'Nurture Groups'

[Corax]

Started this by responding to another thread, but it was potentially a hell of a derail so here we are:

I think the case of 'overdiagnosis' is being overstated actually. Even when a child has a diagnosis, actually getting them specialist help is still a huge uphill battle for many. Some education authorities and schools are better than others when it comes to making suitable provision.

I agree completely. I wasn't clear enough in my post.

Probably the best way of explaining is the context I'm thinking of:

My 4 year old was 'selected' for his school's 'Nurture Group' - http://www.nurturegroups.org/pages/what_is_a_nurture_group.html

Whilst it is doing him good in helping him to deal with his occasional frustrations better, at the same time I kind of resent it as the reason he gets frustrated isn't actually his fault.

He's a bright lad, sensitive to the needs of those around him, and socially able (popular amongst his peers, although I hate that expression). He's as responsible and 'grown-up' as I'd want a 4 1/2 year old to be, and doing well academically. He really doesn't fit the criteria on the websites, which the school agreed with, saying that it was a couple of aspects that needed 'tweaking' rather than a major problem.

But...

His Mum and I have always talked to him on a level, told him why he should/shouldn't do something, not just dictated, and basically treated him with the respect he deserves.

At nursery that was fine. The staff/kid ratios meant that they were able to take a similar approach.

Now he's gone to school though, he's in a class of 30 and expected to just obey instructions a lot of the time. I'm actually perversely slightly proud that he doesn't respond well to this approach. It pisses him off, and rightly so IMO. So now and again he kicks off a bit - nothing dreadful, just screwing his drawing paper up and throwing it across the room or something.

In essence, despite being one of the youngest in the year, he's a hell of a lot more emotionally developed than most of his year group, and (IMO rightly) expects to be treated with the same degree of respect that he gets from his Mum and I.

But because they don't have the resources to give the kids the attention that they need and deserve, he gets labelled as the one in need of special help. And yes, he's responding well to it because the 'nurture group' is only 10 kids and 2 staff, so he gets the treatment that he expects.

It seems this situation isn't unusual. Effectively, he's been labelled as the problem, when in fact it's the inadequacies in our schooling system that are at fault.

 

[spanglechick]

i understand your frustration - and his, tbh.

i think it's possible that as he ages he'll develop the ability to 'play the game' - keep out of trouble because the consequences aren't worth it. fwiw, the education system now, certainly at secondary level, requires much less in the way of unquestioning obediance than it did when i was at school. The concept of 'Student Voice' is growing and schools are including nominated and elected student representatives in the process of reviewing and creating rules and proceedures.

But i forsee no time when mainstream education doesn't fairly often require kids to do stuff because the teacher says so. The teacher will have a reason, but even in a small class, there just isn't the time to explain that reason to every student who would want to do something different. It's the same in most jobs, ime. So if he doesn't develop an ability to 'play the game', you'll be looking at a difficult choice. Homeschool seems like an obvious option - but financially ruinous for many families. nurture groups and sen withdrawl are another. but for the sake of the rest of the students, you can't have a kid in class who demands explanations all the time when there is teaching and learning to be done.

 

[Cloo]

I'm surprised that your son should be put into a nurture group - I generally had them down as for kids with marked difficulties or else those who come from a home situation where they don't get the 'nurture' they require, which I don't believe for the moment is the case with you!

It sounds like they're misuing the resource in the case of your son.

 

[Corax]

you can't have a kid in class who demands explanations all the time when there is teaching and learning to be done.

That's exactly what teaching and learning are all about IMO!

It sounds like they're misuing the resource in the case of your son.

In a way, yes. We went to have a chat to the Dep. Head about it because we were frankly a bit puzzled, and they explained that they see it in terms of potential. That is, he's doing well, but they think he could do even better with a bit of fine tuning.

What makes me cross is that it would be entirely unnecessary if they had better staff to pupil ratios. That's exactly what he's getting in the nurture group. But at the same time, he's being segregated from his peers for 2-4 mornings a week, which isn't so good. They think he'll only be in the group for a couple of terms though, so I suppose that's not so bad.

Don't get me wrong, I'm dead impressed with his school, they're far better than most in the area and have a very 'nurturing' approach in general. It's not their fault that they have class sizes of 30 - that seems to be the case everywhere nowadays.

But I'm sure he's not unique. I wonder how many kids across the country are receiving 'special treatment' when (in some ways) because actually ahead, not behind.


I'm trying not to be biased here, but honestly, he's a cracking lad and his behaviour's generally far better than kids much older than him. He doesn't hit, swear, he says please and thank you (with a prompt now and again!), he shares with his friends, eats nicely and without being fussy, and so on. He's naughty sometimes, but only minor stuff, and I'd be worried if he wasn't naughty from time to time! He's 4!

 

[Ms Ordinary]

Would you mind if you thought the school were aware they were misusing / being creative with the resources?

