Son is Finding School Too Easy!

I have discussed the subject of children who are too high academic ability for their year group at school more times than I can keep count of…

A teacher (who also works as a private tutor and homeschooled his children) told me that state schools are a 'bus' type system. All children must learn the subject material at the time when it is delivered to them in accordance with the curriculum. Teachers can provide extra work of the same ability for children who have completed their assigned work, but are limited when it comes to more academically advanced work. After all, a primary school does not have the books and educational resources to teach subjects to secondary school level!

He also stated that most teachers don't like it when children jump ahead of the curriculum (in any subject) for their year group. Such children are a headache for teachers and they often end up exhibiting behavioural problems and general laziness because they find the work assigned for their year group unstimulating and unchallenging. This inevitably leads to a poor relationship with their classmates, or even results in them becoming targets for bullies.

He is also of the opinion that jumping ahead of the curriculum – either by parents teaching their children, the use of private tutors, or children learning material themselves from reading books and watching videos – is actually a dumb thing to do because their school is going to teach that material in the future anyway. Why learn Y8 material in Y5? Why not just wait until your child is in Y8? His advice for parents of high academic ability children who have jumped ahead of the curriculum is to deliberately slow down their learning and encourage them to play sports, watch films, engage in social activities, go to theme parks, rather than studying. These parents of high academic ability children should also spare a thought for the thousands of less fortunate children across the country in the same year group who are academically behind the curriculum, and the challenges teachers face when it comes to improving their attainment, rather than 'selfishly' thinking only about their own 'clever' kid.

Schools don't teach social skills and life skills. The purpose of school is to teach academic subjects (like English, maths, science, history etc.) and the purpose of a teacher is to deliver the curriculum. It is the responsibility of parents to teach their children social skills at home in exactly the same way it is the responsibility of parents to teach their children to tie shoelaces; eat with cutlery; ride a bike; use the washing machine without ruining the clothes inside it; set the burglar alarm; or feed the pet ferret. It is a myth, or even an outright lie, that children need to go to school to learn social skills or conversely that children who don't go to school won't learn social skills. This is because social skills are learned at home and taught by parents, not learned at school and taught by teachers. Now it's clear as day why the teachers at your son's school are only happy to 'manage' him rather than encouraging him to excel in social skills. It's simply not their responsibility, but your responsibility. Teachers who have to spend time teaching social skills and life skills to children see themselves as having to pick up the pieces of failed parenting. It doesn't matter whether it's having to teach about unwritten rules and non-verbal communication to a kid with Asperger Syndrome or tying a shoelace. It's outside of their job description. Remember that teachers have Ofsted breathing down their neck, and even teaching unions can act as 'bullies' preventing teachers from helping the children that they teach in matters outside of the curriculum because they aren't being paid for it.

I'm well aware that these words are not very comforting to the OP, or may even come across as condescending, but they are the bitter truth from an inside source. A teacher who has the courage to speak the truth.

He also adds that state schools are designed for the 95%. If a state school fails to provide for the remaining 5% of children after their parents have made a reasonable number of requests for services, then such parents should not stress out and waste their lives trying to fight the system, but instead find (but not fight for) an alternative educational venue, even if happens to be YouTube.

I know exactly how your son feels. I was learning about quadratic equations and trigonometry at home in Y5 when the rest of the class was trying to get their head around converting fractions to decimals and vice versa.

The reality of state schools is that when it comes to sports or music then the sky is the limit for children, but there is no advantage in excelling in any other subject above what is expected for their year group. A highly talented sportsman or musician is a superhero. A highly talented mathematician with AS who can do Y10 work at the age of 10 is a problem child.

I think your friend sounds like an idiot ... I'd suffix that with 'no disrespect' but I realise that would be almost tautological.

I do agree that schools purpose is to educate, not socialise, kids and certainly not to babysit them. I'm not convinced that home life provides sufficient social stimulation and exposure for kids though. Children need to interact with others outside of the family with out their parents close supervision. However for autistic children I'm not convinced they get that at school anyway or least not to the needed degree. We really need to separate socialisation and education and accept that for autistic kids, while they are both important, they may need to be delivered by very different pathways / systems.

He is a professional, qualified, and experienced teacher with a degree in computer science. He previously worked in software development and IT before training to become a teacher where he has taught at both primary school and secondary school level, in a SEN school, and a PRU, as well as a private tutor. Therefore I'm quite confident that he knows the state school system very well. He also has some knowledge of AS and is highly critical of this newfangled DSM-5 as he believes that (from the perspective of a teacher) AS is distinctive enough to be a condition in its own right rather than one that is submerged into the confusing mess of autism.

