My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Join our Primary Education forum to discuss starting school and helping your child get the most out of it.

Primary education

Year 1 attainment levels: part II

41 replies

lovecheese · 09/02/2010 14:46

Continuing an earlier thread about KS1 levels, what is the average level that children are supposed to hit by the end of year 1?

OP posts:
Report
ElbowFan · 09/02/2010 15:19

'Age Related expectation' at the end of Year 1 is 1B / 1A so that the child can reach the 'expected' average of 2B at the end of KS1. There will of course be those higher than that, and those below that, other wise it would not be the average!

Report
lovecheese · 09/02/2010 15:48

Thanks ElbowFan - using those criteria, do you know what a child who had reached 1B at the end of reception be expected to reach in KS1 SATs? (sorry to pester)

OP posts:
Report
starstudent · 09/02/2010 18:40

They would be expected to reach 2b in KS1 SATs, though at this stage many children progress rather quickly, so the level they achieve could be higher - it all depends on the individual!

Report
lovecheese · 09/02/2010 19:31

starstudent thanks for replying, but am slightly confused by your reply; My DD hit a level 1b at the end of reception, is she only expected to "go up" 1 level to a 2b at the end of yr2? doesnt seem like much progress??

OP posts:
Report
starstudent · 09/02/2010 19:36

Goodness, no! Sorry about the confusion. As I said before, it depends on the individual, but I would expect your DD to be attaining a level 3 by the Year 2 SATs.

Hope that helps.

Report
Smithagain · 09/02/2010 19:56

The guidance notes attached to our school reports state that "expected" progress is one third to two thirds of a level per year. More than that is given a rating of "outstanding" progress.

Report
RacingSnake · 09/02/2010 21:15

But remember things don't always go in a straight line. Sometimes children 'plateau' academically while theyare developing fast in other areas. So don't get too hung up on levels.

Report
ElbowFan · 10/02/2010 12:51

You may be interested to have a look at the age related expectation as published by National Strategies (nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/node/171919)
On Page 64/65 you will see how progress is expected to be made on a year by year basis, and how children are expected to make a given number of sublevels progress each year.
Your dd levelled at 1B at the start of Y1 should be aiming higher than 2B at the end of Y2!
Hope this is helpful

Report
RacingSnake · 10/02/2010 13:17

But remember that it does not always go in a straight line! Sometimes faster, sometimes slower, depending what else is happening in their development at the same time.

Report
lovecheese · 11/02/2010 14:56

Ta Elbowfan for that link, will look later; p.s I love Elbow too, if thats what you mean, and not a penchant for arm joints.

OP posts:
Report
Cortina · 11/02/2010 16:38

Isn't this all very prescriptive? Shouldn't a child who is a W or so at the start of year 1 should be as likely to reach a level 3 in year 2 as a child who began the year a grade or so higher?

Why do we expect a child who enters year one at a higher level to do 'better' a year or so on? Spurts and dips in performance are the norm especially at this sort of age.

Looking at the National Strategies website so much of how 'well' a child does at KS1 is about drill rather than ability. If they 'demonstrate' what a teacher is looking for in terms of writing formation etc.

Everyone tells me things are fluid and no child is labelled in any way but this tells me otherwise?

Sorry don't mean to be negative. In prep schools things seem to be much more fluid and children all children are expected to do very well. Or is this just my impression?

Report
Feenie · 11/02/2010 20:06

A measure of expected progress is needed in case something is amiss - if a child makes no progress, the possible reasons can then be addressed quickly. If a child makes more than expected progress, fantastic.

Most schools set themselves challenging targets and aim to have children making good progress, as opposed to just satisfactory.

Once again, Cortina, no one puts any kind of ceiling on children's learning. It isn't what any of us teachers here came into the profession for.

Report
Feenie · 11/02/2010 20:10

making good progress - got my italics mixed up with my crossings out

Report
NoahAndTheWhale · 11/02/2010 20:19

lovecheese what do your child's teacher(s) say about how they are doing now? Do they seem to be satisfied with how your child is progressing? Are you happy?

I have a Year 1 child (don't know what level he was at in any subjects at the end of reception but his teachers and I were happy with his progress). I know I can have a tendency to get myself fixated on levels etc but I think there is more to a child's life than what levels they attain in Year 2. I am happy to be convinced otherwise though.

Report
SailAway · 11/02/2010 20:29

In each 'level' 1, 2, 3 you have 3 sublevels (a, b and c).
They expect your child to go up by 2 sub levels each year. So starting Y1 with a level 1B, they should be at 2C at the end of Y1 and 2A at the end of Y2.
At least that's what ds1 teacher has been telling me (he is in Y1).

