Disadvantage of early reading when going to K ? - Page 2

[meemee]

Originally Posted by Jessica1501 

Meemee and robidoux totally misunderstood my points.

Are you gonna switch school just because they teach reading? I believe the answer is no. 

actually yes i did. i did not want dd's ps/dc experience in any form to be about academics. her ps DID do some starting after easter to prepare those who were going to go to K. just alphabets. however those who were early readers they did keep their level books so they could enjoy them. instead they had such great art and science experience curriculum that school has never lived upto what a great ps/dc dd had. 

trying to get kids to 'read' as fun i still find work. not fun. just the same as i dislike educational toys. trying to introduce 'unfun' things in a fun way. in my books - rather like bribing. perhaps i am a bit radical here. no. no. no. didnt want that. dd was interested in the human body. i got her all she wanted. i did not introduce the human body through toys hoping she would be interested. she had enough on her plate that she was curious about. i didnt need to introduce anything to totally overwhelm her. that's how i see educational toys or fun reading as. 

however what is the definition of reading. if introducing alphabets - yeah i can understand. at 4 to get kids ready for K.

like i pointed out in my previous post - yes there is an advantage to kids knowing the alphabet and writing their name - even if it is in the form of drawing and not in teh form of writing their name as a connection of alphabets.

i was. VERY involved with volunteering in dd's K class. we tried lots of fun ways to teach kids who dont know the alphabet. did they suffer? no. however they could if they are still struggling in 2nd grade. 

however under no circumstances will regular public K or 1st be a great experience for a child who knows how to read and is grades ahead. all the trouble makers or the dreamers in her class fit that category. 

nite nicole i am so glad K was a great experience for your dd. it wasnt for mine. she wasnt reading when she went in. but she took off and went grade levels ahead by before the winter break and the constant repetition has made school academically not a v. pleasant experience. like she told her K teacher 'i come to school to party, but i go home to study.' its still true to this day in fifth grade. but really it isnt about my dd that makes early reading a sore spot for me. she is the lucky one in society. the smart one. 

what is sore are the kids who were NOT ahead, but behind. it breaks my heart. they were so fantastic in other ways. yet the focus was always on reading. no one talked about the sculpture genius who was turning out sculptures of high school quality. THAT still makes me mad. 

[NiteNicole]

however under no circumstances will regular public K or 1st be a great experience for a child who knows how to read and is grades ahead. all the trouble makers or the dreamers in her class fit that category.

That makes no sense.  My daughter is grade levels ahead and she's fine.  Lots of kids are.  It does not necessarily follow that a child who learns to read early is going to struggle in school, nor does it mean they will be "trouble makers."

[transylvania_mom]

Originally Posted by meemee 

however under no circumstances will regular public K or 1st be a great experience for a child who knows how to read and is grades ahead. all the trouble makers or the dreamers in her class fit that category. 

Agree with NiteNicole. Ds also read above grade level, his K teacher had him tested by a specialist who confirmed he was reading at 3rd grade level at that time. He had a great experience both in K and 1st grade, socially and academically. 

[KCMichigan]

Originally Posted by dovey 

  He did not really teach himself.  When he learned to read, it was a huge developmental turning point in his life.  He stopped most imaginative play and began a process of constantly reading books - learning lots of interesting ideas, experiencing literature for himself, figuring out how to write sentences based on the cadences of what he had read, learning math from books - basically, he took off into an intellectual mode of thought and never looked back to early childhood. 

The developmental period of creative and imaginative play is not a phase to be hurried through.  It is important in its own right as well as helping the child develop his/her motor skills, social skills, and the ability to imagine and create detailed ideas.  It makes sense to help a child work through this phase without a lot distractions from screens or the written word.

Both my DDs were early readers (one more than the other) and it has been many years since my DDs have been reading. They were reading in preschool. But they were self-taught I did not seek out teaching them to read in any organized format.

In no way has there creativity been diminished. They constantly do imaginative play and they will be 7 next month. So their ability to read has not in anyway made them less creative or immerse themselves less in dramatic play. In fact, as they have gotten older their play has become more complicated and complex. It is really fun to watch their imaginary 'world' grow larger as their vocabulary and attention span lengthen.

Yes, they act out story lines from books. But they also act out scenes from things they have experienced, events from school, oral stories they have heard, and things they just make up. Yes, they add written portions to their play- but it is more of an enrichment rather than a detractor from what they are doing. It simply is added.

