Grouping students according to ability - helpful or harmful?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Milostar
That's early, but it sounds like the school is trying to help the students in the lower sets make good progress rather than just languish.
Are the pupils aware they're ranked by ability, and where their set is positioned in the hierarchy?
Are the pupils aware they're ranked by ability, and where their set is positioned in the hierarchy?
Completely forgot in my previous post,
Our school puts us in sets for Maths and English from Year 3 too!
Posted from TSR Mobile
We were put into sets even at junior school for maths and english. I think it's a good thing. We weren't put into sets for science until year 9 and year 7/8 I basically learnt nothing because people just ****ed about and didn't even know the basics.
Our school was pretty flexible about the sets, if you wanted to you could put in a request to be changed up/down and unless you were trying to go well above your ability and/or were an irritating troublemaker they generally approved them.
Our school was pretty flexible about the sets, if you wanted to you could put in a request to be changed up/down and unless you were trying to go well above your ability and/or were an irritating troublemaker they generally approved them.
Original post by Stephanie_12
-----.
It sounds like the way your school did it was extremely harmful. Everyone should be encouraged and given the opportunity to go for the best qualifications they can.
However, I agree with setting if it is done well (lots of mobility, encouragement at all levels, same teaching structure), because if you have a C level student and an A* level student in the same class one of them will not be taught properly.
Original post by Ripper-Roo
Two concerns with groups according to ability:
1. How flexible are movements within the group. A hard working student in a lower set will be held back if the class has trouble makers (face it, lower groups do have many trouble makers).
2. How it's examined, just an end of year test which isn't reflective of ability or effort, or throughout the year.
One thing I think needs to be encouraged is independent work from an early age, there's too much "group work".
1. How flexible are movements within the group. A hard working student in a lower set will be held back if the class has trouble makers (face it, lower groups do have many trouble makers).
2. How it's examined, just an end of year test which isn't reflective of ability or effort, or throughout the year.
One thing I think needs to be encouraged is independent work from an early age, there's too much "group work".
This. Setting by ability is better than mixed ability, but it's also fraught with its own problems. Perfectly bright kids in the lower sets can't reach their full potential as, like you said, teaching lower sets tends to be an exercise in policing rather than nurturing young minds and promoting learning as it should be. A close eye should be kept on people in sets to ensure everyone should really be there. Plus the issue with having tests once a year and the like is that flukes and such do happen, and kids who would be in the upper sets go into the lower sets believing they deserve to be there and so achieve far less than they are actually capable of.
Original post by Milostar
That's early, but it sounds like the school is trying to help the students in the lower sets make good progress rather than just languish.
Are the pupils aware they're ranked by ability, and where their set is positioned in the hierarchy?
Are the pupils aware they're ranked by ability, and where their set is positioned in the hierarchy?
I think the aim they state is that they want everyone to work at a pace thats right for them, by Y2 there are always a few that have learned their tables and want to start looking at division, and some are still struggling with place value, so I think the second of those would be a bit freaked out to have to move on before they are ready and the first group can't be held back just because others havent clicked with it yet.
The reason they call the groups pencils and rubbers or whatever is so the children are not aware of which group is 'better' or more advanced than the others, but of course in reality the kids all know who those that are best at Maths are, and therefore that rulers must be the top set etc.
The culture of the school is such that its cool to work hard and do well, so students tend to support their friends in these things, its just accepted that Jonny is great at Maths, Clare is ace at Geography and David is a cricket whizz.
I'm sure there are schools in which it would be divisive to set children, but it works in ours.
Gee what does this remind me of- oh yes.....
BRING BACK MORE GRAMMAR SCHOOLS!
I'm getting bored of a new type of school being re-named by the Government every 3-4 years. Apparently the latest buzzword is "Academy"- I think its a school, right?
BRING BACK MORE GRAMMAR SCHOOLS!
I'm getting bored of a new type of school being re-named by the Government every 3-4 years. Apparently the latest buzzword is "Academy"- I think its a school, right?
I preferred being in the top sets where nobody would go over the top with the clowning in my last year of secondary school. Otherwise, the lower the set, the more fun. It really depends on the student, I'd get the same grade no matter what set so I'm not sure if grouping is bad.
I thought it was good at the time and I had motivation to go up a set in stone subjects, keep it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I thought it was good at the time and I had motivation to go up a set in stone subjects, keep it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Done right, grouping by ability is, in my opinion, best. I often felt held back at school, when I was aiming for the highest grades, and yet most of the class was aiming to just pass the exam. And that was the school's target for them; most of them still failed. Then again, there weren't many 'intelligent' people at my school. 