He says that the reality of the matter is that 99% of the time SEN services are to improve the academic attainment of children who are below what is expected for them in the main curriculum subjects for their year group, as opposed to the provision of more academically advanced material for children who have jumped ahead of the curriculum for their year group. His personal advice to the parents of high ability children who have jumped ahead of the curriculum for their year group is to either find another school which caters for them; become homeschooled; or (best of all) just slow down. Tell the kid who has jumped ahead of the curriculum for their year group to take a hiatus from studying and go and learn something outside of the school curriculum - like card games – or play sports.

In his opinion, the system catches up with children. It's commonplace for a 6 year old to have the knowledge expected of an 8 year old, or even an 8 year old to have the knowledge expected of a 10 year old, but it's rare to find a 14 year old to have the knowledge of a 16 year old (the full GCSE course), and extremely rare to find a 16 year old to have the knowledge of an 18 year old (the full A Level course). Even so, the number of 'clever' kids who have jumped ahead of the curriculum for their year group has definitely increased in recent years due to a the combination of educational materials being more readily available than decades ago (think YouTube videos) and parents who take academics more seriously and push their kids rather than letting them just muddle along. Sadly, the state school system cannot effectively cater for such children as it's a higher priority for teachers to improve the academic attainment of children who are below what is expected for them in the main curriculum subjects for their year group, and get them up to an acceptable standard. It was commonplace for secondary schools to prioritise getting the low and middle ability students up to C grade standard whilst ignoring the higher academic ability students who are aiming for the A* grade.

The only times that children are able to interact with each other at school are break times and in after school clubs and societies. There is no time for any idle chatter in lessons any more, and teachers really detest children who try to become the centre of attention in a lesson. He knows that one reason why children who desire to become a centre of attention in lessons is because they don't really have any (good) friends, and they struggle to interact with other children at break time. Even in tutor group period children can't really talk to each other as the time now has to be used productively. For example: showing videos about drugs and knife crime. Ofsted really has taken the fun out of school and has been detrimental to a holistic education.

The same teacher praised the decision of a parent to home school their son with AS after admitting that if he had problems with literacy or numeracy then all the help in the world would be available at school, but the school could offer nothing to help with problems resulting from AS or teach him the required social skills.

Time will surely tell whether AI replaces teachers...

It's been prophesised since the mid 1980s, if not earlier.

Anyway, it doesn't really provide much helpful advice to the OP.

Peter said:

Why should I give that any weight. I care about the system we ought to have, and how we can make the system we have more like it.

Peter said:

I prefer to think of my self as a modern radical in the sense that the term was used around 1800.

I should have known.

My stance when it comes to liberals and radicals is that they are airy fairy idealists who live in cloud cuckoo land as opposed to people who can come up with sensible workable solutions.

I'm now wondering what the OP thinks of all of this. She hasn't returned.

Do you have any serious recommendations for her rather than numerous ideals about what state schools should be like?

Peter said:

Well the point of things like EHCPs (the kind of things NAS campaigns for) is they are meant to come with the funding to implement them.

And they are dastardly difficult to obtain as a consequence.

I'm actually doubtful whether I could have obtained an EHCP, had they existed back in the 1990s, with an ICD-10 diagnosis of AS because I didn't have speech and language delays, and neither did I require extra help with maths, English, and science.

That's why teachers have recommended using Pupil Premium money instead. It's quick and simple as long as the school has (enough of) it.

There have been instances where schools have used Pupil Premium money to buy tablets and laptops for children with AS who struggle with handwriting, and to employ teaching assistants to help them at break time, because they were unable to obtain an EHCP.

Arran said:

but it's the reality of the system we currently have.

Why should I give that any weight. I care about the system we ought to have, and how we can make the system we have more like it.

Arran said:

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm arguing with member of the Green Party...

I prefer to think of my self as a modern radical in the sense that the term was used around 1800.

All I have done is disseminated information about the reality of state schools from an experienced teacher. It's not comforting it's hard to stomach in places, but it's the reality of the system we currently have.

I don't agree it's how state schools should function myself.

However, you seem to have some cloud cuckoo land view of how schools should function and what they should provide, along with rejecting the view that parents are currently responsible for teaching social skills.

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm arguing with member of the Green Party...

Arran said:

Also outside of school.

Well strictly speaking that's a police matter isn't it? Obviously better to resolve it through mediation etc but I've no issue sending persistent bullies to court or giving them CBOs or injunctions. (especially when the bullying is physical which should be more clear cut to the young mind I would say)

Peter said:

In a school setting? Listen to your self you're basically now acting as an apologist for bullying

Also outside of school.

