[Oz-gifted] Fw: Ability Grouping

[Kristy]

Forwarded through as asked......thanks Helen that sounds wonderful. 

> Hi Kristy
> I sent the message below to Oz-Gifted but it appears to have bounced. 
> Could you please wait a bit to be sure it hasn't come through, then you 
> may fwd my message  to the list? 
> Good luck, BTW!
> Cheer
> sHelen
> 
> 
> Hi Kristy
> 
> As a long-time lurker and occasional contributor to the list, I was 
> interested in this thread as my daughter has BTDT with these issues at 
> school many years ago. Incidentally and like Sandy's son, she started 
> Uni at 16.  Now she has just finished her second year there, and is at 
> last in a place where it is perfectly OK and unremarkable for her to mix 
> with peers 10 years her senior, and to double up on theory courses (or 
> do third year ones). In fact, I believe  it is only at Uni that she  has 
> found a true peer GROUP (as opposed to individual peers): after a recent 
> phone call to an old high school friend, my daughter rolled her eyes and 
> said, "I am just SO over 18-year-old girls!" LOL, she is 18 herself but 
> seemed to have forgotten the fact!
> 
> Anyway, re ability grouping,  one of her most successful and happy years 
> in (public) primary school was as a Year 4 in a vertically grouped Year 
> 4-5-6 class (I think - the exact year details have blurred with time: 
> she may have been a Year 3 in a 3-4-5 class but it was a triple class 
> and the principles of her happy time remain the same). The teacher was 
> experienced and excellent. She had previously tandem-taught a single 
> class with another teacher - she taught Monday-Wed, the other teacher 
> taught Thurs-Fri. In the past, as one teacher had a math bent, and the 
> other a language bent, they tandem taught so that the kids had every 
> subject every day, but did slightly more on the days with the teacher 
> whose preference the subject was.
> 
> But this particular year, one teacher had a 3-4 class, and the other had 
> a separate 4-5-6 class. The teachers were accustomed to tandem teaching, 
> so they were comfortable with liaising with each other. What they did 
> was to schedule their (1) math  lessons concurrently, and (2) their 
> spelling lessons concurrently. Then ALL the kids (Yrs 3-6) were split 
> into ability groups, regardless of age or Year Level. I think that there 
> were at least 8 levels,  - daunting for one teacher, but perfectly 
> manageable for two.  THe teacher of the 3-4 class took the lower 4 or 5 
> groups, while the 4-5-6 teacher took the more advanced groups. Hence, 
> the very top math group (working at mid Yr 6 through to Yr 7 level) 
> comprised a few year 6s and my Yr 4 daughter. The groups then 
> progressively stepped downwards in average ability for each group, so 
> that (say) at the fourth level down the group comprised mainly Year 4s, 
> one or two less able Yr 5s, and a few more able Yr 3s. And so on. The 
> size of each group varied, with a maximum number of what I recall as 
> being about 6, and down to  a "group" of 2. My daughter was regularly 
> grouped with one of the older boys.
> 
> The groups were not fixed but changed fluidly as students progressed 
> through the material. After each assessment, the quick learners who 
> grasped the concepts would move "up" or "along" into the next group 
> (which in turn had changed its makeup as well). Kids who needed longer 
> to master the material were joined by new students coming along. Of 
> course, all the students knew which were the top groups, but they know 
> that anyway. Not only were parents of quick learners thrilled but -  
> rather to my surprise - parents of the less able students were equally 
> happy because their kids were getting the chance to learn, and when 
> "new" students joined them  in a group they were able to shine.
> The groups didn't change each week, but it did happen regularly - a few 
> times each term, I think. My daughter LOVED math that year. She had been 
> lucky because her ability had been recognised early (albeit not until 
> after a battle in the Junior Primary Years!) and, after the first 
> unofficial "skip", she was invariably placed in the younger Year level 
> of split-level (vertically grouped) classes. She had entered school 
> young but, as she topped her class in every subject, the initial 
> doom-and-gloom merchants were quickly silenced and nowadays  I hope that 
> her example helped pave the way for many subsequent bright sparks at 
> that school.  The advantage ran out by Year 7 when she changed schools, 
> but at least the new school ability grouped for math so the four mixed 
> ability classes were split into one remedial, two average and one 
> advanced class for the subject. New problems emerged with this system 
> later in high school, but that's another (too long) story.
> 
> The system was outstanding, not least because the teachers were smart, 
> enthusiastic, informed, experienced and dedicated. They had several 
> years' experience in tandem teaching, so were adept at managing the 
> curriculum between them.  I knew they were fantastic at the time (and 
> told them so!), but it is only with hindsight that I realise just how 
> exceptional they truly were.  My daughter had the best of both worlds: 
> she was with age peers... AND intellectual peers.
> 
> I think ability grouping is most important for math. I've seen good 
> teachers extend kids in mixed ability-level classes for language skills 
> (the seven thinking hats rings a bell, but basically smart kids are 
> expected to answer/tackle more complex and conceptual within a range of 
> questions that allow for answers at many levels), and pre-testing 
> systems (also used by my Teachers From God that year) allow kids to 
> progress at their own pace in spelling.  In fact, an advanced speller 
> can run out of list words by Yr 4-5, after which the words are drawn 
> from their own work or areas of their own interest. Have I said yet how 
> wonderful these particular teachers were?
> 
> For your situation, it will all depend on the individual teachers, the 
> existing class groupings, and the principal. But it's an extra option 
> that two keen teachers may adopt because it actually reduces the range 
> of abilities within the group they are teaching - an attractive option! 
> Anyway, good luck!
> 
> Cheer
> sHelen
>