I also agree it will vary a lot. Depends if your dd has been working to her level in reception or taking things gently for example (eg ds1 has move by much more than 2 sublevels in maths this year but is on 'target' for litterature iyswim). How mature she was etc...
It's more for teachers really to see if there are some problems looming ie why has this child not progressed as we would have expected? Let's look at what is happening type of attitude.

Report
Cortina · 11/02/2010 23:52

Once again, Cortina, no one puts any kind of ceiling on children's learning. It isn't what any of us teachers here came into the profession for.

Feenie, I don't think you do. From what I see on the ground though this can and does happen. Not in a malicious sense and from what I've seen it can happen in the classroom of the most dedicated teacher in the world. It can happen at a subconscious level, Malcolm Gladwell describes some of it in Outliers and other writers I've mentioned do the same thing and quote various studies to back up their findings.

I wonder whether we unwittingly put a ceiling on children's learning as soon as we begin to think about them in terms of whether they are 'bright' or not?

The head of our primary gave a talk and mentioned how the children in her care smashed their year one and year two targets and so on and so forth further along, from what I see the targets given underestimate what the children are likely to achieve. For example DS has targets for the end of year one which IMO he surpasses by a couple of levels at the moment. These may be revised going forward but as these targets have honestly been set they would be able to quote it as per their figures etc.

This is no real problem in itself but isn't there a danger, if this is broadly the case more generally, a parent could 'believe' a child should be on course for say 1B at the end of year one in writing or maths so shouldn't be pushed too far out of comfort zone etc? What if they were turned off learning for life? Etc.

From what I can see sometimes there is a lot of erring on the side of caution. The next level might prove too much etc. It's better that X should stay with a lowing achieving group to boost confidence. All of these things may be the right thing to do in some cases but I think have the potential to limit children. My kids seem to rise to the level of the group they are put with, whether that's swimming, school or learning the violin. What's wrong with real challenge?

I've heard parents say 'I am not putting little Johnny into the school play/concert as one of the bears who has to speak. He's not to be pushed, he's not confident in this way unlike little Freddie'. This may be true but I wonder sometimes whether their little Johnny is actually any different from Freddie? I know little Johnny and he's perfectly confident and capable IMO. Of course it might be he really doesn't want to go on the school trip/read to the class/be in the play. Fast forward a few years and you might have a scenario where you have a under confident Freddie who believes there is a ceiling on his ability in certain areas. Why has it been decided by a parent or teacher that Johnny shouldn't be challenged but Freddie should?

Perhaps there's nothing in what I say, I hope so. I probably think about these things too much. I am not blaming teachers. In the non selective prep down our way we have children all getting the top SATS grades possible at 11. Before I had children of my own and looked into what SATS were and what was expected I assumed that inherent ability was key. While this might play a part I now see it's possible for an average child to ace the tests. The test results shouldn't matter going forward as many say - so perhaps it doesn't matter what grade our children end up with at KS1 or KS2?

What matters far, far more is that our children believe in themselves and their capabilities and I believe challenge is very healthy.

Report
Feenie · 12/02/2010 12:41
Report
Cortina · 12/02/2010 14:49

Feenie, I am sorry , really.

I am honestly interested in all of this and doing lots of reading at the moment.

There seem to be so many studies that back up what I see but seemingly not many people out there who agree? Does this mean that what I describe doesn't exist or is very rare? Do you really think there is absolutely nothing in what I say? Not even the smallest grain of truth in any scenario?

Report
claig · 12/02/2010 15:02

Cortina, anyone can see that you love the subject and are very interested in it. Have you ever thought about training to be a teacher? because I think you would be a natural at it

Report
Cortina · 12/02/2010 15:09

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm Claig ?

Seriously, I am honestly very interested. Things do seem to be very prescriptive from what I see. It seems things really do vary from school to school.

Report
claig · 12/02/2010 16:33

no not sarcastic at all, you have misread me. I can see that you are very interested in it, and I think that in some cases what you are saying is probably likely to happen

Report
dorris44 · 12/02/2010 22:37

Hi
I am really interested on this. My dd is in yr1 and got 8 in reception in her foundation stage reports & a 9? in something. her yr 1 teacher won't give me her end of year1 targets. He says they are for him and the subject leaders. What should I be expecting her to get?

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

IAmTheEasterBunny · 12/02/2010 23:17

Cortina, I don't really get your point. You make it sound like teachers are 'teaching to a level' all the time, whereas we are teaching to the next objective that the child needs to meet.

We are aware of the objectives within levels and we are also aware of where our children need to go.

Report
Feenie · 13/02/2010 00:32

Thank you so much, IATEB. I understand Cortina's worries, but I want her to understand that they are SO FAR from teachers' objectives and aims.

Report
Cortina · 13/02/2010 02:40

Thanks, Claig, it is something I might consider in the future, I do really care about our children's education etc but it's a real vocation and not something I would do lightly. Up late tonight. Easter Bunny and Feenie, thank you.

