Higher or Ordinary Maths streaming after a home schooled 1st year

AmberGold

As per the title we received our sons end of year maths exam result (52%) and he’s being streamed into OL next year. We understand the cutoff for higher level was 58%.

He’s a bright boy but home schooling didn’t suit him, he did well in primary and this years grade was a disappointment although we made little of it.

Personally I feel it’s not good practice given the COVID disruption on children’s education to stream now and they should be given to at least Christmas. Am I correct here?

Random sample

What did his teacher think? When was the cut off grade decided? It may have been decided based on spaces in the classes, rather than a predecided mark, in which case you might not be able to change it.

My own feeling on it would be that 4 months of a very long higher level maths course would be missed if they wait until Christmas to split them.

If you believe your child is capable of higher level then as his parent you can insist he goes into a higher level class so long as there is space for him in one.

They have all been in the same position with covid though, so I don’t know if you’ll be able to argue that point with the school. If they have 3 classes of 30 in higher level, and 90 kids got a higher mark than your son, it’s unlikely they will be able to accommodate him at higher level.

Bottom line, it depends on the school and their circumstances this year.

rainbowtrout

Christmas of second year is far too late to stream for maths. The higher level course is long, it would never be completed in time. I would say that in most schools a common summer test is given at the end of first year and if there are 30 places in the HL class then the top thirty students in the test get put into that class, so there simply may not be room for him.

Without knowing the details of how the school streams, you’ll have to discuss it with the school.

lawred2

Many years ago, I didn't exactly pull up trees in first year maths. Teacher tried to 'stream' me (drop me) into ordinary level. My parents were having none of it.

I finished with an A2 in the HL leaving cert and went on to do electronic engineering. Software engineer now. All of which would likely have been rendered impossible by a decision made on exams I did when I was 12.

I think first year is incredibly early to be making such decisions. It's not like your kid was that far off making the "cut off" either.

AmberGold

We'll take it up with the school and and let you know how goes. Thanks for the replies all!

rainbowtrout

lawred2 wrote: »

Many years ago, I didn't exactly pull up trees in first year maths. Teacher tried to 'stream' me (drop me) into ordinary level. My parents were having none of it.

I finished with an A2 in the HL leaving cert and went on to do electronic engineering. Software engineer now. All of which would likely have been rendered impossible by a decision made on exams I did when I was 12.

I think first year is incredibly early to be making such decisions. It's not like your kid was that far off making the "cut off" either.

It’s not about dropping a student to OL. It’s about capacity in a classroom and not having enough resources to have two HL classes usually.

Treppen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It’s not about dropping a student to OL. It’s about capacity in a classroom and not having enough resources to have two HL classes usually.

I disagree, you shouldn't deny a child a chance at higher level based on 1st year tests and school decision, especially not this year.

I've seen a couple of students who stuck in there with around 50% in 1st year all the way up to LC Higher, granted they didn't get the H1 and it was tough, but they did the work and passed the exam (with the much needed bonus points). Plus I presume it helped them in STEM courses they chose.

Maybe based on subject choice and restriction of places yes you can cut off. But not on levels.

I don't know how schools can get away with this (telling parents that their child "HAS TO" move to Ordinary level without any parental involvement). If we told parents this in our school it would be lawyer-up time. We can only strongly advise, and if a student wants to stay and fail all the way up to LC, they can... constitution says 'parent is the primary educator' is the byline.

Maybe it would be helpful if the OP mentioned the size of the year group. Department inspectors for maths wouldn't be very happy if there were only a small % doing HL out of a large 1st year cohort. In 2nd year we'd have 4 HL classes and 1 OL... and even at that, a maths inspector said we should have had those students who were getting top marks in OL sitting in HL classes !!!

Maybe it's a small school with only one higher and one ordinary class, but I think it's rare enough to have only 1 HL class in an average size school of 500+ Unless it's in a socially deprived area or something. Maybe someone can set me straight going by their experience.