We do and always have limited screen but never ever have we limited printed word. I have read to them (and still do) since they were infants. We share books. Books are listed as one of their favorite things in any list they write.

I dont see the use of creativity and free open-ended play as something that can not coexist with reading. They are two separate things and sometimes they will occur in the same child and sometimes they wont. Some of it may be inherent personality  or interest driven (for early reader and non-early readers). 

I also do not think a kiddo that is not an early reader means anything negative either. Lots of preschoolers love books but have no drive or interest in learning to read before school. Some preschoolers have a low interaction with written words. It has no reflection on intelligence. In fact, some gifted individuals may also have learning disabilities and struggle to read as adults-- it does not mean they are any less intelligent.

Originally Posted by meemee 

trying to get kids to 'read' as fun i still find work. not fun. just the same as i dislike educational toys. trying to introduce 'unfun' things in a fun way. in my books - rather like bribing. perhaps i am a bit radical here. no. no. no. didnt want that. dd was interested in the human body. i got her all she wanted. i did not introduce the human body through toys hoping she would be interested. she had enough on her plate that she was curious about. i didnt need to introduce anything to totally overwhelm her. that's how i see educational toys or fun reading as. 

I am just going to disagree here. We love educational toys (not the flashing, blinging electronic ones!). An educational toy is one that you learn from. Which can be creating patterns with beads, magnetic letters/shapes/animals/pictures- those are toys and educational. Puzzles are both as well. Blocks can be educational toys-- count them, stack them, build with them, write letters on them, create scenes with them and other toys....Games are educational. Memory, chess, checkers, scrabble, Mad Libs, etc are all educational toys. A lot of kids enjoy playing them and you learn fantastic things (prediction skills, spelling skills, planning, counting, visual discrimination, etc)

Kids learn through play. Open-ended toys teach. That is an educational toy. Toss a bunch of things in a tub of water and see what floats? Why? That is educational and a toy? Letter stamps-- educational and fun. Get out maps and find places. Educational! Fun!

Again- I dont see how fun and education have to be exclusive of one another.

We did child-led learning at home. And they went to a play based preschool-- in both places they learned and had toys.

Things my DDs expressed an interest in- we explored. Space, animals, volcanoes, fish, weather, countries, etc. I got books, maps, models, figurines, etc that enabled them to satisfy their curiosity. When they were done we moved on.

however under no circumstances will regular public K or 1st be a great experience for a child who knows how to read and is grades ahead. all the trouble makers or the dreamers in her class fit that category. 

My DD did not do K. But they LOVED 1st grade. They were reading  way past grade level. There were a few other children right there with them academically. They learned to write stories and became excellent spellers.

They just started 2nd grade and love that so far too. The teacher has already differentiated for spelling and small group word lists come home next week.(we just started school this week).

Their 1st grade class had differentiated reading, spelling, writing groups. They did math centers on Friday that allowed for more individual exploration.  It worked well. Yes, there were a few issues that I did not like. But my daughters were really happy there and most of the time they were challenged. It helped that there was a small cluster of students in the same grade that were slightly below, at, or slightly above where my DDs were (all those kiddos were above grade level). 

But in the big picture it worked. Neither DD is a trouble maker and one is a dreamer--- but she was a dreamer looooooong before she started school!!

what is sore are the kids who were NOT ahead, but behind. it breaks my heart. they were so fantastic in other ways. yet the focus was always on reading. no one talked about the sculpture genius who was turning out sculptures of high school quality. THAT still makes me mad. 

It must be the school culture. The school my DD are at is not highly academically aggressive (though there are parents there that are that way- the school itself is not), but is in an areas that has a lot of parents that are academically inclined (it is by a major university). The schools stress that everyone has talents and does all it can to emphasis them. That we are all different at different things and that is a good thing. Art covers the walls, there is a drama club, a math club, scouting clubs, etc.

The teachers also stress teaching to different styles. They do activities and lessons that focus on auditory learners, visual learners, kinisthetic learners, etc. 

It really is a supportive well-rounded place that does well. No school will be perfect for each child-- but I think ours does a good job trying to meet all the kids needs.

Originally Posted by NiteNicole 

That makes no sense.  My daughter is grade levels ahead and she's fine.  Lots of kids are.  It does not necessarily follow that a child who learns to read early is going to struggle in school, nor does it mean they will be "trouble makers."

Same here.