If they'd approached it by saying "we think your son is super-bright & emotionally well-developed. However this means he has problems fitting it to a class of 30, we think a couple of terms in the nurture group will benefit him." - would you think that was OK? Perhaps that was what the dep head meant by "he's doing well, but they think he could do even better with a bit of fine tuning" ? I'm sure good teachers find it frustrating when they see bright / advanced kids having difficulties at school - maybe thats why they've put him in the nurture group?

Goes without saying that it wouldn't be fair for them to misuse the resource if their are other kids who need it more / need it for what its really meant for.
And I can only half remember the other thread, so I may have missed the point about him being mis-diagnosed. It does sound like you have been left in the dark about exactly why they are doing this, which would make me worry.

Its not necessarily wrong for kids to receive special treatment because they are advanced, not behind - especially if that fact is causing them to play up & might put them off school altogether, or make difficulties for the rest of the class.

I think later on there is a 'gifted & talented' program which amongst other things, targets kids who have difficulties because they are more advanced than their age group. Maybe he is too young for it but they are trying to help him in a similar way? (not saying he is 'gifted & talented' btw but I recall reading that schools can implement it however they choose - a few schools seemed to stick loads of kids on it for things like 'being emotionally very mature' while others were more traditional.

 

[Cloo]

The gifted and talented programme runs from when they start school - I've not heard of nurture groups being part of it.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Well, every nurture group I've worked in the children tend to be behaviourally disturbed or very needy in terms of education and were usually just ten or so pupils to two staff.
As far as G&T goes, it depends what the criteria for G&T is in that school. If a child is really musically gifted for instance they might be in a nurture group. I haven't come across it myself, but I've seen huge variation in what is classed as G&T from school to school.

 

[spanglechick]

That's exactly what teaching and learning are all about IMO!

fair point. it's certain kinds of explainatons ("why must i put my pen down and stop writing now?") that delay other kinds ("what were the causes of the fall of rome?").

I'm really not talking about your son per se - because i teach secondary and who knows how he will be in seven years time. Just that kids of secondary age who can't accept instruction without questioning, tend to be isolated from the mainstream because they end up dominating the time of the teacher who has a syllabus to deliver.

 

[Corax]

Would you mind if you thought the school were aware they were misusing / being creative with the resources?

I think they are. From talking to the Dep. Head it seems they've been running it for a few years now, and have expanded it's use. I'm not sure how much I mind exactly, as it's doing him good, and he deals with frustration far more constructively now. It's not like he was lashing out or anything, he's just have a bit of a sulk. That's normal for a 4 year old afaic, but it's still a good thing that he snaps himself out of it and tries again or does something else instead now. As long as it's only for a couple of terms, I think I'm okay with it.

I suppose my point is more about the class sizes that meant he wasn't getting that coaching anyway. Kids spend more (awake) time at school that at home during the week, so you can only do it all from home I think.

If they'd approached it by saying "we think your son is super-bright & emotionally well-developed. However this means he has problems fitting it to a class of 30, we think a couple of terms in the nurture group will benefit him." - would you think that was OK? Perhaps that was what the dep head meant by "he's doing well, but they think he could do even better with a bit of fine tuning" ? I'm sure good teachers find it frustrating when they see bright / advanced kids having difficulties at school - maybe thats why they've put him in the nurture group?

I don't want to sound like a boastful parent (he's not biologically mine so I can't claim credit anyway! ) but that is the essence of what they told us. Not to that degree perhaps, not 'super-bright', but a smart lad with good social skills. They showed us his 'Boxall Profile', and he was a bit ahead in most areas, but slightly short in a couple, mainly around concentrating/focusing properly. She basically said that the idea was to boost those areas so they didn't hold him back. He's also right at the youngest end of the age range for the year, which I'd guess may be a factor in that.

Goes without saying that it wouldn't be fair for them to misuse the resource if their are other kids who need it more / need it for what its really meant for.
And I can only half remember the other thread, so I may have missed the point about him being mis-diagnosed. It does sound like you have been left in the dark about exactly why they are doing this, which would make me worry.

They've definitely got a mix of issues in the group, such as maybe 'angry' or 'insecure' kids and so on. The group size means they all get much more individual and close attention, so apparantly that works fine.

Its not necessarily wrong for kids to receive special treatment because they are advanced, not behind - especially if that fact is causing them to play up & might put them off school altogether, or make difficulties for the rest of the class.

I think I'm suffering under the ridiculous expectation that all kids, especially at a young age, should get what seems to be 'special treatment'.

I think later on there is a 'gifted & talented' program which amongst other things, targets kids who have difficulties because they are more advanced than their age group. Maybe he is too young for it but they are trying to help him in a similar way? (not saying he is 'gifted & talented' btw but I recall reading that schools can implement it however they choose - a few schools seemed to stick loads of kids on it for things like 'being emotionally very mature' while others were more traditional.

I've no idea if he's 'gifted & talented' . He's bright enough to do well at whatever he wants to do, and generally happy and balanced. That's more than enough for me.

 

[Corax]

fair point. it's certain kinds of explainatons ("why must i put my pen down and stop writing now?") that delay other kinds ("what were the causes of the fall of rome?").

