Year 3 targets(33 Posts)
Year 2 SATs results were 3 for all three categories. Now started year 3 and reading and maths targets were sent home on Friday. They were both 3c.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong but she must've reached at least 3c to be awarded a 3.
Bumped into head mistress this morning and queried it. She said that KS1 and KS2 level 3's are different and they like to consolidate the yr2 level 3 to make sure they are a strong KS2 level 3.
This sounds rubbish to me.
I am convinced my dd is part of the school's attempt to improve value add. She has gone from being on an ELP in reception to being in talented and gifted in yr 2. I don't believe she should've been on an ELP and I'm not sure they did much forher anyway.
I am right to be cynical or is this all correct and above board?
In my limited experience as a parent, ks2 progress (level 3 and level 4) is slower than ks1 (level 1 and level 2) and ks3 (level 5 and level 6) because it's twice as long as ks1 and ks2 but the number of sub levels they go up is the same as the duration of ks1 / ks3.
Just realised original OP was KayFayOLay - don't know why I thought it was Mrs Melons
Hi Mrs Melons:
I believe you are a victim of 'gaming' of the system.
It is in the school's interest to have pupils achieve NC Level 3 at end of KS1 (this shows good or outstanding progress across EYFS/ KS1).
It is also in the interest of the school at start of KS2 (whether same or different school - if infant/ junior schools are separated) - to 'dampen' down the end KS1 results.
This has been discussed on the 'staffroom' bit of Mumsnet Learning - but basically - most frequently when junior school is separate from infants - the start of KS2 comes with a readjustment of this score. This also seems to be the case at the start of secondary (Y7) where the KS2 SATs results are frequently overturned by new in-school testing (CAT, etc...).
What does this mean for you. Well the good news is that the KS1 result is reported to the LEA and can't be denied - so the school has to get the child to at least NC Level 5 (or whatever the new equivalent will be and NC Levels are meant to be dropped - more info here: www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum2014/a00225864/assessing-without-levels) to show good progress and NC Level 6 to demonstrate outstanding progress.
I would suspect the 3c was the target for end of term (maybe half-term) and not something to worry about too much. What it is saying is that this teacher doesn't feel your DC was securely NC Level 3 - not sure whether s/he's had time to fully assess your DC or not. It may be real (your DC isn't securely NC Level 3) or it may be gaming (start them lower so I can show 2 sub-levels progress or equivalent APP points for my performance review - remember performance related pay is coming).
However, I think you should trust that most likely this will all work out in the end and you should be expecting mid-high NC Level 5 result end Y6 and be looking to see she progresses toward that goal (if not exceeds it) as she works her way through KS2.
During the holidays, children unlearn a great deal of what they have been taught. Parents can help by being aware of what has been taught, and keeping it fresh by integrating into normal home activity. Probably not a popular idea, but going through a worksheet once a week, would help solidify the learning. Teachers have experienced this many times, thus the caution on targets in 1st term.
I suppose that every child's progress is different but DD2 made a lot of progress in year 3,(and in year 4 actually), she went up a whole level in reading and maths and 2 sub-levels in writing. But she's a highly motivated child who really rose to the challenge of being in juniors and her teachers are very good at getting the best out of her.
at the end of the term, that level would be fine. there is quite a lot to cover. she my hve only just got the targets needed for level three. for 3a, i think they need to be doing the minimum level three stuff, more of the level three stuff and have started achieveing some level four stuff, but not enough yet for a 4c.
that was how I read the guidance from one authority...
My eldest is now in Y5, and I do remember that in Y3 there was a lot of consolidation.
I don't think it was to do with boosting levels at the end of Y2 (dd's class had an external moderator checking the teacher's marking, and it was spot on) I think its just what people have said - the kids slide back a little over the holidays, and instead of being 'just' a 3c they need to be 'securely' a 3c (or whatever).
FWIW, dd didn't move much in Y3 - especially the first half of the year - but shot up in Y4. Kids don't progress in straight lines (nor do adults) so I think some stable times are to be expected.
That would make sense if they are looking to consolidated to a 3c by Christmas. As others have said many children are not a comfortable L3 and may just be slightly above a 2a so will need some work to ensure they are truly working at that level.
DD is in Y3 and we've basically been told the same - they aim to get the children securely up to the level they attained at the end of KS1 by Christmas. IT was made clear to parents not to expect levels to change during the first term and that this doesn't mean your child is not progressing (though this is a separate junior school and they also mumble about inflated infants results).
Yeah. I wouldn't have believed it except that it was the teacher herself who told me.
"then the parents went to the head to complain and the head told her to change the level to a 3!"
I'm astounded at both the parents and the head for caving into parental pressure. It is not only the junior school I feel sorry for, so much for trusting the professional judgement of the year 2 teacher!