Without wanting to be negative, I do see some what I am discovering through my reading in the classroom. I believe that any average child should do extremely well in SATS etc. It shouldn't be the be all and end all if they don't of course, but I believe most will be capable of excellent results. I am seeing that you need to give a great deal of support and encouragement at home too. The results are not as important as the children being confident, enthusiastic beginner learners by then.

Easter Bunny it's about what can be messaged on a subconscious level (see above for details that concerns me. I get that teachers are teaching to the next objective and so many do so much more than they need to. We seem sometimes to see things in a linear, prescriptive way in terms of what children should achieve. For example I believe it's as possible for a child that enters year one at W+ (assuming there are no real underlying learning difficulties) to get a level 3 in year 2 as it is for one that enters the year at 1A, see Bill Claxton's research for details. Dips and spurts are (he says) the norm not the exception yet we expect the high fliers at 11 to be the 'best' at 16 or we've failed them.

The danger is that it may not be believed a W+ is level 3 material (on a subconscious level) there will be more 'concern' about them than a child who is 1A at the start of year one. Of course any teacher would be delighted to see a child do very well. This 'concern' can unwittingly be limiting for the child. There's a danger that the W+ himself might not have such an expandable view of his ability than the 1A. I see this in my own children via their view of 'ability' tables in the classroom.

Bill Claxton has proved that small adjustments in the classroom by the teacher can make a huge difference. He talks a lot about building learning power in children, which many teachers do and are doing already but not all. His excellent 'What's The Point of School' puts things much better than I do.

Christchurch Primary School in Wiltshire took on board some of Claxton's ideas and they found that their SATS results improved. Over the next 4 years the percentage of children achieving level 4 and above in their Key Stage 2 SATS rose from 59% to 86% in English, 55% to 86% in Maths and 67% to 94% in Science. Averaging all 3 core subjects the % of children over-achieving for their age (who got level 5) rose from 13% to 40%.

Claxton's idea that children who have great learning power (regardless of IQ) achieve beyond their years was bourne out by an experiment Jane Leo did with her year 6 children (St Mary's Primary School, Thornbury, Bristol). She had been working all year on building learning power in her class.

After they had taken their Key Stage 2 tests she gave them the Key Stage 3 Maths paper, (designed I think for 14 year olds). She said 'have a go, have fun'. Some of the questions were on unfamiliar topics, as you'd expect. Jane said 'by applying your thinking and using what you already know, you ought to be able to have a go at much of it'. The children who were not confident with maths at all were allowed to work in pairs. She allowed the children to ask 'clarifying questions' only, which she answered by encouraging them to trust their own judgement. Jane told Bill Claxton most of the questions stemmed from not believing the questions were as easy as they were!

The result? All bar 5 got level 6, many jumped a whole level over their performance in the actual KS2 tests they'd taken a week before. The other 5 all improved on their acutal SATS performance by at least 2 sub levels.

Jane Leo said:

'I believe their willingness to have a go stemmed from a year's worth of teaching them how to learn and knowing themselves as learners. Through Building Learning Power, they know how to tackle a challenge; what questions to ask themselves; how to apply what they know to new situations. They know themselves as learners, and they see learning as a journey, not an end - if they couldn't do a question it wasn't because they would never be able to but they hadn't seen the way there yet.

Jane's children didn't mind being faced with something they hadn't prepared for, one said 'strangely I really enjoyed that' and another 'that was good it makes you see the links between everything'.

Claxton talks about teachers modelling learning. Children need to become good learners not secure knowers (in traditional schools teachers modelled knowledgeability).

He believes it should be a requirement teachers are visibly engaged in some project that stretches their subject knowledge (as if they don't have enough to do)!

An English graduate might regularly pin up drafts of a poem they are struggling to get right, a science teacher might be running an experiment in the corner of her lab, something she is genuinely interested in and doesn't know the outcome.

Peter Mountstephen (head of a primary school in Bath) commits to learning a musical instrument that he has never played before. On the first day of each school year there is a whole school assembly and Peter tries to play a new instrument. Last year the bagpipes, everyone laughs as he makes a total hash of it. He says to the kids he is going to learn it and talks about what 'learning muscles' he is going to need, perseverance, commitment, time to practice, courage to ask for help etc.

He goes round to each class and asks the children what they find difficult and they talk about shared challenges and difficulties. They talk about themselves as learners.

His commitment is to be obviously bad at something and to be seen putting in the learning required to get better at it. It encourages kids and enables them to be 'bad' at something without feeling bad about themselves.

Sorry if I am going off point but wanted to include these examples, especially Peter Mountstephen. I think his is a brilliant idea, what a great Head!! This story really inspired me I am trying to do similar at home with my children.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.