The situation is better now that I'm doing A levels at college, because everyone in my classes actually chose the subject, wanted to do it, and met the requirements to be put on the course. So here, ability sets aren't needed.
The situation is better now that I'm doing A levels at college, because everyone in my classes actually chose the subject, wanted to do it, and met the requirements to be put on the course. So here, ability sets aren't needed.
Setting or 'streaming' by ability is definitely the way to go. It happens on sports teams all the time and nobody bats an eyelid. My school streamed languages, the core sciences Maths English and History on ability, and it helped so much!
The important thing to note about streaming is that if it's done properly the results speak for themselves. Streaming requires the teachers to pay attention to pupils and trust each others' opinions about the pupils. The boundaries between different classes have to be fluid and while the students themselves are vaguely aware of who is good and bad at a subject, they must not be given hard percentile rankings or a definitive 'cut-off' point.
In terms of aiming for grades, yes, lets be realistic. Some kids can aim for A*s and we know they will never get beyond a B. Some kids can say they'd be happy with an A but when it comes to the exams they'll pull out all the stops and get an A*. The teachers are meant to help the kid realise what is possible- but I don't think I've ever heard of a kid being coached into settling for second best.
The important thing to note about streaming is that if it's done properly the results speak for themselves. Streaming requires the teachers to pay attention to pupils and trust each others' opinions about the pupils. The boundaries between different classes have to be fluid and while the students themselves are vaguely aware of who is good and bad at a subject, they must not be given hard percentile rankings or a definitive 'cut-off' point.
In terms of aiming for grades, yes, lets be realistic. Some kids can aim for A*s and we know they will never get beyond a B. Some kids can say they'd be happy with an A but when it comes to the exams they'll pull out all the stops and get an A*. The teachers are meant to help the kid realise what is possible- but I don't think I've ever heard of a kid being coached into settling for second best.
If you're sorted properly then I think it's great. I've mostly experienced the benefits from the perspective of being in a lower ability group, I was pushed down a few sets in Maths and it really helped a lot. I went from being hopelessly struggling and out of my depth to actually moving at a pace and with the level of support that I needed. I still sucked but at least it wasn't by virtue of being so far behind the rest of the class that the teacher couldn't really spend time helping me much. They'd be explaining things to the class on pages I hadn't even got to yet and by the time I DID get there, I needed way more explanation than everybody else did anyway plus I'd missed it. So it was really good for me to move down.
I've been in top sets for other things and found that boring, I can't say I ever felt like my time was being made any better for it. Then again I didn't experience being in a lower set and being put up for those subjects, so I guess I wasn't in a position to judge differences!
People who felt that being in a lower set held them back were probably just sorted badly into sets and should have been in the one above.
I've been in top sets for other things and found that boring, I can't say I ever felt like my time was being made any better for it. Then again I didn't experience being in a lower set and being put up for those subjects, so I guess I wasn't in a position to judge differences!
People who felt that being in a lower set held them back were probably just sorted badly into sets and should have been in the one above.
(edited 10 years ago)
Having sets is god dam awful, every subject apart from your options, so science, english, RE, Maths etc.
Y7 > Low sets because I was slow in primary, which leads to me being influenced by the wrong people who don't care for education/distrupted lessons etc
which then caused the rest of the years in school to be in crappy classes where I'm hardly learning, apart from IT where I was somehow in the top set.
It would of been a lot better if they changed it to something like, real motivated people wanting to learn in a class who are not quite at the A*/A level in one class, or a couple if a lot of people want to learn, A*/A people in another class, and the troublemakers/who don't want to learn in another.
Another good way is to get smaller classes, in English for Lang, I was boarderline D/E and got put in a class of 7 with the deputy head (she was an amazing teacher) and because of this, nobody messed about and everybody got on with their work, a long with this we had more support because we was a small class, and so I got an A in my coursework (previously getting E's in my coursework in the other class... tells you something) and C in the exam (foundation) which resulted me in gaining my C overall (I might of got higher, if I did the higher, but who knows.)
Y7 > Low sets because I was slow in primary, which leads to me being influenced by the wrong people who don't care for education/distrupted lessons etc
which then caused the rest of the years in school to be in crappy classes where I'm hardly learning, apart from IT where I was somehow in the top set.
It would of been a lot better if they changed it to something like, real motivated people wanting to learn in a class who are not quite at the A*/A level in one class, or a couple if a lot of people want to learn, A*/A people in another class, and the troublemakers/who don't want to learn in another.
