I'm a maths teacher and I make up sub-levels.

[noblegiraffe]

There have been a few threads here lately about parents concerned that Little Johnny hasn't gone up a sub-level since September, or has only gone up one sub-level in a year or hasn't made any progress. There is even a thread where a school is giving out sub-sub-levels.

Sub-levels are bollocks. Levels given for individual pieces of work are bollocks as an indicator of overall achievement. I can only really speak for secondary school maths as that's what I teach, but comments from other teachers on here lead me to suspect the same thing for other subjects. There are level descriptors which state what is required to reach each level. There are no set descriptors for individual sub-levels, making them meaningless. There is even no consensus about what level individual maths skills are. The best they can do in maths is say that in a levelled test, a child just achieved the mark required to get a level, was well within the boundaries, or just missed out on a higher level. A mark of 47 could get you a 5A, where a mark of 48 would get you a 6C.

Levels are also broken down in maths into 4 areas - Using and Applying, Number and Algebra, Geometry, and Statistics (names for these areas change depending on educational fashion). Therefore children's levels can vary throughout the year depending on the topic being studied. A child could be a whizz at algebra and do very well on the end of term test which focuses on algebra. They could also be crap at geometry and so next term not do as well. We do not give out levels for these tests because we would have parents up in arms that algebra whizz Johnny was a level 6 at Christmas but only a level 5 at Easter, thus having gone backwards due to no-doubt dreadful teaching.

The only relatively reliable way to get an overall level in maths is a comprehensive exam which covers all areas of maths. We set these in the summer of each year - a SATs style exam for each year group. The end of year level is therefore usually a reasonable assessment as a measure of progress, although like I said, a different level could just be down to 1 mark.

We have to report levels to parents three times a year, despite levels only being effectively assessed once per year. So, when writing reports in November/December, I will probably put down the same level as they got in the summer, unless they appear to be making very good progress in which case I might bump it up a sublevel. I also need to predict them an end of KS3 target, which I do with one eye on the FFT target and the other on what set they are in and how they are working. By March, I will bump them all up a bit to show that they have made some progress towards their target grade. If they haven't made progress, they will have moved down a set by then. In the summer when they do their proper exam, I cross my fingers that none of them will achieve lower than the bumped up level I gave them in March, because parents don't like it when levels go down.

It's utter nonsense. I do not like it when parents get concerned based on sub-levels and it annoys me when parents think that they quantify progress. Levels were designed to measure progress between Key stages and this is reasonable as they give a broad, not a detailed assessment. Trying to insinuate that they give a detailed assessment by breaking them down into sub-levels (and sub-sub-levels) is stupid.

I know in some primaries they have massive grids of attainment targets in order to show progress through the levels - this, for obvious reasons, has never caught on in secondary. But I am wary of this too. What a child can achieve in a lesson, or a homework just after the work has been taught is very different to what they can achieve in exam conditions at the end of the year. Also, in maths it doesn't matter if you can answer a level 7 question on an exam, that doesn't make you a level 7. What makes you a level 7 is having achieved sufficient marks overall to put you in a level 7 boundary. You could answer some level 7 topics correctly but get some level 5 topics wrong and thus be awarded a level 6.

Please don't get so het up over them.

Apologies for the long post. I am only speaking for how I award sub-levels. Other schools may do things differently, but I am sure based on how levels work that they can't do them much more accurately. There might be a consensus within a department within a school, but nationally there is no consensus and there can't be.

[schobe]

Lol at thread title, excellent.

A very accurate summary, let's hope it helps some parents not get so worried.

[whathaveiforgottentoday]

Fantastic post, couldn't agree more. I'm a secondary science teacher. Some topics we teach don't cover all levels, so for example one topic may not have any level 7 work in it at all, so no way of achieving level 7 on that test. Other tests will be mainly testing level 7 etc. Plus the skills we assess can vary enormously from topic to topic (think heavy maths content in physics topics to learning the structure of the heart in biology) so children's levels will vary up and down over the year.
Only way to judge is looking at average levels over an entire year and use the end of key stage tests.
Oh and sometimes particularly early on in the year (October reports) the sub levels given are very subjective, as often you've only done one assessment to base it on if you're lucky, so you're basing your judgment on previous year's assessment and how they are working in class this year so far.

[fiftyval]

Noblegiraffe - you could be my dd's maths teacher. This teacher told us pretty much what you say in your post at parent's evening for dd (yr7). DD adores this teacher who seems to be able to inspire the girls to really enjoy the subject.
She basically told us that dd's maths target as expressed in sub-levels were a load of bo**ks and not to worry if assessments varied dependent on the aspect of maths concerned. She also pointed out that for some aspects of maths she would work them at significantly higher 'levels' eg for algebra.
She was a breath of fresh air as although all the other teachers we met seemed very good, she was the only one 'brave' enough to tell it how it is.

[Sparklingbrook]

I always thought that was the case-thanks for confirming it noble.

[Jux]

I do hope my dd's maths teachers do this. It seems eminently sensible. Thank you!

