Recently, a mother approached me in the playground and said, «Tell me, Mr Berger, doesn't that bother you? That girls are usually more mature than boys – and yet we still sort them all at the same time?»
Her question lingered in my mind for a long time. She expressed what many parents and we school administrators feel: the decision whether a child should attend grammar school, secondary school A or secondary school B is made at an age when the differences between children could hardly be greater.
Children do not develop according to a calendar, but according to their own inner rhythm.
Remo Largo, paediatrician (1943–2020)
Decision with long-term implications
At the age of 12 or 13 – i.e. at the end of primary school – children are in the midst of puberty. It is a time of physical, emotional and cognitive upheaval. Modern developmental psychology refers to this as a phase of «maximum heterogeneity». It is therefore a time that is ill-suited to making selections. Nevertheless, it is precisely at this point that we make decisions with long-term consequences.
The well-known paediatrician and developmental researcher Remo Largo repeatedly pointed out that child development takes place across a broad spectrum. «Children do not develop according to a calendar, but according to their own inner rhythm,» said Largo. Girls mature earlier than boys in many respects, which gives them an advantage in school assessments.
His successor, Oskar Jenni, who is now head of the Developmental Paediatrics Department at Zurich Children's Hospital, builds on these findings: «A child's development is a dynamic interplay of biological and social factors. The fact that girls develop earlier does not mean that boys are less capable – it simply means that they need more time.»
Girls move on – boys on the lookout
These differences are clearly evident in behaviour. Girls of this age are often more communicative, cooperative and socially sensitive. They are increasingly interested in social issues, friendships and academic success. Many of them are able to express their emotions in a more nuanced way, deal with conflicts verbally and take on responsibility.
At the same time, they are under increasing pressure to «perform» both at school and in society. Quite a few of them experience constant stress, which manifests itself in psychological problems. Studies show a significant increase in depression and anxiety disorders among girls in puberty.
Boys, on the other hand, are often still caught up in playful, competitive thinking. On average, their frustration tolerance is lower and their self-control is still developing. Many express their insecurity through provocation, withdrawal or impulsive behaviour. They are more easily distracted, appear «immature» – and are often punished for this at school.
Particularly controversial: while girls strive to get ahead among their peers, boys are increasingly falling behind in comparison. This can severely affect their self-esteem. In many classrooms, it can be observed that the two genders are drifting apart emotionally, which creates additional tension. It is only towards the end of puberty, at around 15 or 16 years of age, that boys and girls converge again in terms of emotional and cognitive maturity. By then, however, the school sorting carousel is long over.
When speed is confused with potential
In school, this means that children who are «sorted» at the age of 13 are not only classified according to their performance, but also according to their pace. And pace – especially during puberty – is not always a good indicator of actual potential.
The great injustice here is also systemic: until puberty, children learn primarily in primary school – from highly trained teachers with in-depth knowledge of child development, differentiation and individual support. At secondary level I, too, most teachers have a university degree in education.
Humanly tragic – economically foolish
The situation is quite different in long-term secondary schools, where teaching is primarily carried out by specialists with university degrees in academic subjects, whose pedagogical training, at best, consists of a short postgraduate course. The focus there is on teaching the subject matter, not on individual support or heterogeneity skills. Those who are slow to catch on often find themselves unable to keep up in this selective system.
We at the Swiss Headmasters' Association say: this sorting, known as selection in the current education system, comes too early. It does not take talent into account, but leaves it behind. Studies show that over 80 per cent of children who are assigned to a particular performance level remain there forever. Advancement or transfer is rarely successful, even if performance and motivation change. This is not a flaw in the system. This is the system.
If pupils are not grouped according to ability until the end of primary school, individual strengths can develop more effectively.
Another problem is that this so-called selection process acts as a form of labelling. Children who are classified as «weak» or «unsuitable for grammar school» internalise this external attribution. Even if they develop positively during their school years, they often lack self-belief – and the structures to enable them to change. Talents that only emerge later on have little chance of ever becoming visible. This is not only tragic from a human perspective, it is also economically foolish.
A school that takes its time – and thus creates opportunities
Our position is clear: the division according to performance must be postponed until the end of primary school. Not because we are against performance, but because we are committed to development. To time. To the development of individual strengths.
Those who decide on their path at the age of 15 or 16 do so on a more mature and stable basis. This is fairer to young people and smarter for our society. After all, Switzerland does not need the fastest. It needs the right people. And sometimes you only recognise them when you give them time to grow.
What I will say to the mother
When I meet the mother from the playground again, I will thank her. For her honest, probing question. And I will tell her what I have read, learned and realised since then. That her observation was not only correct, but important. And that it is precisely questions like these that help us move forward as a school and as a society.
I will ask them to continue asking such questions. Because they remind us of what really matters: our children and the time they need to develop.
