[4th Grade Gnoble] What I learned after attending Gnoble for half a year. The true meaning of the "Science/Humanities separate classes" that became clear in 4th grade

My son enrolled in Gnoble in December of his 3rd grade year.

During 3rd grade, there were almost no situations where we were conscious of class divisions, and our family prioritized getting used to the pace of classes and homework.

Then, as he became a new 4th grader and had been attending for about half a year,

I finally began to see, little by little, that "Gnoble is a cram school that raises children with this kind of philosophy."

Among these, the most impressive thing was the system where classes are divided separately for science and humanities subjects during regular lessons.

Gnoble has separate classes for science and humanities

In many middle school entrance exam cram schools, classes are determined by the total score of four subjects.

However, at Gnoble, regular classes are divided as follows:

* Science-oriented classes centered on math and science
* Humanities-oriented classes centered on Japanese and social studies

In other words, they learn in separate classes.

This means it is not rare for the same child to belong to different classes for science and humanities.

On the other hand, during spring, summer, and winter seasonal courses, classes are divided by the average of all four subjects.

It was only after attending for half a year that I understood, "I see, so this is the kind of school it is," regarding the operation of separating science and humanities only for regular classes.

*1 Regarding class naming
At Gnoble, "α" is generally the top class, followed by "α1," "α2," "α3," and so on. On the other hand, at SAPIX, "α1" is the top, followed by "α2," "α3," etc., so the concept of ranking differs even with the same "α" designation. Class organization and naming may change depending on the grade and school building.

Our family has different classes for science and humanities

My son is the type who clearly reflects this system.

His science subjects (math and science) are relatively stable, and he is often in the α or α1 class.

On the other hand, his humanities subjects (Japanese and social studies) have fluctuations in scores, and he moves between α and α3.

In the past, I think I would have perceived this as "his class went down."

But now it is different.

Because they are evaluated separately for science and humanities,

"Let's maintain the science subjects as they are"

"Let's focus on Japanese reading comprehension for the humanities subjects"

I have come to naturally see the priorities for home study.

The "stay-behind study" I learned about in 4th grade

Another thing that surprised me was the stay-behind study after class.

At our school building, starting in 4th grade, there are times when stay-behind study of up to about 30 minutes is held after class.

The students who stay are determined by the results of confirmation tests or calculation masters, and they do reviews or corrections on the same day.

At first, I was a little wary when I heard about "staying behind."

However, in reality, because he can resolve his lack of understanding on the spot, the number of times he "tackles homework without understanding" has decreased.

The time spent re-teaching from scratch at home has also decreased, and as a parent, I feel this is a grateful system.

*2 Regarding stay-behind study
This is the operation at the school building we attend. It is not officially announced as a system common to all schools, and the presence or absence of implementation, the teaching materials covered, and the operation methods seem to differ depending on the school building and the teacher in charge.

Looking at the classes, the priorities for home study become clear

By evaluating science and humanities separately, it becomes very easy to understand a child's strengths and weaknesses.

In our home,

* Science subjects are for maintenance study
* Humanities subjects are for reinforcement study to address weaknesses

We divide the roles like this.

Especially for humanities, since scores fluctuate easily due to Japanese reading comprehension and social studies knowledge questions, we always check the cause when the class changes.

Instead of "I did it/I couldn't do it,"

"Where did I lose points?"

Since we started looking at this, the efficiency of home study has changed significantly.

Classes are not "rankings," but hints on "where to improve"

Before attending Gnoble, I thought classes represented rankings.

But after attending for half a year, that way of thinking has changed significantly.

I feel that separating classes for science and humanities, and conducting stay-behind study when necessary, are not systems "to make them compete for rankings."

What is the child lacking right now?

Where should they improve to move to the next step?

I think it is a system that shows this clearly not only to the child but also to the parents.

In fact, even in our home, because the classes for science and humanities are different,

"This time, let's focus on Japanese reading comprehension"

"Let's fill in the gaps in social studies knowledge"

We have become able to decide the priorities for home study without hesitation.

In Gnoble's math, the difficulty and importance are indicated for each problem, and "problems that must be tackled" and "recommended problems for each deviation score range" are clearly distinguished. Also, the philosophy of home study is shown, saying, "Do not force yourself to solve difficult problems, but properly solidify the basic content."

I feel that the class division is also designed with this same philosophy.

Classes do not determine a child's value.

They are hints that tell you "where to improve next."

Since I started thinking that way, I have been less swayed by the results of whether his class went up or down.

That is why, in our home, every time we look at the class list, we do not look at the ranking, but rather

"What shall we improve this week?"

We organize our home study from that perspective.