OzTennis

http://www.theage.com.au/national/ed...029-2wduf.html

What's the thoughts on this dilemma - streamed classes or mixed ability?

I must declare my hand here because the Principal of WSC is a friend of mine who I went to school with and later played tennis with. Please don't personalise it but just discuss the desirability or otherwise of what he's done at the school.

As background, he became Principal when WSC was one of the lesser performing western suburbs schools in Melbourne. By insisting on streaming classes and teaching each group to their ability, by insisting on uniforms, school rules, certain standards, lots of homework, involving parents more etc, etc he has (with the help of the majority of his staff and the pupils and parents) transformed the school.

As said, the ATAR score for the school has gone from 48 to 75 in 8 years and "Werribee Secondary is the only Victorian school to divide students into different classes for all subjects based on their academic performance".

The legal action shows that there might be a down side to streaming - the lower level classes might be more challenging than mixed ability classes and so on.

To stream or not stream? That is the question.

quoll

Personally I think yes but it's a very un PC thing to do so good on him for making a difference. Lower level classes are challenging to be sure but probably not as challenging as if those kids were floundering in a mixed ability class and wreaking havoc because of their frustration and having their noses rubbed in their inadequacies. If they are being taught at their ability level with other kids at the same level it opens up wider possibilities for the way the teacher gets the message across. Of course, in an ideal world every child should be working to their ability level in a mixed ability group but we don't have too many superperson teachers out there who can run 25-30 individual programs and with the best will in the world teaching to the middle is generally the norm.

Should have said - you can't, however give the lowest streams the least competent teachers and you do have to ensure that all teachers get a good mix. In fact the lower streams need the special inspirational teachers perhaps more than the independent motivated ones! I have seen some fabulous results from streaming with the placement of super teachers. Unfortunately, schools are often unable to get rid of underperforming teachers and there may be a tendency to give them the underperforming kids and kill 2 birds with one stone!

ExKiwilass

No. Why not have high standards and expectations for everyone. All streaming does is confirm to some kids that they're the bottom of the heap.

FWIW I went to a streamed state school, then a non-streamed private school. What I noticed was that the expectations were higher for everyone at the private school, regardless of how 'intelligent' they were percieved to be, and that as a result they by and large achieved them. Whereas at my state school, only the 'bright kids' were expected to achieve certain things and it was expected the lower streamed kids would just be shop assistants or whatever.

http://nihrecord.od.nih.gov/newslett...99/story03.htm

One of Vancouver's most disadvantaged schools (Britannia) now has great scores because the principal started pushing reading/literacy skills and insisting on higher standards.

roaringmouse

Yes, streaming is a good thing.

There needs to be high expectations of all the students, however teaching needs to be delivered in an appropriate way - and that can be vastly different for differing abilities. Having groups based on ability should help with a teacher's planning. There also needs to be the ability to change between groups, and the allowance that different subjects mean different abilities, therefore one child may be in different level groups depending on subject. Different teachers also have different styles that they're more comfortable with, so having a good team with a wide range of experience is important.

One issue with the school you mention is that in the article it said that there were kids in the lower streams who have disabilities (e.g. autism, dyslexia) that need extra support, but no mention was made if the Principal had put anything into place for those children. The general level of support for such kids in Australian schools (that has been talked to death on here) is seriously lacking, generally speaking of course.

GarryP

Unquestionably, yes.

Hell, tuition should be personalised and individual - taking into account not only the level of the child, by their learning style, attention, etc. You should certainly never be in the situation where a poor behaved student held back others. You shouldn't even be in the situation where their slow pace held another back from learning at their maximum rate.

Such an aim is perfectly possible, right now, but the lack of pace in reforming education gives the problem (including the kind of bozo teacher that uses legal action to try to prevent change).

KJCherokee

I went through school (in the UK) before the introduction of the 'comprehensive' school, when all primary students took the 11+ exam to determine what sort of secondary school they would attend - grammar, technical or secondary modern. Then within the grammar school which I attended students were streamed again after the first year.

Was that better than mixed ability? No idea really, since I never experienced the alternative, but having classes where the 20-30 students in the class were all around the same ability level certainly seemed a better idea.

From the fifth year upwards we were also separated into either Arts or Science depending on which A-levels we were aiming towards - we all took four basic O-levels in the fourth year (English, French, either Latin or German, and I forget the last one) and then another four in our selected area in the fifth year.

Swerv-o

I find myself quite incredulous that none of the other schools in Victoria is streamed - It must be an utter nightmare for the teachers to have to try and develop appropriately differentiated lessons to accommodate all of the achievement levels in any particular class.

