KS2 Sats scores - how do they translate to 11+ / grammar admission?(22 Posts)
Been given DS' SATs scores (as well as working at such and such level). But they literally mean nothing to me.
How do I use them to figure out if he's on track for grammar school potentially or not? We're in Bucks so, yes, this matters.
They are totally different assessments, so it isn't really possible to be certain. Although there is a correlation some dcs with lower SATs levels can "pass" the test with the right preparation.
Have the school indicated that he has grammar school potential?
Our school refuse to say. The most they will do is give you the scores, if requested.
I'm in no way an expert on this, but would presume that the grammar school test is entirely or mostly composed of reasoning tests, both verbal and non-verbal, designed to test academic potential? If this is the case, SATs scores would not necessarily give an accurate indication of grammar school entry exam. results.
Also, statistically, the grammar school will accept the top % of the candidates who sit the test so it doesn't depend on what your son achieves but what he achieves in relation to everyone else. Is he top or near the top of his class?
I would say that the best way to find out is to ask his teacher(s) whether they think he is on track for grammar school and what he should be doing to prepare.
You could also contact the grammar school to find out what the entry exam. comprises - usually they have sample or past papers which you can get a copy of for practice.
Sorry, cross posted.
You could arrange a session with a local tutor who prepares students for 11+ and ask for his or her assessment?
If he's done KS2 SATS isn't he too late for 11+ anyway? Are you thinking 12+? In which case you are presumably tutoring already?
Have I got totally the wrong KS here? Yes only in Year 2 and just done his first SATs. Our school advise that the scores they get in those are usually consistent with whether the child will get into grammar or not. But as the school is quite openly "anti Grammar system" (awkward in Bucks), they won't actively tutor for or advise on how likely a child is to get in. Yes, DS is in all top sets. I'd say in the top 10% of children in his year, but not at the very very top. I just wondered if there was some kind of correlative mark they used as I've heard about standard scores where they add the marks together then do something to them to account for birthdays?
And yes, he will be tutored. But not until year 4.
I'm a secondary teacher so no expert but I would be genuinely surprised if there were a clear correlation between Year 2 SATs scores and the 11+. Also weren't this year's SATs different to in previous years?
If you really want him to go to grammar school, I would see a tutor now for one or two sessions as they should be able to spot areas of strength and weakness and suggest things to do at home over the next year before you start him on regular tutoring.
The 11 plus test in Bucks is CEM and example questions are on the Bucks CC web site under secondary transfer. They are a wider set of questions than verbal and non verbal reasoning.
To get things into perspective, no state primary school in Bucks is allowed to teach for the exam or coach for it. Schools teach the National Curriculum. Schools do not give any hints or tips on 11 plus potential. They are not anti 11 plus, but they do not express opinions on it. Any parent that wants more should opt for an independent school. Bucks expects 33% of pupils to be selected for a grammar school but lots of out of county children take the papers. In some schools virtually no child is selected despite good Sats results. In other schools, lots of children pass. The main thing is to do more than coaching. Reading widely, number games, puzzles, extending general knowledge, concentration, perseverance and doing really well at school are the main criteria. Coaching may help but it will not make up for a poor vocabulary for example.
KS1 is probably too early to tell unless the child is mostly exceeding on all measures. Reading ages should be high and the child should have a real enthusiasm for learning. The tests are taken very early in Y6, so three years to go!
OP if your DC only KS1 now I think you have plenty of time to help your child become a high achiever without stressing about tutoring. If you feel that your child is an inquisitive sole with love for reading and studying you are on the right track. Encourage your child to read for pleasure consistently in order to develop vocabulary, help improve child's creative writing and revise time tables, addition, subtraction etc. in order to improve Maths skills. By year 5 you will have to start building child's speed and accuracy during tests. My DC's Key stage 1 SATs Levels: Maths Level 3 & English Level 2A but at the time we didn't even think about grammar school. I know children who were just average at the end of Year 2 and now at Grammar school with my DS. Good luck!
I would also be highly surprised I'd there was much correlation between the two... My dd, for example, was very average in year 2, but top table by year 5.
As a Bucks parent, you do start to work out who the definite 11 plus children are fairly early if, and only if, you are in a school where plenty get the pass mark each year. You can gauge who is bright and family background tells you a lot too. Not exclusively of course. However, I knew who the bright children were in Reception! The borderline was more difficult to guess and that is where there is greatest movement in attainment. Children who are reading fluently at 5 are going to get to grammar school. Others do catch up but may not catch up with the really bright ones. If you don't live in a grammar school area, parents don't even think about it. Why would they? Sats, though, are a very blunt instrument and do not tell you enough about a child's reasoning, speed of thinking or general knowledge. That is why children can get really good ks2 Sats results, but not get a grammar school place.
Grammar schools are not everything so I wouldn't worry about the tutoring just to get into that certain schools.(unless the other schools around are terrible.)
Dds A August bornand just slightly above average in year 2(level 2+3 mostly on the old system)
In ks2 says got highest marks possible(high 5) but in end of year reports got mostly 6 and a few sevens) took the 11+ on the day without studying and passed it easily and got the grammar school place but didn't take it.
