Ability/Performance Grouping in School

[ReadingMama1214]

We are currently semi-homeschooling DD who turned 4 this past December. She does attend a public preschool for 3 hours a day 4 days per week. At home we mainly play math games and she is learning to read with OPGTR. At school it is a lot more play-based, life-skill, environment awareness, and basic academics. We will probably keep her home next year instead of sending her to Pre-K 4. She will enroll in K for the 2017/18 school year. We are currently looking at Classical charter schools in the area as well as one or two other non-classical charters.

 

My question is, how important is it that students are grouped by ability for things such as reading and math? Some schools that I have looked at specifically state "do not group based on ability". Both classical schools use Riggs Institute for phonics and spelling and Singapore for math. Should I look into how they group for reading and math? Is it important that they are grouped based on ability? In one way I think DD would benefit from receiving instruction at her level, but then I also think that further phonics instruction will only improve her spelling later on.

[tm919]

One question I'd ask them is whether that means there is no between-class grouping or not within-class grouping. My daughter has no grouping at all in math at the public K she attends part-time, but has within-class grouping for reading. Within-class allows kids to move up or down mid-year, and I think that makes sense given that kids can go change and learn quickly within just a couple of months.

 

Another question for them is how much is adaptive. A lot is done online now, and all of that stuff is adaptive (e.g., they get their own RAZ-kids reading assigned, their own spot in ixl/xtramath/lexia). Even though the kids are sitting together doing reading, it's totally different reading assigned to each child.

 

As far as our experience, I don't think it's helped my daughter for there to be grouping. If your daughter's skills are very strong when she starts, she might have the same experience -- her "group" isn't really pitched at her level anyway, so it's not helpful to her.

Edited January 4, 2016 by tm919

[ReadingMama1214]

Thanks that was helpful. Being able to understand the various groupings is helpful. We plan to attend open houses for each school and I have a list of questions.

 

She doesn't seem to mind being "ahead" even in PreK. I don't even know if her teachers know she can read! She's not a performer. But I could see her getting bored later on. The classical school is more rigorous so I hope it will challenge her in other ways. Although she's starting to read, I don't think she's extremely advanced or one to act out when bored.

[TranquilMind]

We are currently semi-homeschooling DD who turned 4 this past December. She does attend a public preschool for 3 hours a day 4 days per week. At home we mainly play math games and she is learning to read with OPGTR. At school it is a lot more play-based, life-skill, environment awareness, and basic academics. We will probably keep her home next year instead of sending her to Pre-K 4. She will enroll in K for the 2017/18 school year. We are currently looking at Classical charter schools in the area as well as one or two other non-classical charters.

 

My question is, how important is it that students are grouped by ability for things such as reading and math? Some schools that I have looked at specifically state "do not group based on ability". Both classical schools use Riggs Institute for phonics and spelling and Singapore for math. Should I look into how they group for reading and math? Is it important that they are grouped based on ability? In one way I think DD would benefit from receiving instruction at her level, but then I also think that further phonics instruction will only improve her spelling later on.

What happens is that your gifted kid is eventually bored out of her mind.  It is not a benefit to gifted kids at all, not to group with kids of similar ability. This is the premise for all of the gifted schools that have been popping up in the last 25 years or so.

 

I don't know if I would worry about it for a 4 year old, but just keep it in mind for later.  My college kid just discussed this last week, how demoralizing it was to always do all group projects herself  in order to make sure they were done correctly and to sit and wait for others to catch up in almost all classes.  This particular one completed university level up to the Master's level for some classes (during high school) and still found the same scenario in the university, where it was unexpected.  This one firmly believes that high school should be optional and you should be able to test out and move right on up according to ability, not be hindered by "required" grade levels. Yes, somehow I have created a radical in many ways.  ;)

 

I don't know that I did everything - or anything - right in so many ways, but I do believe that devoting the early years to creative play, lots of books,  and "school" in spurts was a good idea. Some days, I didn't interrupt a game that had taken over the entire house with toys all day (say military manuevers, or "traveling"), and I'm not sorry.   Once 10-12 or so, that kid can take off academically in a way that burned out kids who have been schooled full time from an early age don't always manage. 

Edited January 4, 2016 by TranquilMind

[Arcadia]

When DS11 was in public K, there were 6 classes of K. All the 6 kindergarten teachers did things differently. His teacher group for reading but not for math. Still the teacher ran out of books at his reading level for him so we used library books from local libraries for the required weekly book report and reading logs.

So it varies by teacher even within a school.

[Kiara.I]

"Grouping" just means you're still bored by your group, even if they're the "top" group.  I suppose it's helpful if it keeps you fractionally less bored, but you still wish they could pronounce the stupid words and move on.

 

And in my experience grouping never produced instruction "at my level".

 

Depending on the skills of the child in question, it might be sort of a moot point, right?  They simply wouldn't instruct 8 grade levels ahead in reading.

[ReadingMama1214]

When DS11 was in public K, there were 6 classes of K. All the 6 kindergarten teachers did things differently. His teacher group for reading but not for math. Still the teacher ran out of books at his reading level for him so we used library books from local libraries for the required weekly book report and reading logs.

So it varies by teacher even within a school.

I could see that in the larger schools. I know that's how the public school dd attends for PreK is. She won't go there beyond PreK though.

 

Her charter schools for K only have one K class though. There are multiple classes for 1-12, but only the one K class per school.

[ReadingMama1214]

"Grouping" just means you're still bored by your group, even if they're the "top" group. I suppose it's helpful if it keeps you fractionally less bored, but you still wish they could pronounce the stupid words and move on.

 

And in my experience grouping never produced instruction "at my level".

 

Depending on the skills of the child in question, it might be sort of a moot point, right? They simply wouldn't instruct 8 grade levels ahead in reading.

I could see that if you had a child high above grade level. I don't expect DD to be too far ahead in math at all. She might just have an easier time. But in reading, she is already at a higher K level phonetically. So that's my main concern. But more phonics can't hurt as long as her home reading is on level right? I think extra phonics would just help with spelling. The school uses Riggs

[Kiara.I]

But more phonics can't hurt as long as her home reading is on level right? I think extra phonics would just help with spelling. The school uses Riggs

 

Well, maybe.  It depends on your child's personality.

Some children who are compliant will be just fine.

Others who are "questioner" types may learn quickly that school is pointless.

[ReadingMama1214]

Well, maybe. It depends on your child's personality.

Some children who are compliant will be just fine.

Others who are "questioner" types may learn quickly that school is pointless.

She's a questioner in terms of inquisitive and seeking to understand things, but not of authority. This could change though! She's only 4 and pretty timid. Who knows how she'll be at 6. I feel like a lot could change this year!