progress 8 based on KS2 SATS

[summerchocolate]

On one of the other SATS posts here someone had explained that "progress 8 attainment is based on KS2 SATS scores. That is why secondaries use them to predict grades- they need to get all pupils to an = or + score for progress 8".

Can anyone explain this. I can understand for maths how this might work but how would it work for English where there is a separate score for reading and SPAG plus a teacher assessed writing. The results for each may be very different to each other? Which part would they use for an English score?

Even if secondary schools don't have any faith in the SATS results themselves are they being forced to use them to set their own GCSE targets and to be measured against on progress?

[BoneyBackJefferson]

You are right in that the targets for Ks4 are based on the year Ks2 Sats results.

However the targets are not set by schools they are set by the family fisher trust, they take the data and extrapolate probability for all subjects, including those for subjects that are not directly linked to the Sats results.

As these are the measure used by the LEAs, league tables and the government the schools are required forced to used them.

[noblegiraffe]

You'd like to think that they use the English score to predict English and the Maths score to predict maths, but they don't. They use the SATs total to predict everything.

[summerchocolate]

What!! This gets crazier and crazier. A child with failed maths and 100% on reading and SPAG could have a totally unreasonably high target for maths GCSE?

Do you mean they use the total of the scores of 3 exams ie reading, SPAG and maths?
Presumably they cant use teacher assessed writing as there is only pass, fail or exceed or can they??

[LockedOutOfMN]

Spare a thought for the heads of department in subjects like art, chemistry, economics and music who are held accountable for their Year 10 students' results in comparison to predictions made on their literacy, numeracy and SPAG scores aged 10!

Agree with OP, it is crazy and another example of the government's failures both to respect teachers as professionals and to think through properly before taking decisions that affect millions of children and thousands of school.

[stubiff]

Currently it is based on combining English & Maths. For the 2017 KS4 cohort onwards it will be based on Reading & Maths.

[Essexmum69]

DS2's Art teacher is going to struggle then as he scored highly in his Sats but his year 6 report puts him as emerging for Art (at 11.8 years he still can't colour within the lines and his free drawing is infant standard, so no hope I feel)
What a ridiculous system!

[summerchocolate]

Sorry do you mean that for children going into KS4 in 2017 so currently maybe yr 8 or 9 onwards will only have their maths and reading exam scores included to create the target and nothing else including nothing teacher assessed. Is the plan that this then applies to current year 6 too?

This is absolutely crazy.

[PenelopePitstops]

Teacher assessment means bugger all from now on. At the moment the targets are based on the total English result but this will change to be just the reading score (if I read the documents properly!).

[summerchocolate]

Would a total English score currently be one third reading exam, one third spag exam and one third teacher assessed? When do you think the change takes effect? If it starts with this years reading paper only then I understand the results were generally poor nationally.

[ohtobeanonymous]

Ignore all the ridiculous numbers and look at comments on effort/understanding/application to learning in reports (or at parents' evenings).

Children do not 'improve' in a linear fashion. sometimes they plateau, sometimes make slow/rapid/erratic progress and sometimes they regress. If they choose their GCSE options wisely, and put in their best effort they should achieve their best in the exams.

If they are happy and confident to try new things, and not 'put off' by failure but motivated to learn from any, they will do well in life.

The whole idea (or usefulness) of predicting a GCSE grade from a child's result in a few tests at age 10/11 is nonsense. SATS are nonsense, and this current government's attitude to judging the quality of education and progress/achievement is nonsense.

[summerchocolate]

ohto - I think we all unanimously agree that the system is totally ridiculous!!

I just want to understand what the teachers/secondary schools are actually being measured against. For example if they have a child who scored very highly on the KS2 exams will school then be expected to try to get her to reach As at GCSE despite poor teacher assessments, poor writing and very poor effort at primary which may not change at secondary. Would she be put under pressure at secondary to try to obtain unrealistic GCSEs to prevent school getting an unacceptable progress 8? I presume teachers cant ignore progress 8 and get pressure from above to reach target but I have no idea really as it all sounds nonsense to me.

[HeyBells]

The Year 11s who've just done GCSEs didn't have a SPAG Sat, although they did have a few spellings. They were the last year to have a writing Sat rather than teacher assessment so the English Sat is based on reading and writing papers and 10 spellings. There were also no level 6 papers so the highest you could get was level 5. This will be why what they base the targets on will be changing.

[PenelopePitstops]

Summer you have pretty much nailed it.

Teachers performance management depends on progress 8 targets. They are used as a stick to beat individual teachers, departments and schools for their "lack of performance". These targets are based on ks2 results. They have been for a long time but progress 8 wasn't a "thing". Previously the headline figure was a percentage of A*-C grades including English and Maths.

