Streaming in secondary schools

Tombo2001

Is streaming still the norm in Irish secondary schools?

It was 25 years ago.

Is it still now or have most schools moved away from it?

If they have, are the classes chosen according to a formula or is random?

bdoo

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Is streaming still the norm in Irish secondary schools?

It was 25 years ago.

Is it still now or have most schools moved away from it?

If they have, are the classes chosen according to a formula or is random?

In my experience, which wouldn't be extensive (4 schools - all VEC) mixed ability us the norm in first year. Students are streamed for Irish, English and Maths from second year based on their first year progress and ability. Mixed ability would remain in all other subjects apart from languages maybe depending on the timetable.

Cailin CoisFarraige

It's difficult to generalise for all schools, but yes, streaming is still the done thing in the majority of secondary schools.
Some schools sort students alphabetically/randomly in first year, but they are usually rearranged on the basis of first year Christmas/Summer tests.

dambarude

It's still definitely the norm. In the school I'm most familiar with English, Maths and Irish are streamed after two months in first year, and French after a year. I was also streamed for Biology in Leaving Cert, as well as Maths, English, Irish and French. This was four years ago now, and I wouldn't think much has changed since.

That said, the availability of teachers might mean that where might have been an higher, ordinary and foundation class in say Maths, some of those classes would be collapsed together. I've heard of some classes where honours and pass Irish were being taught together because of strains on teacher numbers.

RealJohn

Contrary to what the others have been saying, in my experience it is not the norm anymore with the exception of maths to stream for any subject prior to junior cert and after junior cert, it's not exactly streaming to break classes into higher and ordinary level, is it?

I'll grant you I haven't taught in many schools but aside from maths, none of them were streamed, including the school I attended myself which was streamed while I studied there but isn't streamed anymore.

Why do you ask anyway OP?

Miss Lockhart

2/3 of our first year intake are put in mixed ability base classes and do all first and second year subjects with that group (other than options obviously). The other 1/3 (around 50 students) are placed in SEN base classes and do all subjects with that group.

Students with AS/ADHD/Dyslexia/Dyspraxia/ODD etc are almost always in mixed ability. Those placed in SEN generally have MGLD and a reading age of below 7.

Streaming happens for most subjects in 3rd Year. From my point of view I think it is necessary for subjects where there is significant difference between HL/OL/FL courses. However, I would be much happier if my science class was left unstreamed for 3rd Year as I feel it achieves nothing and just unsettles the group.

There are HL and OL classes for most core subjects at LC but there are not enough resources to split option subjects. My LC Biology classes are always mixed. A shortage of Irish teachers means we often have mixed OL/FL LC Irish classes too.

rainbowtrout

RealJohn wrote: »

Contrary to what the others have been saying, in my experience it is not the norm anymore with the exception of maths to stream for any subject prior to junior cert and after junior cert, it's not exactly streaming to break classes into higher and ordinary level, is it?

I'll grant you I haven't taught in many schools but aside from maths, none of them were streamed, including the school I attended myself which was streamed while I studied there but isn't streamed anymore.

Why do you ask anyway OP?

Same here. Our classes are mixed ability divided by alphabetical order. We stream for Irish and Maths in second year but everything else is mixed ability.

In fifth year. English, Irish and Maths are streamed and last year French was streamed I think (not a language teacher), but only because so many opted for it and two classes were on at the same time were they able to do that. Normally it's mixed to the best of my knowledge.

implausible

Mixed ability in first year for all students and we get a larger than average intake of SEN students. Maths, English and Irish depts decide when to stream into HL, OL and FL, usually after Christmas of second year.

Edit: in my last school, it was the same

whiteandlight

I'm a maths and music teacher. The first has always split into levels, the latter-never. Only one of the school I worked in did thorough streaming where in maths for example if there were three honours JC classes then there was top honours, middle honours and 'aspiring' honours. I wasn't a huge fan of it as the students were aware of it and without students achieving the too grade in the class there's a lack of motivation in the students.
Having said that I do agree with streaming the honour/pass maths simply because the pacing between the two is next nigh near impossible without seperste groups.

Tombo2001

RealJohn wrote: »

Why do you ask anyway OP?

Well what got me thinking about it firstly was the increased attention on fee paying schools, and the increased participation....

....from there what I was looking at was the data on college university attendance from secondary schools, and how high it is in fee paying schools compared to non-fee paying.

....I think ultimately that what parents want when they send their kids to fee paying schools, is that the kids will be in with kids of like-minded parents (ie middle class, professionals) and that they will go on to university.

And that just being blunt, and I think its a fact......when parents talk about "good schools" in any given area, what they really mean is "schools with lots of middle class kids in them"......and I'm basing that on all the conversations i've have with parents on the subject over the years.

So my point is this:
If you want your kid to be in with other middle class kids, who are likely to progress to university.......then you do have that option if you send that kid to a non-fee paying school......as long as that school is streamed.
You might have a local secondary school where only 40% of kids progress to university. But if you get your kid into the A class, then you know they will be streamed with other kids who are likely to be university going kids.

However, if the school is not streamed, in the same school and same year, your kid will be surrounded mostly by kids who will not be progressing to university.

And in this circumstance, the fee paying schools becomes a more attractive option.

spurious

There are involved parents and parents who are not involved.
There are supportive homes and homes that are not supportive.
There are children who aspire to third-level and those who don't.
Both groups exist in all types of school, whether they stream or band or do nothing.