[bigTillyMint]

Noblegiraffe, I love the thread title, and what you say is so right

[Doobydoo]

Thank you for posting.I have a ds in year 8 at Grammar school and have to say can get bogged down with levels etc.Am not going to stress about it as it is officially bollocks

[sue52]

I've long suspected that. Thanks.

[qumquat]

Yes yes Yes! I am an English teacher and I make up sub-levels; any levels at all used too frequently are a nonsense. We have to report to parents 6 times a year. Every teacher levels differently. It is an utter waste of time. Thanks for helping me to 'come out'!

[TalkinPeace2]

DO YOU REALISE HOW HAPPY THIS THREAD MAKES ME ?

I'm not a teacher so have not felt able to post "its all bilge" onto every thread about sublevels.
Now I can point them here
Yippee
Yippee
Yippee

[Bletchley]

Thanks giraffe, I have long suspected as much.

One of my kids' primary teachers told me to think of 5c as a low 5, 5b a secure 5 and 5a a high five, which I have found helpful.

It seems that we are obsessed by exams and grades in this country, often at the expense of a proper education. I just don't believe that it's all about the grades, far far from it. It is interesting that now the boys have moved to the independent sector we don't even get NC levels.

[bigTillyMint]

Bletchley, that's how teachers using APP so Teacher Assessments - low, secure and high. It's a subjective best-fit.

[bigTillyMint]

do Teacher Assessments!

[clam]

Don't blame you. "They've" invented a bloody stupid system, so they can expect people to nod and smile and go through the motions with it.

[Doobydoo]

Highfive to NOBLE

[tethersend]

Art teacher here...

[Niceweather]

It's very funny and a great relief to read this - many thanks from one of the mums who has been stressing. We get report sheets 6 times a year and I will be taking them with a large pinch of salt from now on.

[hackneyLass]

Big cheers for noblegiraffe, the voice of reason, and qumquat too.

My son's primary school is obsessed with sublevels, cut out all interesting stuff & PE to do endless testing. We all took it a teeny bit seriously in September but now it washes over us. Poor teachers though.

[Kez100]

I remember a primary meeting when the school were trying to explain why they would be merging two years into one due to budget cuts and number on roll falling. To try and satisfy some of the more vocal parents they explained how it would be fine and how they would now differentiate work (inc Maths sets) and how grading would now be done as level 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 so you would always know exactly what progress your child was making.

I have to say - I didn't know whether to laugh or cry! I'd expect most teachers could easily identify if a child was generally a level 3, 4 or 5. Surely the latter - being more accurate - is the better.

Funnily enough, despite all the promises and two children at the school with 6 years left between them, I never once actually received a report with a level graded that way. They never actually changed from the a,b,c.

I do sometimes get a bit ratty about these levels but then remind myself of my school report.

Test score 45% place in class 25/33

Completely and utterly useless that was too!

[mamacheeks]

History teacher here. This is music to my ears. I know many schools that will not allow teachers to report one sub-level lower than the previous report. These are big disciplines. Progress is not always linear. I would rather a child was able to recall their strengths in a subject and know what they need to do next to improve, rather than be able to recite their sublevel across all subjects, which seems the current trend. Thanks noble. I had no idea maths teachers felt this way. Who actually wants sub-levels?

[asiatic]

This is how I award sublevels. Retreive level and sublevels awarded from previous teacher. Check pupil is still a. alive, and b. attending school. If answer to a and b is yes, add one sublelvel for each 5 months teaching pupil has recieved since previous teachers grade allocated.

This is in fact the ONLY way we are allowed to award sublevels. This rate of progress must be shown, or off with the teachers head. I've had students, tragically, with severe degenerative diseases, steadily losing cognative ability. I'm still required to show this rate of progress.

As to my feelings about the previous teachers allocated grades, there are times when I seriously wonder if she was holding the class list the other way up.

Luckily, in my school, non of the parents care a hoot, Few even read the reports. ( many can't read). So we just get the paperwork out of the way as quickly and painlessly as possible, then get on with the business of actual education.

[TalkinPeace2]

Beautiful description!

[LoopyLoopsIsTentativelyBack]

Same (not Maths).

Levels mean bugger all, sub levels even less. Mine are based on how they did last time, how I think they are getting on, and FFT data. Not assessments themselves, which can vary wildly for each child depending on the skill area assessed and the individual piece of work.

[marriedinwhite]

I couldn't agree more but why do teachers (head teachers) go along with it if its such a lot of old tosh? I would respect them so much more if they stood up for principles like these. Next there will be a thread about behaviour and the toleration of poor and disruptive behaviour being the root of all evil.

Precisely why we pulled our dd out of an outstanding comp. We now get much more information on far less paper. Haven't heard about levels for almost a year now. At the end of Y8 though she had a mixture of 6a's and 7c's and at a very middle of road and gentle indy she had a great deal of catching up to do.

[Ouluckyduck]

Can anybody explain to me why this ridiculous system is deemed to be better than awarding grades to pieces of work/on end of year reports? Wouldn't it make much more sense because grades can go up and down?