Any teachers here? Do mixed ability classes work?

[SpoonsAndForks]

I need to hurry up and decide whether my DS takes up his state school place for September or stays on at his private school.

His state school has mixed ability classes for all subjects apart from maths and English.

I'd like to know (especially from teachers) how this works with 32 children of very different ability. Is it really possible to differentiate and offer the right amount of challenge for each child?

How does it work in language classes where some children have already had 2 years lessons on the language and others are beginners?

Do the more academic kids suffer and end up not reaching their full potential or can they still fly academically?

cantkeepawayforever

What you want for your DC is your decision. Obviously what you can get is what you can get, isn't it?

I genuinely don't understand your point - or rather, it seems to me to be ultimately contradictory.

You are saying that for a child who is very good at a specific subject [I presume that is what you meant by 'bright children', because as you have agreed, children do not tend to be equally bright across all subjects] you believe being in a top set is beneficial.

However, you have also said that for all children NOT in a top set, mixed ability is better (ie setting is detrimental).

So what you want for your child is for there to be a top set available to them in their areas of strength BUT if they are not in that magic 32 children, you want mixed ability teaching, because you don't want them to be disadvantaged?

You also want them to be able to swap between the two systems (or rather, you want to be able to make the choice for them to swap between the two systems) whenever you make the parental judgement that the system they are in is, on balance, not beneficial to them?

However, you now admit that this is impossible in practical terms??

I might also add, setting creates such anxiety! As we can see on this thread! From parents, from children, from teachers! Top set students cna become very very anxious. I have not noticed this so much from the most able in my mixed ability classes : not such a hothouse effect, I suppose and they feel more secure and confident in their ability and lear to see the world is made up of people of many differing abilities. It is quite powerful for a very anxious and very able girls I teach to see how fantastic she is. She feels, conversely, that she can never be good enough in ehr top set English. She has no intention of following English at A level because she thinks it is too stressful, too competitive , and too hard. Her words. she is predicted an 8/9 in bothe Englishes and my subject.

Anotehr girl I teacch, her mum was emailing the day after new sets came out believing her DD had been 'relegated' to set 2. (she hadn't). it was like the apocalypse had arrived.

And another gril in a set 6 I teach (of 10) had a panic attack in a lesson, due to the misbehaviour of other students and my haranguing of them. It overwhelmed her. She missed two weeks of school. That class should ahve been diluted and would ahve been without rigid setting. Instead, she has two years more of them to out up with. the make up of that class is a direct consequence of setting. And, no, I am not saying the less able behave worse. They are less inclined to value the subject, though, as they feel they are 'failing'and bring with them a range of fairly negative attitudes. But I feel like no one cares about the garde 3 - 5 students (shortsightedly!) and whoever said parents only like setting when they have their DCs in the top set hit the nail on the head!

DS2 thinks setting is a great idea. Humbug

I am actually really cross at the constant assertion that bright children are 'held back' by less able peers. This is insulting on so many levels , I don't know where to begin!!

Piggy I guess it’s because when the bright child has grasped a concept by the teacher going through an example on the board and then has to sit through another half hour of explanation, it can feel like a waste of their time?

But that's bad classroom organisation, surely? Why can't the bright child get on? It's what we do in primary maths: teach, show me on a whiteboard, go and do if you've got it, stay with me / a TA if you haven't, rinse and repeat.

Sorry, not 'bad' classroom management. Just a model which is alien to me as a primary teacher who teaches mixed ability in all subjects.

It's one of the reasons we always mark overnight - so we can teach efficiently the following morning and not delay those who could just get on the next morning.

Piggy And, no, I am not saying the less able behave worse. They are less inclined to value the subject, though, as they feel they are 'failing' and bring with them a range of fairly negative attitudes. But I feel like no one cares about the grade 3 - 5 students (shortsightedly!) and whoever said parents only like setting when they have their DCs in the top set hit the nail on the head!

I'm the parent of a grade 3-5 child. I am broadly in favour of setting, in that, my DD seems happier in set subjects than mixed ability ones, and her confidence has grown since being out of a mixed ability primary class. But I am happy to accept that in a school that does mixed ability for more subjects well she would be fine.

However, what concerns me about these discussions (and the discussions about grammars) is the overwhelming assumption / acceptance / resignation that behaviour in lower sets will be worse. My DD needs, if anything, better behaved classes to help her concentrate and reduce stress levels.

A number of the arguments in favour of sets seems to be 'my bright child shouldn't be held back by disruptive behaviour'. But why should my hard working but less academic have her education disrupted by it?

Perhaps children shouldn't be set by ability, but instead set by effort? So mixed ability classes, but top set are hard working go extra mile types, set 2 & 3 well behaved do as asked, set 4 lazy / disruptive.

It's what we do in primary maths

Not according to my primary DS, who is the one making this complaint. He also didn’t say half an hour, he said that they spend days on a topic. Sure he gets given extension work, but on the same topic, rather than a fast-paced curriculum.
I know how much longer it takes a bottom set to grasp a new concept than a top set, and how much more of the curriculum a top set covers (its why we still have tiers in maths).

Is the difference between maths (Noble) and English (Piggy)? I've got a dd who was very good at science, maths and English lit.

Although her school did set for maths & English, it's very small, so still had a wide ability range within each class. (Science somewhat set by default in that only those liking science took triple to GCSE)

The 'most set' was maths, with a small group of 12 high achievers pulled out separately. Yet that was the only subject where dd always complained about being bored, consistently got 100% on tests (and got a lot of grief for fiddling, staring out the window, reading under the table etc). IME it's always maths that seems to be the difficult one, in that a question is right or wrong - unlike even science where you can understand a subject to greater or lesser depth (or English where the same question can be answered at primary or PhD level it sometimes seems!)