Pringles123

I do think it has to be said that maths next year may be more rushed than usual for all groups bar incoming first years. You will see on another recent forum that there is no reduction in the maths syllabus due to covid and as a result it has to be finished and catch up has to be done.
If you're child is struggling be aware that more resources than usual may need to be put in place to help him work at a faster pace than usual and a level higher than they have worked at before.

I do agree with others that its a bit early to stream first years especially considering the year we have had. My school is planning to stream second years at Halloween.
I think you should keep an eye on your child's ability in algebra. In my opinion its one of the most important topics in first year and would definitely be a good argument for HL if they can do that topic.

rainbowtrout

Treppen wrote: »

I disagree, you shouldn't deny a child a chance at higher level based on 1st year tests and school decision, especially not this year.

I've seen a couple of students who stuck in there with around 50% in 1st year all the way up to LC Higher, granted they didn't get the H1 and it was tough, but they did the work and passed the exam (with the much needed bonus points). Plus I presume it helped them in STEM courses they chose.

Maybe based on subject choice and restriction of places yes you can cut off. But not on levels.

I don't know how schools can get away with this (telling parents that their child "HAS TO" move to Ordinary level without any parental involvement). If we told parents this in our school it would be lawyer-up time. We can only strongly advise, and if a student wants to stay and fail all the way up to LC, they can... constitution says 'parent is the primary educator' is the byline.

Maybe it would be helpful if the OP mentioned the size of the year group. Department inspectors for maths wouldn't be very happy if there were only a small % doing HL out of a large 1st year cohort. In 2nd year we'd have 4 HL classes and 1 OL... and even at that, a maths inspector said we should have had those students who were getting top marks in OL sitting in HL classes !!!

Maybe it's a small school with only one higher and one ordinary class, but I think it's rare enough to have only 1 HL class in an average size school of 500+ Unless it's in a socially deprived area or something. Maybe someone can set me straight going by their experience.

It wouldn’t be unusual in smaller schools and there are plenty of those around. Schools also don’t have unlimited resources. Maybe the class is already full with 30 students and this lad is not student no. 31 on the list but no. 34 or 35?

He has a right to sit HL maths but not an automatic right to be in a class that’s already full. The OP hasn’t given any details about class sizes.

Treppen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It wouldn’t be unusual in smaller schools and there are plenty of those around. Schools also don’t have unlimited resources. Maybe the class is already full with 30 students and this lad is not student no. 31 on the list but no. 34 or 35?

He has a right to sit HL maths but not an automatic right to be in a class that’s already full. The OP hasn’t given any details about class sizes.

Fair enough , if the class is oversubscribed but they should do everything in their power to split it and create two classes... Or manage it better.

We don't create an OL till after the " Big October Test " in 2nd year.
Once September of 2nd year hits, the pace, home-work and difficulty ramps up significantly, that way it's not that much of a shock to parents and students, by then most students who are struggling are more than relieved to move.

It's a little bit messy but works out better than a letter or report card during the Summer at the end of 1st year. Probably even worse is that there's no one there to appeal to or discuss it with in June / July. That's some cold nasty **** right there.

RealJohn

Being good at sums in primary school is not the same as being good at maths in secondary school.
There tends to be a fair correlation there, but one is not necessarily indicative of the other.

Treppen

RealJohn wrote: »

Being good at sums in primary school is not the same as being good at maths in secondary school.
There tends to be a fair correlation there, but one is not necessarily indicative of the other.

Ya there's no doubt there's a divergence once secondary school hits. I'v heard it at countless PTMs about how great the kid was in primary.
But even something as small as a change in environment from primary to secondary can throw a child in 1st year. Also , some kids only come good after 3rd year exam papers (I certainly didn't figure it out till much later in life).
A cut off of 58% during a pandemic seems harsh to me. Could they not just wait till 2nd year October like a lot of schools.

noplacehere

RealJohn wrote: »

Being good at sums in primary school is not the same as being good at maths in secondary school.
There tends to be a fair correlation there, but one is not necessarily indicative of the other.