You are an apologist for bullying.

Arran said:

I'm starting to think that you are not serious in this discussion and you just want a big argument for the sake of it.

Believe me I find your position equally incredulous.

Peter said:

Yes and thats a big part of learning. Learning the hard way. The advantage of school of course is people can't walk away far. Memories fade unless some one does something truly horrific. Actually one of the things we don't teach these days, a lost cultural value as it were, is the value of second chances and giving people leeway to learn from their mistakes. That's a social skill this recent generation seems to have forgotten.

I'm starting to think that you are not serious in this discussion and you just want a big argument for the sake of it.

Perhaps your idea of learning the hard way is learning by being bullied. The only thing a bullied person learns is how to be a victim. They are never told the reason why they are bullied.

Arran said:

the chance is that they will kick his head in for being an annoying jerk or even a socially offensive individual.

In a school setting? Listen to your self you're basically now acting as an apologist for bullying. Or at least suggesting that it's inevitable fact of school life. If teachers can't stop their disabled student getting 'kicked in the head' really they should resign, the profession would be better with out them.

Peter said:

The only effective way I know for autistic people to learn social skills is by repeatedly throwing them into social situations and giving them the licence to learn by making a huge number of mistakes.

Unfortunately mistakes with social skills alienate, offend, and hurt people. The damage can stick and be remembered by people for many years to come. Unless the person is surrounded by many patient and kind hearted people who will explain to them where they have gone wrong and what the correct way is, then the chance is that they will kick his head in for being an annoying jerk or even a socially offensive individual.

There really isn't a such thing as a licence to learn by making a huge number or mistakes.

Arran said:

I'm sure you can learn that from a video...

Kindly direct me to this video. When I first really started to realise I was autistic I started studying to try and compensate. NLP, psychology, I've read a lot of books. You know what I've learned from them? Virtually nothing. They all assume you have some basic instinct for reading people to start with. Show me this magical video please. The closest thing I've seen are those dreadful pickup artist videos that I just can't take seriously.

Arran said:

If a person makes a social error then acquaintances are alienated or offended, so 99% of the time they either just walk away from the person as if they are a bad smell

Yes and thats a big part of learning. Learning the hard way. The advantage of school of course is people can't walk away far. Memories fade unless some one does something truly horrific. Actually one of the things we don't teach these days, a lost cultural value as it were, is the value of second chances and giving people leeway to learn from their mistakes. That's a social skill this recent generation seems to have forgotten.

Peter said:

Knowing how to talk people round and get your way is a social skill,

I'm sure you can learn that from a video...

You can only learn social skills in person from a good friend or a decent parent who is willing to explain them and provide constructive feedback. It's hard to learn social skills from acquaintances as they don't provide the constructive feedback required. If a person makes a social error then acquaintances are alienated or offended, so 99% of the time they either just walk away from the person as if they are a bad smell or (worst) they hit them. A good friend or decent parent will explain how they should have correctly handled the social situation in order that they don't repeat the social error.

Arran said:

Having children learn from their peer group is like the blind leading the blind. Children can easily pick up bad habits or end up exhibiting undesirable behaviour from the influence of their peer group

You are confusing social skills with behaviour. Knowing how to talk people round and get your way is a social skill, knowing when you shouldn't is a behaviour. For autistic people in particular I feel the former is much more of an issue.

Peter said:

from there peers and friends outside of the family. The social skills that are really important in life tend to be picked up during adolescence by interacting with people outside of the family.

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that.

The best teacher is somebody who is very knowledgeable about the subject.

Having children learn from their peer group is like the blind leading the blind. Children can easily pick up bad habits or end up exhibiting undesirable behaviour from the influence of their peer group, because they don't know better. This is well known amongst latchkey children and children neglected by their parents who rely on their peer group for everything. In contrast, the children who have good social skills tend to have parents who seriously take responsibility for nurturing them.

Secondary school has created a youth subculture with its own peculiar array of social skills, many of which are not applicable (or even desirable) for life as an adult.

There is increasing interest in having children with AS move directly from being children to adults, cutting out the short but messy teenage life in all but an age, by focusing on the social skills required for life as an adult and life in the real world rather than those for life as a teenager in a secondary school.

Peter said:

I've often had people remark that homeschooled children (of which I am one) come off as odd. but there there is a chicken and the egg thing going on. Where they homeschooled because they were odd or odd because they were homeschooled.

There are 1001 reasons why children are homeschooled. My experience of homeschooled teenagers is that, on average, they are better at relating to adults than state school counterparts are (regardless of their academic intelligence) who often struggle to relate to people other than their mates of a similar age.

