85% in KS2 Maths (all of)- what's that as a '3', '4' or '5' level mark pls?

[LittenTree]

DS2 is keen to get a feel for how he's doing in Maths. He's done several old papers which have been very useful to him in highlighting where he consistently goes wrong, and has been getting around 85%.

I have no idea how this translates into SATS levels!

Anyone know pls? tia.

[juniper904]

Levels aren't decided like that.

He needs to also do the mental maths paper, and then look at the mark scheme.

THEN it's compared to his actual age.

Where did you get the past paper from?

[juniper904]

If you really want to do past papers (although my professional opinion makes me a bit )

then look at
www.emaths.co.uk/KS2SAT.htm

You can download papers, the mark scheme and the audio transcription for the mental tests.

[LittenTree]

OK, his scores on his latest one was:
calculator 35/40
non-calculator 33/40
mental 17/20

i.e. 85/100

I think it was the 2009 SATS paper (didn't look at it in that much detail).

Incidentally I don't necessarily want him to 'do old SATS papers', but it seems pretty common practice for DCs who are 2 months away from The Real Thing to be familiarising themselves with them amongst my friends' DC at all the local primaries. Maybe it's a Hampshire school thing?

I actually didn't realise at all that SATS were age adjusted!!

[LittenTree]

In fact, on my last point (not realising age was taken into consideration in SATS results)- I recall feeling just a tiny, inconsequentially bit annoyed for DS1 when he got a 2 in his KS1 Maths SATS (back when they 'sat' them) when he was about 10 months younger than another DS we knew well who got a 3. Around 10 months later, DS1 was regularly getting high 3s and even low 4s in the same subject. That's not to say he couldn't possibly have made a great leap forward but I don't recall it happening. So was precise age always taken into account? Surely a DC gets say 85 out of 100 or they don't?

This is purely an academic question (excuse the pun!). It's really neither here nor there.

[snowball3]

We don't age adjust SATs scores, what you get is what you get!
And if it was the 2009 paper, 85 marks would be a level 5 ( as I suspect you might have worked out!)

[juniper904]

Ah, well my bad then.

I have used QCA tests in years 3 and 4, and they do age adjust.

[snowball3]

Some schools do and some schools don't!

We tend not, simply because KS2 SATs aren't age adjusted so if you do age adjust in previous years, you MIGHT get "false" readings when compared with the unadjusted score they will end up with!

[bruffin]

My dd did her Ks2 SATs in 2009
85% would have been a 5b

[LittenTree]

Thanks all.

It's a minefield, isn't it?!

I am happy for DS2 that at least he can feel, even if he gets a 4 (which will be fine by me, I should add!) in his actual Maths SATS, come the day, that he knows that he can do better. He'll be lucky to get a 4 in English so this is a confidence boost.

[ImNotaCelebrity]

Approx 78 upwards would be a 5 most years.

juniper - the 3, 4 and 5 optional tests can give both a general nc level (nothing to do with age) and a standardised score, which is based on age. The 2 don't mix. It's possible your schools use just the standardised score so it's comparable to other tests? Most schools track progress using nc levels though.

[juniper904]

Yeah, we use a mixture. We do APP and teacher assessment throughout the year, but then QCA tests in April/ May, which are sent to the LA for marking.

Bit of a waste of money IMO. I quite enjoy marking the maths papers! Writing- not so much.

[lljkk]

ZOMBIE THREAD... but may I just ask..

DD came home today with a non-calculator 2008 maths test (Test A) which she got 33/40 on, or 82.5%. Would I be right to think that suggests high 4/borderline for low 5 (atm)?

[Feenie]

2008 thresholds

Again, it depends on what the mark is on Paper B and Mental Maths, all added together.

[lljkk]

Thank You Feenie!!
yes I got gist of previous parts of the thread about different components of overall score, was still fun to see DD's own exam work & I wondered what it meant. It kind of confirms what I thought about her & her cohort, too.