You'd have some kids doing cut and paste exercises, while others are trying to use algebra to solve complex formulae. Utterly ridiculous I'm afraid, purely from a planning perspective. It's far easier to plan for kids of approximately the same ability level than it is to try and cater for all.


S

sr71

Quite, it really is punishing those who are gifted and celebrating mediocrity - guess it reflects Australian society.

quoll

I'd be laying odds that the AEU is behind the action!

Dreamy

I agree with streaming - so long as at all levels appropriate education is being given, and not all the focus is on the top stream.

Also, unlike the 11+, there should be a facility for children to move between the streams (at least until a certain point), some kids are just slow developers and shouldn't be penalised for their performance at a specific age.

sr71

Yes, that is vital. But also some reality and hard to digest news is probably needed for many parents, not all children are geniuses.

More and more we are competing for jobs with countries like Singapore, India, China. They stream extensively, far more than Australia. Even to the point where the elite jobs are lined up for the top performers. We need to cultivate exceptional people to compete and by dumbing everyone down for a 'fairer' system is just stupid.

The heart of this matter doesn't seem to be the streaming itself though, more to do with the fact they didn't provide enough support for the teacher, maybe because of the more disadvantaged students, it makes mention of disabled/slow learners etc. Of course he could just be a wet lettuce.

OzSheila

Absolutely!

My 3 children were streamed in primary school in the UK. When we moved to Melbourne for their secondary education I hadn't done my research very well as I was dismayed to discover that they would not be streamed despite being in the private sector. (I was educated in Oz in the 70s when there was streaming.) Mediocrity soon set in.

Fortunately all of them eventually moved onto Victoria's only Selective schools, Macrob & Melb High.

My own personal view is that their early education in the UK played a large part in them gaining places at the selective schools here in Melb.

OzTennis

If I may say so, the replies certainly show a certain degree of mixed ability. (tongue in cheek).

I wouldn't jump in an assume that there wasn't support for the lower levels of classes nor that the main complainant had a breakdown caused by teaching too many of these classes nor that the complainant wouldn't have had a breakdown teaching the top levels but as I said I don't want to personalise it but just discuss the general principle. As someone hinted, the teaching union may be behind the case going to court.

MacRob and MHS are selective in terms of entry criteria, the private schools are selective in the sense of whether you can pay the fees or not and many of them have waiting lists; WSC doesn't select who goes to the school or not other than a school zone, the policy just refers to what classes the pupils are put into.

I guess it largely comes down to which pupil (or staff) group you are looking at and your attitudes to them. Education in the last 30 years in both the UK and Australia has been increasingly concerned with the underachiever, the disadvantaged, the less able, the emotionally disturbed, physically handicapped etc and trying to create a more level playing field.

It's akin to the progressive taxation system in a way - those below average get more help/are considered more than those above average. We don't want to encourage winners too much because that creates losers.

Mixed ability classes have been the preferred route so the underachiever/disadvantaged/less able etc pupil isn't stigmatised and the theory has always been that they will be encouraged (not discouraged) by being in a class with their peers of all levels of ability.

If you take the viewpoint of the most able pupils then you probably feel that they are being held back because lessons have to be pitched at a lower level and they are not being 'stretched'.

I've had experience of teaching both streamed and mixed ability classes in both countries and it is an incredibly complex issue with no easy right or wrong. On balance I favour some streaming.

Bermudashorts

You can have high standards for everyone, but it doesn't make everyone the same and doesn't make the learning needs the same.
Have appropriate standards for everyone. There is no point pretending that every child can become a doctor, engineer or scientist with a bit of hard work and "high standards". People are meant for different things, there is not a one size fits all. You are the one looking down on shop assistants, but some people will be shop assistants and what is wrong with that?

Long way back for me now, but we were streamed in comprehensive school and it was normal back then. I remember one time a boy who had just been expelled from another school joined our school and was put in my class which was the top class. I think they thought that it would be a good influence on him but in fact he could not keep up and he was teased about that and altogether he had quite an unpleasant time and had to be moved.

I cannot think how non academic children might feel about streaming, because I was a very academic child. But just to try and think this through, I was not a sporty child. In primary school we did sport together regardless of sporting ability and I really hated sports, it made me so unhappy and I dreaded those days. I would have happily sacrificed some of my academic ability for some more sporting ability. When I moved to secondary school, they split us into two broad streams A and B. I was in B, I was much happier to be with my own ability level. Just like some children wont be doctors and scientists, some won't ever make the Olympics!

OzSheila

Exactly!

Many years ago an ex boyfriend's mother (who coincidentally was a teacher) said to me that there are two types of horses in the world - racehorses & workhorses - and that you can't make one into the other