Secondary teachers are tied by these targets and will do everything in their power to get students to achieve them because quite literally their job is on the line.

[noblegiraffe]

What really annoys me about FFT targets is that schools misuse them - I'm not sure how many on SLT actually understand statistics. They're an average target, which means that they will be accurate over a large cohort. They should not be used to assess the achievement of a small group (e.g. A class) and never for an individual. By their nature, some students will beat their target, some will meet it and some will miss it, and this says nothing about how hard that student has worked or how well they've been taught. It's only when this is put together with the results from a large number of other students that a picture will emerge.

And yet we often have teachers being denied pay rises because their class (or an individual) don't meet their target, and students being singled out and forced into intervention if they're failing while other students are praised for beating their computer generated average target. Madness.

[summerchocolate]

Yes that is what I am concerned about. If a child has similar scores/strengths for all subjects and SATS scores that are likely to relate to GCSE the system might not be too awful but if they have widely fluctuating scores then it will make a huge difference which aspects of the SATS are used.

I have visions of DDs life being made a misery for not achieving As when it is unlikely to be a realistic target and some poor teachers getting very unfair grief from above about it.

If progress 8 is now based solely on reading and maths for this year 6 SATS then why not SPAG too?

[youarenotkiddingme]

IT is madness!

My DS got level 4 across all English (with reader and scribe), level 5 for science and 6 for maths.
So his average points score that set his year 7 targets was 30 and his target for end of year was 34. (Using schools own system of points against grades)

His end of year 11 target across all subjects is 50/6/B (using old grades against new grades against schools own points system).

At end of year 7 he got 38 for maths, 30 for English and 34 for science.
And apart from computer studies (38) and geography (34) he didn't reached the progress 8 targets set in any other subject.

In fact in a few he made no progress at all and has ended year on 27 - lower than his average posts score!

[spanieleyes]

i was pulled in to my son's school at the end of year 7 as my son was not achieving his target grades, he had achieved very highly in his SATs and was therefore targeted A grades across the board. He had not achieved the A grade in art, dt or PE. I had to explain to the poor year 7 teachers that he would never achieve an A grade in these subjects as he had severe dyspraxia ( diagnosed when in year 2!) and his skills in these areas were equivalent to a 7 year old! He never did achieve above a C in all his years at secondary school and his report comments for PE were generally of the "well, he turned up!"

[livvvvvv]

spanieleyes - that's pretty much what happened with my DS. He got level 5 in English and level 6 in maths sats, and therefore his targets in year 7 for art/dt/pe were high level 5/low level 6 - on his report they continually put 'seriously below target' until they did their own assessments at the end of y7 and his targets were adjusted to 3a. It's completely ridiculous how they expect a person who's good at english and maths to be good at everything else, let alone predicting GCSE results from some tests you do when you are 10 /11

[summerchocolate]

Yes livvvv and spaniel that is what I fear. Also if it is now done just using reading and maths exam results it is even more crazy as a child who can scarcely write could be targeted with As in everything including English and humanities even though they may have no chance of writing an essay just because they can read and do maths.

[spanieleyes]

to be fair, he did get As for everything else, just not any subjects that required any level of manual dexterity!

[cricketballs]

As PP have descibed; feel for those of us who don't teach English or Maths as we are beaten by the targets that these KS2 results generate

[BreconBeBuggered]

I'd been thinking DS2's projected GCSE grades were some kind of administrative cock-up, with predicted grades for Art and PE being as high as for English and Maths. He does give everything a go, so the accompanying comments in my view aren't that useful about the standard he's (not) reached. How stupid. Why didn't I guess it was part of an alleged 'system'? The school must be stuffed with teachers praying he won't attempt anything that involves physical coordination of any kind for GCSE.

[LockedOutOfMN]

BreconBeBuggered You've hit the nail on the head. At the other end of the scale, your son's friend who's a gifted athlete or artist but perhaps a bit useless at English or Maths (at this point in his life) has a ridiculously low target grade for the P.E. or Art at which he excels.

Sorry if I've missed a previous post where you've stated your son's age. When he gets to Year Nine, I expect his tutor and / or head of year and individual subject teachers will support him (and you) in choosing GCSE options which he'll enjoy and in which he has the potential to achieve highly...according to the teachers' professional judgement rather than the mad statistical predictions. You can start asking individual subject teachers at parents' evenings from end of Year Eight / start of Year Nine whether they think he'd be suited to the GCSE.

[antiqueroadhoe]

You're all correct to be in disbelief over this - your fears are founded!

[summerchocolate]

Why is there so little outrage about it? There was so much publicity about the new SATS this year but I had not heard of this at all and had very little response or outrage to this post and my one in the primary section.