I'm really not talking about your son per se - because i teach secondary and who knows how he will be in seven years time. Just that kids of secondary age who can't accept instruction without questioning, tend to be isolated from the mainstream because they end up dominating the time of the teacher who has a syllabus to deliver.

Fair enough. I agree that there's 'questioning' and there's 'pointlessly challenging'.

 

[mrs quoad]

In retrospect I see this kind of disjunction between the way my parents brung me up; and the way schools imposed rules; as being a LARGE part of the root of my massive drug and alcohol problems.

 

[Corax]

In retrospect I see this kind of disjunction between the way my parents brung me up; and the way schools imposed rules; as being a LARGE part of the root of my massive drug and alcohol problems.

That doesn't inspire optimism!

 

[mrs quoad]

That doesn't inspire optimism!

Yeah...

Well...

I think there's two ways of looking at it.

1) my parents supported me in finding a belief in autonomy and questioning. When I found that put me firmly 'outside the system', that self-belief kinda turned into a spiralling whirl of separation / conflict. "Fuck the system", etc, etc. Combined with an inability to handle that sort of conflict (particularly from a very early age) kinda led me to give up on 'the system'. And to find autonomy / questioning in a deeply drug and alcohol involved form of 'outsider' 'self-expression'. The cheap and easy route of asserting my autonomy / 'rightness' over and above rule-bound systems. In that kinda interpretation, believing in questioning for the sake of questioning (and the rightness of being able to question rules) left me frankly unfit for 'the system' that I (ultimately) needed to find a way of fitting into in order to be emotionally functional / happy.

2) the narrow / restrictive system I had to engage with just wasn't fit for purpose. The teachers' attitudes, narrow learning system (etc etc) were unable to handle someone who wasn't particularly suited to their teaching style / the way schools work, and their inability to work with / be flexible with an intelligent, autonomous, questioning kid led to all of the above.

In the first thingy, I guess it could be suggested that my upbringing harmed me... in the second, that it was the school system. (Or it's pure personal pathology, obv ) tbh, I'm not particularly fussed either way. It's only something I've begun to think about in the last year or two - for the first four(ish) years of my sobriety, I always presumed it was pure 'nature'. A fucked up gene pool, or some such similar.

Erm, IMO it isn't a coincidence that [after sobering up and learning to adhere to rules / listen to others' authority] I thrived in learning at Bachelors level, REALLY thrived at Masters level, and'm doing alright at PhD level - all of which are far less rule-bound / directive.

And, erm, I'm not really sure where I'm going with all that. But... I guess there's a part of me that feels it's beneficial... or necessary... for kids to also be able to understand the ways schools work... and to find the ability to 'fit in' with that way of working. Even if it doesn't necessarily seem 'right'.

Maybe

 

[Corax]

I see a lot of similarities with my own 'development' (I seem to be putting a lot of words in inverted commas on this thread!), but I 'rebelled' relatively late and so never seriously spiralled so far out of control that it screwed my education/career up much. Because of that, I actually don't regret having such a frustrating, unpleasant and fucked-up time when I was younger as I'm now finally happy with where I'm at, iykwim.

I suppose I hope I can teach him the coping skills that it took me 25 or so years to acquire.

 

[Corax]

And, erm, I'm not really sure where I'm going with all that. But... I guess there's a part of me that feels it's beneficial... or necessary... for kids to also be able to understand the ways schools work... and to find the ability to 'fit in' with that way of working. Even if it doesn't necessarily seem 'right'.

I agree with this, but I'm not sure it's fair to expect 4 and 5 year olds to accept it. At that age you're trying to encourage the ideals in them imo, and I think accepting 'unfairness' is more reasonably expected when slightly older. I'm not basing that on any child psychology, just on what I observe/understand of kids' development.

 

[mrs quoad]

I agree with this, but I'm not sure it's fair to expect 4 and 5 year olds to accept it. At that age you're trying to encourage the ideals in them imo, and I think accepting 'unfairness' is more reasonably expected when slightly older. I'm not basing that on any child psychology, just on what I observe/understand of kids' development.

I don't think it's 'fair' to expect people of any age to accept it

I guess I might be more tempted to phrase it in slightly different terms... i.e. there might be different outcomes for a kid who is not able to accept the way schools work. Whether or not that's fair.

It wasn't the rightness or wrongness of my parents or schooling that - IMO - might've had an impact on the way I responded. It was the discrepancy between 'em, and my inability to reconcile them. Being stuck in a system I had not been given the tools to handle.

I don't know if there're right or wrong answers, just a continuum of responses that might support children in (mal)adapting to school in countless different ways. And that's - obv - just one dimension of the personality any kid brings into school. But - IMO - it is an important one. The way people respond to, understand, and interpret rules (again IMO) often shapes their happiness for much of their lives...

Handing over the emotional coping tools that took you 25 years of hard experience to learn sounds like an interesting challenge, Corax Good luck.