y6 does not inspire confidence regarding stretch and challenge!

There are loads of video tutorials out there for free (see corbettmaths for a good example, could save the school a bit of time!) but I think responsive class teaching is better. Sadly I think that maths teachers are in such shortage now that we will gradually be replaced by videos anyway.

No, not the same tutorial - a tutorial from the same series (i.e. the same voiceover). And as I say, he gets 'responsive class teaching', including one-to-one tutorials with a teacher on demand, as well.

The same voiceover person, I mean

It's good, isn't it Piggy! I've also done a load of reading about gender, obviously in maths we have very different problems to you at the top end but we also have boy-heavy bottom sets.

And actually, thinking about it, I may just be assuming the school made them at all - he's just showed me the maths resources bank and there's a whole heap of stuff there from all kinds of sources, arranged by topic, I think (he's now challenging himself with GCSE exam questions).

one-to-one tutorials with a teacher on demand

Like putting your hand up and asking for help?

Kind of - of course, they do that anyway, in lessons. But in addition, if there is something they are really struggling with, or they would like to explore a particularly interesting topic further, or get help with revision or whatever, they can electronically book slots of up to an hour, one to one with a teacher.

Really enjoying Mark Roberts, by the way!