[NiteNicole]

As far as creative play, my daughter was relieved when she could write down her own ideas, stories, dreams, lists, etc.  She liked writing letters - which we mailed.  I never proofed or changed them so people got some pretty random stuff from her for a while ;)  She is HIGHLY imaginative and is very much a story teller and into imaginative play.  It's endless. 

As far as educational toys...I've never been really hardcore about toys.  The toys that held her interest were usually toys that coincided with whatever developmental thing she had going on - pouring, stacking, sorting, building.  As with reading, I'm not going to keep her back from trying new things and discovering/practicing new skills - but I'm not going to force them on her either.  In that way I think we'd be pretty good unschoolers.  She's pretty motivated to explore her own interests and I'd say it's served her well in school.

[bec]

I have had 2 that taught themselves to read in preschool, and one who didn't break the code until halfway through first grade.  They are all great little readers.  With my "late" (put in quotes, because, I don't think she was all that late) reader, she made a huge leap from a pre-k level of phonics to above grade level in a matter of about a month once she figured it out.  The others had big leaps of comprehension and decoding skills, but not quite that dramatic. 

As far as how this all impacted them in school, it was totally teacher dependent.  My later reader had a horrible 1st grade experience, but had an awesome reading teacher (she was in a pullout to help get her up to speed) that got how she learned, and made adjustments for her learning style.  My middle had a tough time in K because the teacher would not accept that she was bored and disengaged with the class.  The teacher promised her over and over that she was going to bring challenging work in for her, but never did (didn't even try), and, instead set her up to help the kids that needed extra help as their tutor.  It was hard for her to comprehend that these kids were having such a hard time when it was so easy for her.  It put her in an unfair position, and set up a bad dynamic with the other kids.  There wasn't enough other things to keep her occupied and happy.  We got the brunt of that at home.  My youngest, however (very different personality, for all that her reading ability was actually more advanced in K than my middle), had a wonderful, wonderful K year.  Her teacher was phenomenal.  She gave a lot of open ended assignments, which naturally create a differentiated environment that met all the kids where they were at.  She seamlessly provided meaningful instruction to all the kids.  Children that needed phonics work got it. She didn't work with Abby on learning to read because she already knew how.  She worked with Abby on her writing skills, and focusing on the written word as a means to gain information (reading to learn). 

I will make a note, though, that the thought of preventing my two early readers from learning to read is laughable.  It's like trying to stop a runaway train.  I'm just trying to make sure it stays on the rails!

[meemee]

Originally Posted by NiteNicole 

That makes no sense.  My daughter is grade levels ahead and she's fine.  Lots of kids are.  It does not necessarily follow that a child who learns to read early is going to struggle in school, nor does it mean they will be "trouble makers."

i think you are right. because in this thread i am discovering how different all the states are with what they have available for the teachers. school life can be so different for an early reader depending on which state they live in. and no it does not necessarily follow. 

i am curious about the moms' with early readers. did they get any differentiation in school? Differentiation made a huge difference in two of the worst behaved kids in dd's school. 

in the state i am there if there is no pullout or GATE programs or volunteer parents, the teachers hands are tied. they are overworked with a LOT on their plate. they can barely make it each day. ESP. in the lower grades. 

of course i am talking about regular public schools.

i probably should have said a child who is ahead of the class struggle if they get no differentiation - in a public school which is academically focused. 

[Neera]

Mine is reading and has started K. We'll see how it goes. There are so many words like 'One' that she doesn't understand the phonics of. So I think she will be ok. But since she hasn't gone yet as she was sick and it is really the start of school, we'll find out soon.

[NiteNicole]

I had a lot typed out but I don't want to give too much identifying information or get too far off topic.  I don't think I'm going to be successful. 

We are in a state in the deep south not known for it's good schools.  It's a regular public school in a suburb of a larger city.  When the school was started in the 90s, the parents had a lot of input.  Their biggest goal is to mainstream as many students as possible.  For pre K, which has limited spots, half the spaces are reserved for children with special needs and the rest need to qualify for free lunch so the families who most need those spots get them.

There is extra help in kindergarten for reading and math.  There isn't any official pull out program for early readers, but my daughter's teacher was very good at keeping her challenged.  Pull out gifted starts in first at ninety minutes a day and is a full day class starting in second.  There is also a grade between kinder and first for kids who are a little young, have discipline issues related to maturity, or just need more hands-on time with the concepts.  Some parents opt in just because, some kids are recommended and their parents opt out.  There's no stigma among the children because it's grouped with kindergarten. Due to the smaller class size, they get to do some really neat stuff and they are the "leaders" of the kindergarten hall.