This is a very good way of phrasing it and it is so true. Even more so with project maths. Parents can get a real land in first/second year.

For what it’s worth we wouldn’t be allowed to ‘make’ a student drop down. And our cut off has never been that high. We would usually ring all parents under 40 to discuss and see if they will move. This can all be an absolute nightmare for the teachers though and can end up with 31-32 in a HL room or a teacher trying to split themselves in two teaching HL/OL which never works in my opinion.

This approach causes problems for us and resources get poured into students who were not ever capable of HL in the first place. It’s now coming back to bite us because students who were dragged through by the skin of their teeth at JC (or by predicted grades…) are now insisting on taking HL LC too. So much so that we are now looking at a 4/2 split HL to OL next year. Which is completely insane. However that’s managements stance in this case.

OP technically they cannot make him take OL is my understanding. However you need to get to the bottom of things. Be reasonable and ask why there is a cut off? Why is the cut off above 40%? How many students would have been above him?

Then you need to decide if him being in a massive class moving very quickly or in an OL class are better for him. Which will he cope better with? Which will mean he actually picks up more maths? Because ultimately all of the content for JCOL and JCHL are on the LCOL course and needed for LCHL so for me as a parent (and maths teacher) I’d want him wherever he will get the best grounding in maths

RealJohn

I would also say that while it would be better for a higher level student to be in a higher level class, there isn’t a huge difference between the ordinary and higher level courses at junior cycle, so if a kid gets a distinction at ordinary level, and had been saying all along they should be doing higher level, it will be hard to argue against allowing them to give higher level a go for leaving cert, and if they don’t get a distinction at JCOL, you can be pretty sure they wouldn’t have been able for LCHL anyway. It’s not quite that simple, but it’s a fairly safe bet all the same.

rainbowtrout

RealJohn wrote: »

I would also say that while it would be better for a higher level student to be in a higher level class, there isn’t a huge difference between the ordinary and higher level courses at junior cycle, so if a kid gets a distinction at ordinary level, and had been saying all along they should be doing higher level, it will be hard to argue against allowing them to give higher level a go for leaving cert, and if they don’t get a distinction at JCOL, you can be pretty sure they wouldn’t have been able for LCHL anyway. It’s not quite that simple, but it’s a fairly safe bet all the same.

There’s also the case where if this lad is as good as the parent says he is then in theory he should be topping the OL class in second year. If someone moves out of the HL class then there would be justification to move him up.

rainbowtrout

Treppen wrote: »

Ya there's no doubt there's a divergence once secondary school hits. I'v heard it at countless PTMs about how great the kid was in primary.
But even something as small as a change in environment from primary to secondary can throw a child in 1st year. Also , some kids only come good after 3rd year exam papers (I certainly didn't figure it out till much later in life).
A cut off of 58% during a pandemic seems harsh to me. Could they not just wait till 2nd year October like a lot of schools.

Schools can’t wait forever though and can’t have overcrowded classes on the off chance that the student comes good in third year. There is also a responsibility on the student to work

AmberGold

Some great responses here including one PM, thanks all. Teacher hasn't responded to my mail as yet btw.

RealJohn

AmberGold wrote: »

Some great responses here including one PM, thanks all. Teacher hasn't responded to my mail as yet btw.

I can’t speak for that teacher, but it’s June. If you emailed me in June, you can be fairly sure you wouldn’t be getting a reply from me until late August, unless I was feeling charitable. I don’t even check my school email more than about once a fortnight once school is out, if even that often.
If you want a response anytime soon, contact the principal.

rainbowtrout

AmberGold wrote: »

Some great responses here including one PM, thanks all. Teacher hasn't responded to my mail as yet btw.

That’s because the teacher is on holidays. I don’t answer work emails during my holidays.

Ultimately it’s the principal who will split the classes, perhaps with some input (provision of results) from teachers, but if it’s an established policy that the top 30 first years go into the HL class then all the principal has to do is pull the results from the summer tests.

