to think GCSE targets of 9 is not right in year 7

Totally agree. We weren't given the "minimum target grades" until year 10, but they've just been discouraging for DD, because they felt unattainable. Most teachers would not predict above an 8 in year 10, so her predicted grades fell short of her "minimum target grades". Meanwhile they keep going on about the target grades only being a minimum and aiming to do better.
I've asked the school to consider using 8+ instead (and 7+ would be sense in year 7).

Our school has a range of targets (which I still feel is utter bollocks in year 7, but that's another story) so any of the higher achievers would get a target of 7-9. To just set 9 as a target is setting kids up for failure and a self esteem hit.

Ridiculous. In y7 the most it should say is 7+.
Even in y11 I think targets of 9 is setting up to fail.

I couldn't agree more.
What a load of head fuckery bollocks.

The most annoying things about it, is getting that red mark for not 'on target' for years to come.

My Ds was predicted all 8s (school had the same policy of never predicting a 9 no matter how well you did in the initial exams that determined the grades) and it was soul destroying for a few years for him as he was wasn't getting 8s in the assessments in years 7, 8 and 9.

He did come out with all 8s and 9s though, so they were pretty accurate. Which is annoying but also a relief once they have those certificates!

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Mental health amongst young people is at rock bottom. We've just come out the other side of a school-impacting pandemic. How is targeting a Yr7 with 9 helpful for anyone?

It's great that they're seeing his potential and aiming for that but I'm not sure it helps the child to have such a build up of pressure.

I went to a grammar school and many of us got As, Bs and Cs. These days it seems they all get the highest marks. What happened to being ok with good marks rather than outstanding?

I would push them on it. Write to the governors with your concerns. Link it back to any statements they make about mental health in their prospectus.

I agree, and we don't set 9s as targets ever in my school (because to get a 9, there's no fixed level of performance, it's the top 1.5% or whatever).

It's completely counterproductive because it's based on bollocks data and it means that anything less than perfection means your DC ends up feeling they are underachieving. And that can be a self fulfilling prophecy.

Flight paths are notoriously inaccurate - children mature so much, they blossom at different ages, they develop unexpected talents as they go through secondary school. One rubbish teacher or one inspirational one can make a massive difference.

If it's a decent school, they'll modify as the pupil goes along. DD got 120 in her English SATS, but English is her worst subject at GCSE and she's likely to get a 6.

I would speak to the school. I had a similar situation in Year 7. I do question the validity of the flight path approach and also the pressure it puts on young people.