The parents and PTA make our school possible.  Every special extra thing we have is a direct result of PTA fundraising and parent volunteers who keep costs down.

I volunteer a lot in the classroom and am the product of many gifted programs, from pull out to public residential.  I have known some profoundly, crazy, gifted wonder kids (I'm NOT one of them!).  I don't believe this myth that every kid with a discipline problem is just so gifted he/she is bored.  To me, it's just like any other discipline/impulse control issue.  Yes, we are all bored sometimes.  That doesn't mean we get to act out.  Sometimes you just have to learn self-control.  I think kids can have difficult impulse/discipline issues AND be profoundly gifted, but I don't think giftedness excuses or necessarily causes issues in the vast majority of kids. 

[Mommykendra]

DD1 was reading at age 3. There is nothing I could have done to stop her--short of taking away anything that had letters on it.  Kindergarten was great for her (as was preschool).  She had great teachers that catered to her strengths and weakness (so during reading time--she'd either work on writing a story, or the teacher would ask if she wanted to read stories to some other kids).  We did have a problem in first grade with her being bored (so didn't like school as much, but we just talked to the teacher and worked out things she can do at school and at home to keep her challenged and learning), but never was a trouble maker and has always been near the top of her class.

DS1 was reading at age 4.  I'm not even sure when he started reading because it just seemed to slowly emerge and where DD1 would prefer to read herself, DS1 prefers to be read to.  One day, we were at the library and I asked him what book he wanted and he told me by reading the title.  He is very good at phonetics, but struggles with sight words and words that don't follow the rules.  He's been in Kindergarten for 3 weeks and I'm certain his teacher has no idea he knows how to read.  He's loving school even though it's very much things he already knows.

So to answer your question--I think it's only a disadvantage if you let it be and don't advocate for your child's academic needs

[MamaPrincess]

this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracking_(education)

[Mummoth]

There is so much more to being a reader than understanding what the strings of symbols on a page mean. In early years, I think it's much more important for a child to enjoy the storytelling, have that be a relaxing activity, than to actually do the reading themselves. My son was a late reader, he was in a special reading program in grade 1 and part of grade 2 that completely and utterly failed to teach him anything. I pulled him out of the program part way through grade 2. The only help he got with reading after that was a notepad in the bathroom, where I'd draw a picture with a caption and he'd fill it in (mostly stuff like a person saying "I hope no birds come and poop on my head" and of course that's exactly what he'd draw) He pretty much miraculously figured out how to read over the summer. I think 'teaching' a child to read before they're ready is very similar to trying to force a baby who isn't capable of it yet to crawl or walk. Going through the motions with the baby every day might make the pieces fall into place for them a week sooner than they would have otherwise... but not months. 

[pek64]

It seems some posters fall into the 'they don't learn unless it's hard/work' group while others believe children learn best when they're enthusiastic or having fun.

I don't think there are advantages or disadvantages for early readers. Everyone is different, and the focus on math and reading, not to mention comparing children to each other, ... well we all do it from time to time, but it's our insecurities, not our children's abilities at the center.

[meemee]

Originally Posted by NiteNicole 

I don't believe this myth that every kid with a discipline problem is just so gifted he/she is bored.  To me, it's just like any other discipline/impulse control issue.  Yes, we are all bored sometimes.  That doesn't mean we get to act out.  Sometimes you just have to learn self-control.  I think kids can have difficult impulse/discipline issues AND be profoundly gifted, but I don't think giftedness excuses or necessarily causes issues in the vast majority of kids. 

no not every. 

however every kid whose education needs are not being met (which is so in our public schools in our district) whether they are gifted or not (ones who need some help or services - not special needs) i have found have issues. issues in the form of trouble makers, or la di da dreamers or self esteem issues. many of those kids are thought of as lacking executive skill, when really it is a case of either being bored out of their mind OR totally overwhelmed.  

and no no no. i absolutely DO NOT expect k and first graders to learn self-control. for that matter even 2nd and 3rd graders. perhaps when they are a little older. 6 hours of torture can be pretty hard on the kids. 

but yeah - trouble kids does not mean gifted kids. trouble kids mean usually kids whose educational needs are not being met. 

[KCMichigan]

Originally Posted by meemee 

and no no no. i absolutely DO NOT expect k and first graders to learn self-control. for that matter even 2nd and 3rd graders. perhaps when they are a little older. 6 hours of torture can be pretty hard on the kids. 