Tombo2001

spurious wrote: »

There are involved parents and parents who are not involved.
There are supportive homes and homes that are not supportive.
There are children who aspire to third-level and those who don't.
Both groups exist in all types of school, whether they stream or band or do nothing.

You are right, of course you are. That doesnt contradict what I said.

The situations you describe are not unconnected.

Children who aspire to third-level are more likely to be those who come from supportive homes and involved parents.

Would you debate this?

Next question. Supportive homes and involved parents (from this perspective meaning parents supporting and willing their kids to go on to third level) will represent a much higher % in middle class homes than in working class homes.

Would you debate this?

That is not say that you will not find supportive parents in working class areas. Far from it.

But it is to say that a much higher % of parents will do so in middle class areas.

Would you debate this?

Next question:

Parents who want their kids to go on to university would rather have their kids in a classroom surrounded by other kids who want to go on to university. As opposed to being the one "brainy" kid in the class surrounded by kids who dont aspire to university.

Is that a fair statement?

If non-fee paying schools no longer stream, then the obvious thing if you want to guarantee your kid will be surrounded by other 'university going kids' is to send them fee paying.

Look, I am just calling it as I see it. Why beat around the bush here. Middle class people have all sorts of ideals about, but when it comes down to it, they want their kids in with other middle class kids. They want to preserve the status quo. But I'm not giving out about it, or them. What they really want is the best for their kids.

In my local area, there are the parents who send their kids to the local Educate Together primary. They then send their kids to secondary<snip name of school> 6 miles away without even considering a secondary school half a mile away, because only 20% of the pupils at the local place going on to third level......and because, same thing, its not a middle class school. It might be a perfectly good school with perfectly good teachers. But the local middle class parents dont even consider it.

seavill

I know what you are saying but I fail to see where you are going with this.

I can guarantee you that the 20% figure you mention is highly flawed.

The figures published by the Irish Times each year are of those going to University which in reality is a stupid way to publish figures.

Take an area that has an IT but does not have a University close. The majority of people in the area will stay locally in the IT if the same course is offered especially with the way money is these days in families.
This can really skew the figures.

I worked in a very disadvantaged school for two years (DEIS). The careers teacher did research each year on the previous years LC group. 89% of those students went on to university, an IT, further education courses or got a job.

Taking the figure of University only is purely pointless.

The majority of the middle class (the real middle class) will know the story in each area. Those who claim to be middle class but are at the upper end of it are the ones who tend to turn their noses up at a particular school.

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

I know what you are saying but I fail to see where you are going with this.

I can guarantee you that the 20% figure you mention is highly flawed.

The figures published by the Irish Times each year are of those going to University which in reality is a stupid way to publish figures.

Take an area that has an IT but does not have a University close. The majority of people in the area will stay locally in the IT if the same course is offered especially with the way money is these days in families.
This can really skew the figures.

I worked in a very disadvantaged school for two years (DEIS). The careers teacher did research each year on the previous years LC group. 89% of those students went on to university, an IT, further education courses or got a job.

Taking the figure of University only is purely pointless.

The majority of the middle class (the real middle class) will know the story in each area. Those who claim to be middle class but are at the upper end of it are the ones who tend to turn their noses up at a particular school.

+1


Sligo IT is the closest third level college to where I teach. The school I teach in is also the only school in the town so we don't have convent v. tech etc. I already outlined how we stream Irish and Maths, mixed ability for everything else more or less. Quite a number of our students go to Sligo IT to do things like Business, a degree which is offered in every third level in the country. Not because they couldn't get the points for university, but because it's closer to home, some don't want to move away, for some it means they can commute and keep the cost down, etc, etc. So data published in the papers doesn't often reflect reality.

Also quite a number of our students who are young and don't want to go straight to college take a year out and do a PLC and reapply to CAO the following year. They are not counted in our figures because they are PLC students although they are using their LC points. There has been a trend also for a few of our students to go to the UK for college over the last couple of years. They are not counted in the figures. The published figures might give some representation of numbers going on to college but only on a specific set of criteria.

doc_17

3hr 30min drive to the nearest university from my school. I'm sure that also has something to do with numbers attending university

Miss Lockhart

I teach in what's considered by many to be one of the worst areas in the country. The IT always has us at around 25% of students going to university. The reality is that around 85% of students go on to university, IT or PLC.

On one of your points OP, I would certainly debate your contention that:

"Supportive homes and involved parents (from this perspective meaning parents supporting and willing their kids to go on to third level) will represent a much higher % in middle class homes than in working class homes."

I dislike the use of arbitrary "class" categories - but to continue with your own language, it has been my experience that working class parents know only too well that a third level education is vital in this day and age and are very supportive of their kids going on to further study. On the other hand many of the truly "middle class" people I know want and expect their kids to get on in life, but often they also have the means to make that happen even if the child in question does not do so well in school. They can pay fees for private colleges and they can get them a position in friend/relative's company. This sometimes leads to middle class kids who have little interest in applying themselves in school and are more interested in "having the banter".

I think, perhaps, the attitude to which you refer is more common among parents of the non-working class - those who have never worked a day in their lives and never intend to. Unfortunatley these make up a lot of the parents I deal with in my school and I would agree that I would not by choice send my children to a school where they make up a sizable majority of parents. However, I would happily send them to a working class school. I went to the local Catholic school which would be working class and lower middle class - results were very good (much better than the local fee-paying boarding school). The local VEC school, which at the time was very much working class, achieved even better results. That's where I would send my kids.