Primary school which mix class years by age

advice_please_2

Looking at a primary school which have intake of 45

Reception is a straight mix
But when it goes to year 1, 2 etc they mix
Ie one group of year 2 and then mix older of year 1 and younger of year 2.

Thoughts?

embob74

I suppose the only difference as opposed to a standard class is the cut off age/ date of birth.

It always amazed me that my children's step-sister was in the same year as the DD who was 1 year older and not in the year as other DD who was just 8 months younger than her.

It all depends on the individual child - some are more mature/ advanced than others and this is not always dependent upon their age.

RAS

Given the recent reports on the damage done to summer born children by the current system, sound a decent option.

Mojisola

advice_please wrote: »

Looking at a primary school which have intake of 45

Reception is a straight mix
But when it goes to year 1, 2 etc they mix
Ie one group of year 2 and then mix older of year 1 and younger of year 2.

We had to do this a few times at the school where I was a governor because of the numbers of children in each year.

There's nothing magical about a date that means a child is better off in one year rather than another. As long as the work is set according to the ability of the children concerned, it can work very well.

valk_scot

My DD is young for her year and she's been in composite classes twice now, in P1/2 and again in P6/7. Never did her any harm, in fact she benefited because composite classes usually have a lower teacher-pupil ratio, they usually get a very experienced teacher and they have extra staff help if they need to split the class for some activities. It's been absolutely fine imho. The only thing kids don't like about recurring composite classes is that they move away from their cronies now and again.

Our district composites on age alone btw which I think is absolutely fine. Over the county border they composite by a mix of age plus ability, which can lead to some upsets.

Idiophreak

RAS wrote: »

Given the recent reports on the damage done to summer born children by the current system, sound a decent option.

...for the summer born children, maybe

peachyprice

DD has this at primary and being a summer baby it worked really well, especially in years 4-6, there's an awful lot of difference between a just turned 9yo and a 10yo and a just turned 10yo and an 11yo when it comes to girls.

peachyprice

Idiophreak wrote: »

...for the summer born children, maybe

Why only the summer children?

balletshoes

advice_please wrote: »

Looking at a primary school which have intake of 45

Reception is a straight mix
But when it goes to year 1, 2 etc they mix
Ie one group of year 2 and then mix older of year 1 and younger of year 2.

Thoughts?

sounds good to me - my DD has been in 2 mixed year classes, where she was in the younger year. Year 1/2, and year 5/6. In both cases, she was challenged and stretched by being in a class with older pupils, it did her nothing but good.

maman

This isn't unusual at all and I think it works really well.

The main reasoning is financial as schools aren't able to have more than 30 infant children in a class but the funding generated by the other 15 isn't enough to employ a teacher.

Children are sometimes grouped on age but often on attainment.

Idiophreak

peachyprice wrote: »

Why only the summer children?

Well, in theory, if the summer children from the year above were benefitting from being in a class with the winter children from the year below, the winter children in that year would suffer in the same way summer children do now...

In my experience, however, year groups aren't simply decided by age, so it has little impact on the "summer children" situation...