Wow-- I taught Preschool (and public school) and expected age-approriate levels of self-control. That was in kids as young as 3. Would I expect the same self-control in a 3 year old as a 7 year old-- no. But in order to prevent chaos and function in a group setting, children must learn some self-control.

Preschoolers learn a lot of self-control through practice, gentle modeling, and repetition. As well as role play or book explorations. It would be a mess if they all rushed to the snack table and grabbed food. They learn to be patient until it is served (however the facility deems appropriate for the group size and food being served) and/or to help serve themselves and wait their turn. Is it easy? No. But they do learn. Same with hitting/shoving/biting/screaming-- all are developmentally appropriate for a 3/4 year old, but as a teacher part of the learning process is helping children learn more socially appropriate ways to express their emotions or how to recognize the emotions that lead to those behaviors. They also start to learn empathy and compassion. Understanding ones own feelings help children learn to not only regulate their own emotions/behavior, but to help their peers do so also. Preschools should be active places that encourage children to explore the world around them in a supportive and structured (not academically- but routine) way.Preschools can also learn to clean up after themselves in an age-appropriate way (both play messes and meal/snacks) that is a form of self-control. They have to learn to not just walk away from a mess and/or the impulse that says ' I dont want to pick that up!". Will they need adult guidance at that age, yes- but it does take some form of self-control to do those tasks instead of just doing whatever they want.

Even at home, young children have to learn self-control. Touching the oven (as pretty as it may be) is dangerous. STOP the impulse to chase a ball into the street, it is not safe. Eat a small bite at a time to help prevent choking. Grabbing people can make them upset and hurt. And on and on...

If my own childrens  2nd grade class had a room full of kids with no self-control all the time(kids all talking all the time, not following directions,no lines or waiting, pushing/grabbing, etc) I would be appalled. Kids that age can and should learn how take turns, wait, line-up, try to remember to raise their hand to speak, not make noise while teacher speaks, listen and follow directions, etc. Will they do it all the time- no. But it is a learning curve and each year self-control should improve. Also, the demands on self-control required should be fit to group of children and adjusted for children that may be younger or still working toward developmentally appropriate self-control. The kids this age also need freedom to move about in age-appropriate ways and participate in active, physical play daily.

Do some kids need more than time that others to develop self-control. Yes. Do some kids need modifications to a regular grade expectation to be successful, yes. But still a learning curve unique to each child should be there in goals of developing self-control.

My own kids never viewed school as '6 hours of torture' . Nor when they were 3/4/5 did they view preschool as a hardship, nor were the expectations unreasonable. The few times expectations expected for age were not met, they were adjusted for my children as individuals. But,even with the adjustments-- they were expected to grow and move forward in all areas, including self control. They have always loved school and the teachers we have worked with have been supportive and caring.

but yeah - trouble kids does not mean gifted kids. trouble kids mean usually kids whose educational needs are not being met. 

True but sometimes educational needs cant be meet until children have basic needs met such as shelter, safety (both physical and emotional), and hunger. Some kiddos (not all by any means) are troubled and have behavioral concerns due to other issues. Those concerns led them to not be able to attend to educational needs until they are directly addressed.

A hungry child or a child that is terrified they are in danger (emotionally or physically) or a tired child will not be able to focus on educational needs until their basic needs are fullfilled. I have worked with students that really were more focused on if they would have dinner that night and that led them to really have a hard time placing importance on letter sounds/ social studies lessons, or spelling words--- even if all the work was at the correct academic level.

[meemee]

KC i dont know how to quote you. 

so here goes on self control. i was replying to NiteNichols reference to self-control. of course everyone is expected to have self control. THAT is a given. but self-control under difficult circumstances. NO!!! when kids are bored and overwhelmed and you expect them to show self control and not act out - nope i dont expect them to have self control to that degree. we even had a boy in ps who acted out and had to be taken out because the teachers wouldnt allow any accomodation just for him. perhaps your kids did not view school as torture but there are many who do. and to expect those kids to have self control when they are trying really hard to cope is unfair. 

and yes trouble kids could mean a lot of things. including unsafe or abusive family background. hungry kids? what about free school bfasts and lunches? in the school district next to us which has a huge migrant and homeless population children suffering due to hunger is not an issue. worry about their family yes. but hunger?

there are plenty of kids who are really just tolerate school.

[KCMichigan]

Originally Posted by meemee 

 what about free school bfasts and lunches? in the school district next to us which has a huge migrant and homeless population children suffering due to hunger is not an issue. worry about their family yes. but hunger?