I worked in a separate junior school. The linked, but separate, infant school had every reason to inflate KS1 results because that was all they were being judged on. We had a number of children come over as level 3 who shouldn't have been. The y2 teacher even told me that one of them she had levelled as a 2a, then the parents went to the head to complain and the head told her to change the level to a 3!
It made the junior school's job far harder!
You also need to remember it's a target based on current attainment, not a prediction of where she will be. There's no reason she can't or won't be a 3b by Christmas.
A child may end year 2 at 3C, not move up a sub-level in the autumn term, move up a level by end of spring and another by the end of summer. This will equate to expected progress. It doesn't mean the child made no progress in the autumn term or that the Year 2 teacher got it wrong. Remember Year 2 is not SATs it is teacher assessment informed by the tests ( and I do my actual test papers quite early in the year so they are not the final level for the end of year 2, just a snapshot of a level on the way through the year). Maybe a child has just made it to 3C in Year 2 and in the autumn term acquires more skills but is just short of 3B by Christmas. It is not down to getting enough points on tests, it showing that they can use the specific skills for that level consistently.
As a termly target 3c would be fine at Christmas I would have thought. Still on target to get 3b/3a at the end of the year and would fit if the levels 3s at the end of KS1 were low level 3s.
I don't think they're manipulating the data here. If they are they are doing it in a way that will make them look worse not better.
My DS is now in yr4. When he finished yr2 he got level 3 (c) in everything.
However when he began yr3 he was back down to a 2 (a).
I always thought a L3 was a L3 regardless of KS1 or KS2 however, DS's school seem to mark more vigorously in KS2 (or maybe just the teacher).
Agree with jimmycorkhill (not that I am a teacher!) DS finished yr3 on 3As so it is perfectly possible (apart from a 3B in writing).
It seems more that they are hurting themselves as they can't change the y2 SATS data so that is all locked in. If it hasn't changes but Xmas then query it again maybe. Just be pleased your child is doing so well
Sorry yes, it is a termly target.
The more I learn of SATs, the more of a farce they appear to be.
I was wondering if my child was being 'held back' due to my lack of compliance with yr2 SATs work. Sounds like she isn't but it still sounds like a manipulation of data to me!
I highly doubt it is a yearly target-more than likely a termly target.
It depends on how they are assessing the children. If they are using end of year sats assessments then she is quite right. What a child had to do to get a level 3 in year 2 is not the same as what a child has to achieve a level 3 in year 3.
However must schools don't use sats as the only assessment. We don't use them at all. They should be assessing her against what she is doing generally in class, not what she does on one test.
How long is the target for? It makes a world of difference. In KS2, expected progress is 1 or 2 sub-levels by the end of the year, so your dd should be targeted at 3b or 3a (assuming that she was a 3c at the end of KS1). As there are three terms, in one of the terms the child is going to 'not make progress' on paper... otherwise they'd be making 3 sublevels' progress through the year.
So, if the target is only for one term, then a 3c target is perfectly reasonable. A level 3 at KS2 is not different than a level 3 at KS1, however the focus does change within maths (in particular) and it's more about using and applying ideas within KS2, which can knock back a lot of the children's levels.
If that is the target for the entire year then you need to kick up a fuss. They're either saying they have no faith in last year's result (which is a bit much this soon in the year) or else they're not going to try and push her. Either option is not good.
If a child were a 2a/ 3c cusp in year 2, it's better for value added to call them a 2. Otherwise they have to be a level 5 in year 6 just to 'break even', as it were.
In case you missed my question OP, when are the targets set for?
I taught year 3 for 6 years. The children I had who achieved level 3 in year 2 were usually not working at a level 3 at the start of year 3. This was due to a variety of reasons. One was the long school holiday. One was because the level 3 was the pinnacle of their skills, therefore it was the highest they could achieve as opposed to being the solid base of their learning. One was, sometimes, a slight inflation on part of the previous teacher (which was often due to the head teacher putting pressure on them).
In KS2 the children are also asked to think outside the box. In KS1 you can be a high achiever just by doing a discrete skill eg multiplying. In KS2 you need to know to choose the skill of multiplying as one step of a word problem. In KS1 reading comprehensions the answers are literal whereas in KS2 they can be open ended. This can be a big jump, especially if you are used to getting everything right. A lot of L3 children have yet to fail and that is a scary idea for them.
I found that the majority of children who came to me as a L3 (in maths or literacy) were a solid 2b. By Christmas they were confident at achieving 2a and then by the end of year 3 were either a definite 3c or higher. It really does take time to consolidate the level. I did send children off to year 4 as level 3as so it is perfectly possible. I also sent children as 3cs (when I met them as 3cs), but they were secure at this level.
I was about to say-the value added goes off the KS1 SATS results to the KS2 SATS results-so they are costing themselves on the value added.
Plus children do regress over the holidays, so maybe they are being cautious. Plus imagine your child's joy when they achieve their target before half term?
Better a confidence boost rather than a dent in confidence.
Join the discussion
Please login first.