AmberGold

rainbowtrout wrote: »

That’s because the teacher is on holidays. I don’t answer work emails during my holidays.

Ultimately it’s the principal who will split the classes, perhaps with some input (provision of results) from teachers, but if it’s an established policy that the top 30 first years go into the HL class then all the principal has to do is pull the results from the summer tests.

Sorry just to clarify my comment, I’m not expecting a response until / or just before he returns to school.

Treppen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

That’s because the teacher is on holidays. I don’t answer work emails during my holidays.

Ultimately it’s the principal who will split the classes, perhaps with some input (provision of results) from teachers, but if it’s an established policy that the top 30 first years go into the HL class then all the principal has to do is pull the results from the summer tests.

Seems unfair if a child only in the top 30 (>58% grade)in one school gets to do HL, and a child in another school can choose to stay in HL themselves as long as they like.

RealJohn

Treppen wrote: »

Seems unfair if a child only in the top 30 (>58% grade)in one school gets to do HL, and a child in another school can choose to stay in HL themselves as long as they like.

Life’s not fair. We have to be practical. If the resources aren’t there, they aren’t there.

rainbowtrout

Treppen wrote: »

Seems unfair if a child only in the top 30 (>58% grade)in one school gets to do HL, and a child in another school can choose to stay in HL themselves as long as they like.

Schools are not equal. They don’t all have the same resources or numbers of students. The same issues arise in 5th year when students don’t get their subject choices.

If I was minister for education I would be putting a five year plan in place (not of the Stalinist type!). Over five years reduce the pupil teacher ratio by 1 each year in both primary and secondary. The knock on effect of that would mean that schools could start by splitting core subjects like Irish, English and maths into smaller groups. There would be space in classes for whoever wanted to do HL. Students would get more attention and hopefully have better opportunities to learn. There would be less disciplinary issues. Teachers would have less class work to correct. With more teachers on staff there would be more staff to share extra curricular duties and it wouldn’t always fall to the same few people. As schools improved their offering in the core subject areas they could then look to expand their range of subjects in JC/LC. Students less likely to lose out on subject choice at LC level and would benefit in studying subjects they are interested in, in smaller classes.

But this is Ireland so none of that is ever going to happen. We’ll stick with large class sizes where there has to be a cut off point because the school can’t fit in anymore.

Treppen

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Schools are not equal. They don’t all have the same resources or numbers of students. The same issues arise in 5th year when students don’t get their subject choices.

If I was minister for education I would be putting a five year plan in place (not of the Stalinist type!). Over five years reduce the pupil teacher ratio by 1 each year in both primary and secondary. The knock on effect of that would mean that schools could start by splitting core subjects like Irish, English and maths into smaller groups. There would be space in classes for whoever wanted to do HL. Students would get more attention and hopefully have better opportunities to learn. There would be less disciplinary issues. Teachers would have less class work to correct. With more teachers on staff there would be more staff to share extra curricular duties and it wouldn’t always fall to the same few people. As schools improved their offering in the core subject areas they could then look to expand their range of subjects in JC/LC. Students less likely to lose out on subject choice at LC level and would benefit in studying subjects they are interested in, in smaller classes.

But this is Ireland so none of that is ever going to happen. We’ll stick with large class sizes where there has to be a cut off point because the school can’t fit in anymore.

If anything they're quite keen on doing away with levels altogether (universal design is the new differentiation nowadays).
Common level in everything would solve many many problems.

RealJohn

Treppen wrote: »

If anything they're quite keen on doing away with levels altogether (universal design is the new differentiation nowadays).
Common level in everything would solve many many problems.

There’s a part of me that agrees with that too. I think it would have to go hand in hand with a different perspective on results though. Rather than grades, and pass and fail, it should simply be “this grade represents how much competence you’ve demonstrated”, so 20% means you don’t know most of the course, and 80% means you do know most of the course but there are still areas you need to improve upon.
Some people will call that dumbing down and tolerance of failure, but it doesn’t have to be that.