The last school I worked in had plenty of kiddos on free br/lunch. It had a very mobile population with kids coming in/out of the system everyday. There were plenty of hungry kids.

1. The portion is the same for a kindergartener as a 5th grader.....nutritional needs are much different for a 5 yr old and an 11 year old!   2. They are not terribly good (not taste, but from a balanced meal point of view). Our area has made an effort to make them more nutritious, but still breakfast is often a sugary cereal,  juice, and a chocolate milk. Not really a good high protein food available. Lots of carbs,salt, and preservatives/syrups.   3. Those kiddos often would not eat much at home for dinner-- so school food was the main source of meals.   4. sometimes the kids came late and did not get a chance to get breakfast, etc. 5. Sometimes the kids would hoard food in pockets or backpacks to 'save for later' or a sibling at home that was not school age.

So YES there are plenty of hungry kids out there. What about weekends or holidays?? 

there are plenty of kids who are really just tolerate school.

I agree that some kids just tolerate school. But there is a difference between toleration and torture. 

It is unfortunate that some kids just tolerate school. A good school and positive school culture will make school interesting and should be engaging to most students (not every student will enjoy every subject, everyday). I work with kiddos that have unique learning needs and most of them dislike the portions that are difficult (reading, writing, etc) or struggle with being different from their peers-- but the classrooms I have taught and/worked in have all worked hard to make the kids feel engaged and learning at a level that is appropriate for them- they learn a lot more and retain it by being an active participant in their schooling.

A good teacher can make a big big big difference in  year for a child being bored, tolerating school, and enjoying it. Honestly, yes- there are a some teachers out there that (like any profession) are burnt out and really dont try to adjust for each child. But the vast majority of the teachers I know work hard to try to meet all the kids needs in their classroom-- they show support, care, encouragement, and compassion to their students.

[mamazee]

My older daughter started Kindergarten reading very very well, and writing quite a bit too. She didn't have any problems as her school provided tons of differentiation. I don't think it's a disadvantage, but I don't think it's an advantage either. I don't think it matters whether kids start reading at 3 or 6. Learning to read earlier doesn't necessarily mean learning to read better, and it certainlly doesn't mean enjoying reading more. I think adults should follow their lead and neither push them nor hold them back, so long as they don't wait so long to learn to read that it's really holding them back in school.

[ollyoxenfree]

Originally Posted by MamaPrincess 

this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracking_(education)

Have you or your children attended a school that engages in tracking? 

My children did and I have concerns about how such a system is implemented when tracking into classes is based on achievement of grades in early years. Grades aren't necessarily a good assessment of learning ability, so there's a problem with accurate identification. Then there are also real problems with early pigeon-holing children into a rigid classifications as successful students or hopeless cases.  It can be difficult to alter a prejudice about a child and move them out of their designated class. It also tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy - the successful students believe that they are smart so they work harder and the students in the "dumb" classes give up because after all, what's the point? it's already been decided that they aren't "top class" material. There is also more stereotyping and bullying between students. 

This is separate from systems that offer programs for intellectually gifted learners who have been identified using psycho-educational assessments (IQ testing etc.) to determine learning ability, as opposed to achievement. My children have attended these kinds of programs too. I believe that they are valuable. They are different from old-fashioned tracking systems where there are the "smart classes" and the "dumb classes" and a range of classes in between for each grade. 

[pek64]

Originally Posted by ollyoxenfree 

Have you or your children attended a school that engages in tracking? 

My children did and I have concerns about how such a system is implemented when tracking into classes is based on achievement of grades in early years. Grades aren't necessarily a good assessment of learning ability, so there's a problem with accurate identification. Then there are also real problems with early pigeon-holing children into a rigid classifications as successful students or hopeless cases.  It can be difficult to alter a prejudice about a child and move them out of their designated class. It also tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy - the successful students believe that they are smart so they work harder and the students in the "dumb" classes give up because after all, what's the point? it's already been decided that they aren't "top class" material. There is also more stereotyping and bullying between students. 

This is separate from systems that offer programs for intellectually gifted learners who have been identified using psycho-educational assessments (IQ testing etc.) to determine learning ability, as opposed to achievement. My children have attended these kinds of programs too. I believe that they are valuable. They are different from old-fashioned tracking systems where there are the "smart classes" and the "dumb classes" and a range of classes in between for each grade. 

The 'gifted' classes are the 'smart' classes, and those not 'gifted' are 'dumb'.