Mixed ability or streamed for an able child?

[hippospot]

Need to choose between two secondary schools soon.

Both Ofsted outstanding, both mixed, both will get some intake from DD's primary.

School A is closer (15 min walk), newer (no results yet though that doesn't worry me), smaller, fewer facilities, fab head. Mixed ability for all subjects except maths.

School B is further (30 min walk), bigger, well established, excellent facilities, fab head. Streamed for most subjects.

DD is very academically able, was pretty bored in year 5 as found lessons easy and pace too slow.

I prefer School B as I think being in top stream will stretch her more and I do worry that in mixed ability class there might be more disruption.

I was picked on at school for being "studious" at a mixed ability school. It was not cool to be clever. I also found learning to be frustratingly slow-paced and got fed up of disruptive children slowing things down even more by needing to be told off constantly.

Should I even be worried about this?

Academically I think she'll do well in either school because she is conscientious and motivated, but I want her to be able to find her "tribe" and not be at all ostracised for being bright.

Mixed ability is very common because it is usually cheaper to offer and timetable, plus current evidence suggests that for most children it is as good or better than setting, and schools are interested in boosting overall results, not just those of the more able who benefit most from setting.

Be aware that any school may quickly alter its policy on this, plus, are you absolutely sure your DC would be in the top sets......people are sometimes surprised.

I'd agree that to do mixed ability teaching well (across a wide range of abilities) requires a lot of skill and a lot of planning and that most teachers either lack that skill level or don't have the amount if time to devote to planning that would be necessary, and given the teacher shortage problem, delivering mixed ability teaching across the full range (and this range will be wider in some schools) is going to become even more difficult.

When you go to open evening, don't just ask about setting, but about what is done for the more able. Sometimes there's just an odd token session or two during the year, and that really is about it. Look too at the proportions of low, middle and high entrants to the school to ge t a sense of if your DD will be more the norm or an outlier in each school.

Do be aware too that schools with a narrower range of ability,much as Grammars, and some Comps don't do much setting either....they don't really need to, although if they are going to do it for anything,mint is usually maths. And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all.

I would prefer B, not just because of setting issues but a school so new there are no results yet raises concerns. I'm guessing that school A is an academy or free school as government legislation means that local authorities can't set up new schools - is it part of a chain? I recognise it's quite likely/possible that School B is also an academy, but at least results are some information to look at.

What are the respective sizes of the schools? (also interested in whether or not the new school is a free school).

Definitely streamed if your child is academically able.

The new school is an academy. I don't know what the implications are to be honest.

School A has intake of 180, School B has 240.

Streamed is far better for the most academically able. Ds1 was like a dog out of the traps when he got to (partially) streamed secondary and was taught at his own pace for the first time.

School A has intake of 180, School B has 240.

Overall size? That is tiny, do you mean that is the yr 7 intake?

The larger intake gives better economies of scale and allows more flexibility in setting by subject. A good head will manage size eg subdividing into Houses, each with their own lead and dedicated pastoral staff - you will probably get info on this at the open evening.

Streaming results in the same class for everything. You can be in a group behind you for one subject and ahead of you for another. If you don't gel with your class mates you are stuck with them. We all like to fondly assume they will naturally fall into the top stream but it doesn't always work like this.

Maths is commonly set from very early, English may be mixed or banded for much longer based on the cohort. Setting can start at different ages for different subjects based on how well setting works for that subject - one model doesn't fit every subject, including for the more academically able.

If you ask the schools how and when they set, they can explain this and how it works in their structure including how they review it ongoing etc You can also ask how they cater for the extremes at each end.

Do be aware too that schools with a narrower range of ability,much as Grammars, and some Comps don't do much setting either....they don't really need to, although if they are going to do it for anything,mint is usually maths.

Then they're missing a trick. Even amongst a top stream some children will be more able - and interested - in English composition than others. Similarly for the sciences, history, foreign languages, etc. I can understand prioritizing maths and not setting other subjects because of timetabling restrictions, but to assert that there is not a big diversity of ability in other subjects is lazy.

Oh yes, good point. I meant "setting" not "streaming". Dont think any of the secondaries round here stream.

And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all. I find this interesting. Does anyone know if the benefits for the mixed class are retained in this scenario? Or does the sense of stigma slip back in and undermine things?

I wonder about this too....not so much a sense of stigma, but just wonder if the benefit of learning alongside the able is lost to a significant degree.....it's a bit like having a Grammar stream/set (and I appreciate you might get into the top set for some things and not others, which isn't poss if there's a true Grmmar system) and the rest are mixed ability in the secondary modern. Clearly, in most areas, Grammar/Sec Modern has been abandoned, but in some ways schools taking out a top set are doing a similar thing, especially if it tends to be the same children in the top sets for all or most subjects.

