Crofton Infant School in Towncourt Lane, Orpington, has informed parents that it is scrapping "friendship groups" used to put pupils into classes with friends from pre-school.
Headteacher Richard Sammonds said the new policy of randomly allocating children means everyone is treated "fairly and equitably".Seems reasonable. Who could obje…
Ah. Well, there’s always one, isn’t there?
Rachel Jones has a four-year-old child starting at the school in September and says she may not have chosen Crofton had she known about the change in policy beforehand.Really? That’s your criteria for choosing a school? Not the discipline record, the educational achievements, the state of the infrastructure, even?
It’s whether they can sit with their friends..?
She said: "I received a letter from the school informing me that instead my daughter will be placed with just 'one familiar face' from pre-school.
"As a mum and teacher I know how essential it is for a new starter to walk into their class and see not just one familiar face but a number of friends they like and trust.
"This is essential for their happiness and peace of mind. They have made the first precious friendships of their lives and these will be needlessly thrown aside."They’re children! They’ll get over it!
She added: "Many other parents and teachers I have spoken to share this view.
"We are not asking for a large group to join together. Just three close friends that we have selected."And if you get your way, everyone else’ll jump on board and demand the same thing, and that will cause problems. As the headteacher points out:
Defending the changes, Mr Sammonds said: "Historically the previous head had allowed parents to nominate friends to go into classes.
"That's okay if you can accommodate all parents' wishes, which we weren't able to. "The fairest way is to randomly place pupils in classes.
"(The old policy) means other people would have to slot in around these friendship groups which some people didn't feel was fair."Now, normally, I’m not in favour of a ‘one size fits all’ policy, but in this case, it seems appropriate.
10 comments:
AAAaaagh! Julia - some warning please!
The term 'friendship groups' is one I find hideously emetic, and it certainly has no place in determining school policy.
It's a fair bet the mothers involved are themselves members of a clique - watch any school gates and you'll see them and their ilk in ruthless operation.
Ten years from now, those girls will be mercilessly persecuting any female classmate who doesn't 'fit in' - unless they are given a clear message now that they must treat everyone equally.
Since the children will see each other at playtime, lunchtime, during clubs and activities, I fail to see whether it matters all that much where they do the part they have come for - learning the skills on which all future success rests.
Random allocation is at least fair - or unfair - to everybody.
However, I do think that we could usefully have much smaller class groups in primary school, at least until age 8, to get the basics set down securely and identify behaviour "isshooos" before they set in.
It would cost money but I think it would be well-spent and of benefit right across the society.
Wow, talk about instilling insecurity in your own child...why would anyone do that ?
I don't remember my own first day at Big School but I remember my children's and advice from my mum to ignore whining about having to leave old friends and nursery teachers behind, keep them positive and excited about all the new friends they were going to make and interesting things they were going to learn.
*My son didn't understand why he had to go back on Day 2 ...because he already knew everything.
We ended up in random groups at secondary school. Even though a lot of my primary school friends were there too, I made new friends, and so did most people.
Making new friends is part of growing up.
"isshooos" .. Bless you ..
BTW, I thought that was what snot-rags were for .. ;)
"As a mum and teacher I know how essential it is for a new starter to walk into their class and see not just one familiar face but a number of friends they like and trust" ...
"This is essential for their happiness and peace of mind. They have made the first precious friendships of their lives and these will be needlessly thrown aside" ...
Ahh, so what she's really campaigning for is a return to the 1920's or 30's then ..
When all the kids who lived in the same street went to the same school & progressed through that school toghether, until they all left at 14 to join one another on the factory or mill floor ..
People who worked together, took their holidays together during the "Wakes Weeks" and going to the same resorts on the same charabancs ..
Funny, but I could have sworn the world had moved on a bit since then ..
"The term 'friendship groups' is one I find hideously emetic..."
Me too. And I suspect you're spot on about Mum's social structure.
"However, I do think that we could usefully have much smaller class groups in primary school.."
Yes, it'd be worth the extra cost.
"Ahh, so what she's really campaigning for is a return to the 1920's or 30's then .. "
I'm in favour of them going down t'pit.. ;)
XX "This is essential for their happiness and peace of mind. They have made the first precious friendships of their lives and these will be needlessly thrown aside." XX
Welcome to REAL LIFE darlin'.
So what happens if a parent objects to a "familiar face" on the grounds that s/he was a bullying and/or abusive little shit in play group?
And would it be considered child abuse to move to a school in a different city or town?
FFS, where to these morons come from?
I had a student who insisted he sat with his friend, wasn't spoken to by teachers any more than absolutely necessary and wouldn't be criticised for doing nothing.
The education establishment agreed to it readily.
But then he was 17...
Post a Comment