Things can change a lot in 4 years but the kids who were on the top/middle tables could mostly pass the 11+ I would say.
In yr5 our school have out letter to those they would think be able to pass the 11+ to go to this weekend club thing at the weekend at grammar school-maybe see if your school does a similar thing?
Bojo interesting to read your comments. When you say "reading fluently at 5" (I assume you mean Reception??) are you talking about Harry Potter or a decent level of Biff, Chip and Kipper (or whatever the hell they're called!)?
Wrt your comment on "family background", do you just mean the pushiness of parenting?
NobodyInParticular By end of reception, I'd consider reading fluently would be somewhere between Biff and Chip and Harry Potter. Reading frequently is perhaps equally or even more important.
I'm not sure what the scale is this year, but I would have thought getting level 3 or 2a was much more likely to indicate grammar school performance level than 2c or below. But all sorts of things (later development, lack of emphasis on formal learning in KS1...) could confound it all. I reckon there will be some correlation, but not at a level that is seriously predictive of actual later outcome. What happens at one age can change a lot, later. I remember a great story by a former colleague whose news piece, on election to the Royal Society, began by explaining that this highly distinguished scientist had failed his 11+.
It was perfectly possible for scientists to not pass the old Bucks 11 plus as it was firmly verbal reasoning! When I say "reading fluently" I mean books with decent paragraphs and a wide variety of words. Harry Potter is not read by every child and few could read that at 5. I don't know Biff and Chip either. The brightest children read lots of books and not just reading scheme ones. This is what gives them a great vocabulary. It is what gives them an edge at 11 plus. Working quickly and accurately is also required. The old 2c is highly unlikely to get to a grammar school as few level 4s got in - unless tutored relentlessly. Moving from a 2c to a level 5 was beyond most children.
Family background, regarding grammar school selection, is overwhelmingly middle class in Bucks. Few people on benefits or working class get children into the grammar schools. Yes, some parents are ridiculously pushy but educational attainment of the parents, jobs they do and their interest in education will give you a steer regarding their children. I am sorry if this sounds unpalatable but grammar schools are no longer for the working class kid- they rarely get a look in these days. Report after report has underlined this fact.
Grammar school test can very much be a luck and number game. For example, both Reading grammar and Latymer used CEM exam papers for Sept 2017 entry. Imagine if both papers were exactly the same (highly possible), my son would have failed Latymer but passed Reading. This year Reading had around 900 candidates but Latymer had around 2000. I would say more gifted (or better prepped) kids took Latymer exams than Reading, hence the chance of admission was slimmer. My advise for you is to pick a decent grammar school with lesser number of candidates, it will certainly increase your son's chance of success. :D
Clearly there will be SOME correlation between SATs and school performance and who gets a Grammr place.....in terms of those who achieve BELOW a certain SATS level are unlikely to make it. So I agree that those on the old system achieving 2C at KS1 or 4C at KS2 were unlikely to make it. Likewise, those on L6 at KS2 would have a better chance, but couldn't be guaranteed. Those achieving very poorly and very highly on SATs are also likely to be those lacking or having the vocab and conceptual understanding to not do well or to do well on 11+. However, there will be man you children in the middle - those who were 4A or 5A - and for them, it might be much harder to know if they would or wouldn't get in - some would and some wouldn't from across the range, largely determined by whether they had been prepared or not.
Isn't it daft that in Bucks, the primary and secondary schools, including Grammars and non-Grammars are all part of the state school education system, but the primaries refuse to comment on most likely/suitable school for next stage. Crazy, and contributing to the class gap, where only the middle class kids get prepared. If the primaries did at least some work, those bright working class kids would stand a bit of a chance.
Secondary schools would be slated for not providing advice on unis or careers, but somehow it's okay and encouraged for primaries to pretend grammars don't even exist,in areas where up to a third will go to them. The kids who really lose out from this are the working class bright ones, not the middle classes who will fight for the information, pay for the tutoring or home prep and boost their middling children to the necessary standard, pushing out those who might be cleverer, but not prepared.
So SATs can't tell you for sure, but they can be an indicator of later achievement. I agree that usually it is clear at 5 who are the bright kids and who are less so...and there is some movement across primary, but not as much as you might like. I also agree that early literacy makes a huge difference.......some children are fluent readers at 5, often because their parents have taught them to read and worked hard at it (controversial I know) but once a good reader, even if others do catch up, you never lose your reading ability. I certainly wouldn't be settling for the once a week at school reception reading which often goes on - it's needed every day at home 365 days a year in the early stages. Hmm, sorry,mgone off topic!
Locked out - our experience is a bit different. Our DD at 5 could hardly read - just didn't get it. Something clicked over the course of year 1 and she aced selective entrance exams at 11 and is now at Oxford reading English, with better A levels than some of the early readers. Children develop at their own rate and when they're ready!
As a Yr 5/6 teacher, I have children taking both 11+ and KS2 SATS. I have had a child achieving Level 3 in year 6 who passed the 11+ and a child who achieved L6 who failed. There is SOME correlation between the two but not an exact match.
(P.S the child who passed with the L3 was extensively coached and struggled really hard once in grammar school to keep up with the others.)
Join the discussion
Please login first.