No child should be held back by disruptive behaviour.

Arguing that low sets are badly behaved is a point in favour of effective and strict behaviour management systems, not an argument against setting.

I was talking to an English teacher whose school had moved to mixed ability teaching (it’s obviously fashionable at the moment). They commented that previously they could assign a TA to the lowest set, which would be the smallest group, and do lots of focused intervention. Now they have a swathe of mixed-ability classes, the classes are much bigger, and the TA instead of being assigned to one class and getting to know them well is being assigned here there and everywhere for patches of support. It didn’t sound great for those kids.

cantkeepawayforever

Sorry, can't. I am out for the day now. I will reply later.

cant should say about primary maths - I’m sure you teach mixed-ability maths very well, and that bright kids aren’t thumb-twiddling in your lessons, but my comment was a response to piggy who couldn’t understand why people might think that their bright child is being held back.

If their kid had the experience of a mixed-ability class not taught as you do, rather taught to the middle, then it could definitely feel like that.

I think if I'd had the choice, I'd have sent dd to a school that set for maths & PE, but was mixed ability elsewhere . . .

Teentimestwo - in Primary we call these the 'critical' children - as in it is critically important that those pupils willing and able to work hard get that extra provision to help them catch up. I'm an intervention teacher so my job is to teach groups of 12 or so pupils who are below age-related attainment but perhaps have the potential to become what we call 'At'. It is hugely satisfying to see these hard-working students flourish in a small, focused group. A good secondary school should continue to provide such interventions.

Going back to the original post, setting just in Maths and English in year 7 sounds about right (as well as being the norm). Setting in Science happens anyway in year 10 with the options of core or triple science. As this thread has pointed out, children can benefit in more rounded ways from at least having some mixed ability classes.

I think it depends on the school.

I was taught in mixed ability groups and hated it. I was bored out of my mind. Which has probably influenced my outlook.

As a teacher I'd say they can work but it's much harder to get it right and I find it benefits the middle and bottom rather than the top. A good school and good teachers will make any system work. So if your option is a good school I wouldn't worry to much. I find the culture of a school is really significant. Is this somewhere students are happy to show the enthusiasm they have for learning?

If my child was genuinely in the very top end of the ability range o would be more inclined to go for a school with sets though.

I agree sadi that it is a difference betwen subjects. Most maths teachers are pro setting. i do find amongst NQTs and RQTs these days a rhetoric of fear around mixed abiliyt teaching, often informed by their own school experinces in high sets where they had inculcated into them a superiority over and fear of lower sets. Not healthy!

I do think the voices of those on this thread who teach both at secondary level should be listened to! I can assure all of you, my three exceedingly able students in my MA class are flourishing, are not bored and enjoy their lessons. Honest.

This may also be coloured by the fact that I am not keen on my top set year 10 (all girls ... there are also gender issues with setting) becuase they come across as rather conceited and not half as good as thye think they are: thye seem less prepared to put in the hard yards. Hey ho.

teen I am not convinced behaviour is worst in the very lowest sets (although it can be becuase fo a range of SEN issues) but that it can be highly disruptive in middle sets , populated with underachievers. I suppose if I was in charge of setting , I would trace the data back to a much earlier date, rather than look at their most recent educational outcomes. But our kids are obsessed with setting and see the whole thing as self fulfilling prophecy. They always ask what set they are in and I always try to dodge the question. What happens if I say set 6? And why are they so desperate to know??Even in our set 6 we have target grades of 3 - 5, so it's hardly a fine art!

And talking of TAs, you can forget any TA support in our school in a setted subject unless you have a child with an EHCP or the bottom sets.. so some students who would benefit lose out. We got rid of MA classes partly so TA support could be 'targeted' (ie money could be saved...) I have just had to move a boy witha target grade of 5 into a bottom set so he could get the TA support he sorely needs. That is ridiculous.

And I am curious noble as one of the by porducts of MA classes is often smaller, not larger, average class sizes?

Secondary teacher of ten years here. In my experience no, they don’t.

That would require extra teachers, piggy, and extra teachers aren’t going to happen in the current climate.

If you have two classes and 40 kids, you could have a top set of 30 and a bottom set of 10 - average class size 20.
Or you could have two MA classes of 20.

The kid with SEN in the bottom set has just seen their class size double, although average class size stays the same.

The major thing is having access to staff who can teach in a range of settings well.

I enjoy teaching lower sets and tend to get rid of poor behaviour quickly, but as an A Level teacher with good top end knowledge I often find myself in higher ability groups to stretch.
At a previous school there were a few of us who were strong, and a revolving door of Teach Firsts who were non specialists & cover staff. Do you put your strong teachers in top set to stretch the top, or the bottom to close the gap whislt battling behaviour? Someone ends uo not getting the strong subject specialist.

That's the reality of some schools.

Then there's schools like mine who could do setting or mixed and do it well because we have an excellent strong team.

I agree with that but the top and middle sets become very large with setting.

Not all students in the bottom set have SEN and I am not sure I have ever really seen any child prosper by being in bottom sets of 12 - 15. They don't suddnely overachive : in fact, one could argue they are consigned to their fates. And In English, after all, they still need to do the same --ridiculously inaccessible- exams!

We put our bottom set in for an entry-level exam, and our top set in for Further maths, and obviously maths is tiered so different exams there too.

I’ve heard some people say that mixed ability maths teaching in secondary is possible, but I’ve never seen it done well. It either involves kids mostly teaching themselves (SMP booklet style) or the teacher rushing around like a blue-arsed fly trying to teach 3 different lessons in one.