Another good way is to get smaller classes, in English for Lang, I was boarderline D/E and got put in a class of 7 with the deputy head (she was an amazing teacher) and because of this, nobody messed about and everybody got on with their work, a long with this we had more support because we was a small class, and so I got an A in my coursework (previously getting E's in my coursework in the other class... tells you something) and C in the exam (foundation) which resulted me in gaining my C overall (I might of got higher, if I did the higher, but who knows.)
(edited 10 years ago)
I experienced two ends of this, in my school in england I was in a english class that was mixed ability, and there was a few guys who really struggled with the work, and they would often fall behind or constantly keep asking others for help, because they were from my form class they sat near me so that was annoying but I felt bad for them, id feel bad if I kept geting behind everyone else, also the tutor would say their name followed by "keep up with the class" or somthing similar, which tbh is a big humiliating if the student actualy has difficulties.
Then when I moved to belfast (mid gcse's) I was in a top math class at first and the progression was much too fast for me (I learn alot slower when it comes to math, I just perfer to do alot of examples and fully understand before moving on) anyway, I quickly got overwhelemed and fell behind, so I had to move down a class which was a bit degrading but luckily I was now in a class I felt more suited too, and I ended up passing my gcse so yay
the only downside id say about that though is the paper we recieved, we were told the highest you could get on it was a B (duno how thats possible) like meaning even if you got everything right youd still only get a B so it could limit some individuals who learn slower but are just as good? who knows
Then when I moved to belfast (mid gcse's) I was in a top math class at first and the progression was much too fast for me (I learn alot slower when it comes to math, I just perfer to do alot of examples and fully understand before moving on) anyway, I quickly got overwhelemed and fell behind, so I had to move down a class which was a bit degrading but luckily I was now in a class I felt more suited too, and I ended up passing my gcse so yay
the only downside id say about that though is the paper we recieved, we were told the highest you could get on it was a B (duno how thats possible) like meaning even if you got everything right youd still only get a B so it could limit some individuals who learn slower but are just as good? who knows
The biggest problem is that setting is called "grouping by ability"- that's demoralising and inaccurate.
Unless you have had every single pupil assessed (at significant financial expense) and used those results to assign pupils to groups, you are not grouping by ability. You are grouping by attainment, and that's a very, very, very sensible thing to do. The fact that teachers and students confuse attainment (which can change) with ability, which is more fixed, is what leads to pupils being written off or writing themselves off as incapable.
Language is important.
Unless you have had every single pupil assessed (at significant financial expense) and used those results to assign pupils to groups, you are not grouping by ability. You are grouping by attainment, and that's a very, very, very sensible thing to do. The fact that teachers and students confuse attainment (which can change) with ability, which is more fixed, is what leads to pupils being written off or writing themselves off as incapable.
Language is important.
Original post by Milostar
Some schools divide pupils into sets according to their ability. Does this mean they all get taught at an appropriate level, or does it just hold back the students in the lower sets?
When you're in bottom sets no one thinks you can do well, no one expects anything from you.
Harmful. School put me in the bottom set for every subject because of some dumb test I took when I was 11. It stopped me from taking all the science and math A-Levels. I had to take a gap year to self-study them. Eventually I got A*AB. But it would have been easier if they didn't put obstacles in my way. morons.
Original post by JasmineWills
When you're in bottom sets no one thinks you can do well, no one expects anything from you.
God I can relate to this. Rickyrossman, your target grade is an F. Sarah your target grade is a C. Joe your target grade is a D. Bish you said my target is to fail? Lolwut
Original post by rickyrossman
God I can relate to this. Rickyrossman, your target grade is an F. Sarah your target grade is a C. Joe your target grade is a D. Bish you said my target is to fail? Lolwut
I did fail and where I'm not going to blame everything on them, everyone was in the wrong sets, no support, bad teachers, I got given supplies multiple times for months in different subjects and they couldn't teach where the top sets got the best teachers.
Potentially harmful, but there really isn’t any other way to do it.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Nottingham law prestige?
- Which is the best university for MSc Computer Science based on graduate prospects?
- Leadership Team Position Application
- DSA + Autism
- Busy exam timetable!
- How much do university ratings matter?
- Flexible working nursing student - HELP!
- GCSE Sociology AQA
- Adopting a martial art society
- SLC - Your academic year 2022/23 Student Finance application – Decision
- What wellbeing support can you get at Kingston University?
- Chemical equations gcse alevel
- Are people with 2.2s good PHD students?
- MSc forensic psychology
- Lnat essay review - Space exploration
- Could someone please mark my 12 marker? (AQA Soci)
- law - Lnat essay - space exploration
- LNAT
- Applying for Occupational Therapy or Speech and Language Therapy
- Rejected from 4/5 Uni’s - Feeling Dejected (Law)
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
