This topic was an idea formed from the PDA (Public display of affection) topic in which Cerebral Stasis posted his view on streaming, and I'd have to agree.
I for one completely agree with streaming from an early age (I.E, from the start of high school). Teachers and the heads of school have this idealistic and verging on communist view that putting less intelligent (Thick as bloody posts) students in the same classes as the smarter kids for the majority of classes up until year 10 (I'm in year 9).
Year 7 & 8 have been good for as I was placed into a bright class by pure coincidence and kept a large amount of my best friends from my previous school. We were all pretty much the same level, all well behaved and conscious of ourselves and how we act around others. This year however I have managed to find myself in a class full of preppies (Mostly the girls) and a group of underperforming trouble making boys. What's worse is that I do have friends in this class- two of whom are close to child prodigy grade-wise. Where as last year it wouldn't matter what teacher I had seeing as my class were so well behaved and intelligent every lesson flew by, this year I have been given a few great ones, but the majority are just walkovers who seem to have the view of children that someone who's young and has no children would maintain (We're all eager to learn fact finders).
What really gets me is this: WE'RE STUDYING FOR GCSES THIS YEAR. If we're studying for such important tests why allow bright kids to be dragged down by the bad; it makes no sense. I could ask for a class transfer (A little harsh on my brighter peers) yet the school has so far managed to **** up every class just as badly as mine.
I have a whole year of this crap left (Only five weeks in). Any feedback people?



This post has been edited by rvalkass: Nov 5 2007, 07:05 AM

I've studied in a country that used to practise streaming at grade 8 or 9. They did it for years but it turned out to be such a bad idea that they took gradual moves to scrap it.

From your post, it appears that you've only thought about yourself, but have you thought about what those people who would be streamed to lousier classes feel? That was why the parents complained. It made their kids develop poor self-esteem or keep getting worst because all they mix with is bad company. And on the other hand, you also get elite kids growing up to develop 'superiority' mentalities. Kids are very susceptible at young ages, so the impact can be everlasting on both groups of people.

Mind you, I was put in the 'bright' class, and I've seen a lot of hoity-toity people who refuse to associate themselves with their other schoolmates. I grew to be a bit arrogant too, but fortunately I had a good friend in a not-so-good class so I didn't end up segregating myself from other people.

Besides trouble-making is different from underperforming. A student may not be very good in his studies, but that does not mean he's the sort who comes late to class, doesn't do his homework, disrupt the classes etc. It's unfair to say that all poor students behave like this, and even worst to put all the underperforming and troublemaking students together. Imagine how the poor teacher would manage.

I seriously don't think streaming is a good idea. If there are troublemaking students, they should be dealt with by detentions, lectures from the teachers, principal meetings etc. If you are just talking about students who are bad in their studies, well i don't see how they could possibly affect you if you're a truly good student. In fact, if you take the initiative to help them, you'll be doing yourself a favor by refreshing your knowledge and revising too.

If you are truly affected by your classmate's behavior, you should talk to your teacher, or volunteer to talk to the principal if your teacher doesn't want to do anything about it.

This post has been edited by bishoujo: Nov 8 2007, 04:58 AM

I agree.

Stupid kids (excuse my terminology) generally make the class slower and less fulfilling. They mess around and don't do the work and the intelligent kids suffer.

Obviously, stupid kids should be rewarded for the work they do. If it's sub par then they should be put in lower classes, likewise with the intelligent kids.

Exactly my point. Unless someone is mentally challenged, everybody has the ability to do the work. On most occasions, e.g. Physics tests are purely completed by noting down things you revised straight from the text book- no thought required.


I don't really find that whole 'Superioty complex' thing exists with smarter kids. The thing is, if kids are in a bad set and want to move up- all they have to do is extra revision. Most kids don't because they don't care; I do. I will continue to work to stay in the top sets whilst kids who want to piss about will remain the lowest.
There are some subjects where my theory falters. Maths for instance. I for one am good at maths- I'm in the second best set out of 10. My friend however is in set 10 (Not that good at the subject) and he finds it impossible to move up because they don't teach the whole curriculum to the bottom two sets, just the important stuff. It's still only his loss, we all started out in the same class and he was the one who slipped up in the first place..

I work at a school, and I've found that while there are many kids that are superb, and don't lord it over anyone when they are better (or think they're better ) than their peers, there are unfortunately a fair few that will. That can make you feel pretty small, and once you get thinking of yourself as stupid, it becomes really hard to turn it round (especially in the older year groups).

I'm sure you yourself have been in positions where a chance (or malicious) comment from another student has made you feel like a fool, and made it harder to get involved in a discussion again, if only for a little while.

I'm undecided on whether setting is good or not. It certainly makes things easier for the teachers, which just by itself can make it better for everyone if they were struggling! I think on principle, I dislike the idea of deciding that someone is more or less intelligent (or capable, or however one wants to term the benchmarking), but I can see the benefits in practical terms (for everyone...kids that are struggling aren't going to be helped by having more advanced topics rammed down their throats).

It is certainly true that anyone who decides they are going to improve, will. You're spot on there.



Good for you (not sarcastic!). I know I didn't at school for the first few years, until I got some (a little) common sense.

From my experience, I can tell you that there are a lot of misbehaving smart kids, which pull the class down just as much anyway.

That's why I said intelligent kids as well.

If you don't want to do the work, you shouldn't be priveledged to be in a higher class. I don't care if you're the next Einstein, lazyness should not be rewarded.

But how does that change intelligence? Intelligence is the same as being smart.