Arran said:

GCSEs with coursework are also difficult to take as a private candidate whereas all exam GCSEs are easy to take.

Which is why I referred to key stages prior to GCSE (1 to 3). They should be assessed on course work. I feel kids are over examined but since course work can be spread throughout the year its less pressure for younger kids. progression from keystage 1 to 2 etc should not be automatic but occur when the student has completed the full compliment of course work to a pass standard. (simple pass/fail grading no marks) Also they should be divided by subject. So a student could progress to key stage 3 science but remain in key stage 2 english because they've not completed the key stage 2 english course work requirements yet. ... Personally at GCSE level I feel exams are generally better. But for simple pass / fail assessment course work is adequate.

Also in this sytem its theoretically posable to go from key stage 1 to starting GCSEs in 3 years.

Arran said:

Unfortunately mass public services cannot cater for ever single oddball individual and extreme end of the bell curve customer.

Yet they must. That is the law. All children must have the option of state education. And for those children who have EHCPs the local authority must meet the needs in the plan irrespective of cost, even if this means cutting services elsewhere.

Arran said:

Easier said than done. To cite an extreme example: can a primary school be reasonably expected to teach Y10 topics in maths, science, foreign languages etc. to ONE very high ability 10 year old?

No the obvious solution is to send them to secondary school. At least a few days a week. If classes are not about socialisation as you claim what does it matter what the ages of their class mates are?

Arran said:

Do state schools in any other countries really nurture children's strengths?

I wouldn't know. And tbh I doubt you or your friend know much about how non english speaking countries education systems vary.

Arran said:

Are you some hardline secularist? I agree that RS should be optional as a GCSE subject, but even I had RS lessons in primary school back in the 1990s.

I don't think anything should be compulsory unless its a prerequist for learning other things. So maybe english, maths and these days possibly IT. Education should be driven by the interests of young people.

Peter said:

Personally I favour the complete modularisation of all key stages up until GCSE with progression determined by coursework rather than age.

My local AS support group has discussed coursework vs all exam GCSEs to death!

The conclusion reached is that many children with AS struggle with coursework due its open ended nature, its lack of structure, difficulty with organisation and time management, and issues with presentation. All exam in the main GCSE subjects is simpler and more beneficial for them, and  coursework should be confined only to creative type subjects such as art or D&T.

GCSEs with coursework are also difficult to take as a private candidate whereas all exam GCSEs are easy to take.

Peter said:

The imposition of optional blended learning on all schools where students may study remotely or at multiple schools to maximise the variety of course options available.

Online education adds in a new dimension but the state school system, prior to the Covid lockdown, has always been centred around classroom based learning.

I'm not quite sure how your concept will be implemented in practice. It could probably be trialled with foreign languages to enable children to study a language that the school they attend doesn't offer.

Peter said:

Personally I favour the complete modularisation of all key stages up until GCSE with progression determined by coursework rather than age.

My local AS support group has discussed coursework vs all exam GCSEs to death!

The conclusion reached is that many children with AS struggle with coursework due its open ended nature, its lack of structure, difficulty with organisation and time management, and issues with presentation. All exam in the main GCSE subjects is simpler and more beneficial for them, and  coursework should be confined only to creative type subjects such as art or D&T.

GCSEs with coursework are also difficult to take as a private candidate whereas all exam GCSEs are easy to take.

Peter said:

The imposition of optional blended learning on all schools where students may study remotely or at multiple schools to maximise the variety of course options available.

Online education adds in a new dimension but the state school system, prior to the Covid lockdown, has always been centred around classroom based learning.

I'm not quite sure how your concept will be implemented in practice. It could probably be trialled with foreign languages to enable children to study a language that the school they attend doesn't offer.

Arran said:

GCSEs with coursework are also difficult to take as a private candidate whereas all exam GCSEs are easy to take.

Which is why I referred to key stages prior to GCSE (1 to 3). They should be assessed on course work. I feel kids are over examined but since course work can be spread throughout the year its less pressure for younger kids. progression from keystage 1 to 2 etc should not be automatic but occur when the student has completed the full compliment of course work to a pass standard. (simple pass/fail grading no marks) Also they should be divided by subject. So a student could progress to key stage 3 science but remain in key stage 2 english because they've not completed the key stage 2 english course work requirements yet. ... Personally at GCSE level I feel exams are generally better. But for simple pass / fail assessment course work is adequate.

Also in this sytem its theoretically posable to go from key stage 1 to starting GCSEs in 3 years.