My DDs school - most classes are mixed ability. She just got a batch of 8s and 9s in her GCSEs and is now doing 4 A Levels (maths and science) in the same school. It can work!

ChocolateWombat Every grammar I have visited and worked in sets in the main subjects. So that’s about 18 altogether.

To clarify, the intake of 180/240 is per year group. Thanks everyone for your comments. Gives me ideas of questions to ask when I go to the open evenings. I saw both schools a year ago. I preferred School B for the larger size, better facilities, range of subjects offered and general buzz.

Do be aware too that schools with a narrower range of ability,much as Grammars, and some Comps don't do much setting either....they don't really need to, although if they are going to do it for anything,mint is usually maths. And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all.I agree. Something i would also consider (and I'm not saying this is you OP) is how you and your DC will respond if/when your child is no longer the top one leaps and bounds ahead or they aren't in top set? I only raise this as a child can be a big fish in a small pond and primary and then find themselves in set 2 at secondary because actually there's a lot of other intelligent children out there. For some people this warrants an angry call to school about how their gifted child is in the wrong class etc or their child's self esteem is apparently through the floor because they got the middle score in the class. (I would say school B though)

Sorry for the bold failure and block of text. I can't press enter in the MN mobile site.

And a a growing approach is to cream off a top set and teach everyone else mixed ability....fitting with the idea that mixed ability benefits most but not the top ability....here schools are trying to deliver best for all. We have this - over 50% of the kids have a Maths Tutor to make up for poor teaching. Teacher does not vary the content for the lower half or the top half if she did maybe it would be fine, or maybe if she was a good teacher it would be fine, as it stands it's shit - the stats might make it look like the mixed ability is working at our school but given the amount of tutoring going on it, it would be the wrong conclusion.

GHGN, that's interesting. I've also worked in several and visited many. They have tended to set for maths, occasionally for languages but everything else has been mixed ability. Yes, there is a range of ability, but it's been decided that setting isn't needed.....these are mostly superselectives, so I guess the range of ability is less than at some Grammars. It's also what I've seen in the selective independents I've had dealings with - lots don't even set for maths until Yr8. I guess that in schools where over 80 or 90% get A or higher at GCSE (L7 now) they are all able students. Even the handful who don't get those grades have often narrowly missed it with a B. It's a very different type of 'mixed ability' teaching. However, there are clearly a range of different approaches going on, if there are lots of Grammars you've experienced who are setting in the majority of subjects.

Some Academies / Academy chains have some very formulaic approaches. Check out discipline policies. Personally I would avoid the ‘boot camp’ approach that some use, and the ‘teach to the test’ approach that Harris are open about adopting.

DD is at a school with no sets but as it is selective that has kind of been done already. If she was at a school where the main criteria for admission was distance I would choose sets every time. Otherwise particularly bright kids get bored and might be tempted to misbehave themselves.

BTW if you are going to open days and asking questions, - ask how they set/stream and/or change the set/stream if it doesn't seem right.
Not a question I thought to ask when looking at schools, but it turns out even for schools that set/stream, there are completely different ways of deciding who goes into what. One school we looked at (but didn't go to) uses CAT scores. I asked (only when looking for DD, who is younger, never thought to ask for DS2) what happened if somebody had a bad day on the day of the CAT test, and it sounded like, although they might tinker around the margins if pushed, basically your test on the day of the CATs pretty much was expected to set you up until Year 11.
On the other hand the school we did end up going to basically reset ever six months! But they do it solely based on test result. As in, everybody sits the same test every six months or so, and the top 28 go into set 1, next 28 into set 2 etc. If scores are equal, depending upon numbers, they go either up or down. So, for example, DD was one of five at the cut off between set 1 & 2 on the test for science in Year 7, so all five were put in Set 2. CAT scores, although taken, are mostly ignored for setting purposes. The only concession is that one can only go up or down one set in each exam, after they are set initially. This means that messing up a paper in one subject only theoretically means dropping for six months, but on the other hand, it creates enormous pressure on those at the margins of any given set, every six months and can mean a revolving door between sets.
I am sure others on here have different experiences with how the setting works in their schools.

One local school moves the bottom and the top two pupils with obviously not both for top and bottom set

Mixed ability. Results in higher results for all.

Personally I think it's more important that schools concentrate on the lower ability children.

Streamed!!!!
I would have been doomed without streaming
My English classes were never streamed and they were just awful.
The behaviour is the main issue and the pace is better. In my opinion.