To give DD school (and the SATs agency) some basic statistical literacy?

So if we were comparing in other exams like GCSE

4 is a pass but a low pass then you have 5 pass 6 7 8 etc

then you obviously have 2 3

so I’m assuming like 100 would be in that sense “4 “
and 107 “ 6 “

4 is a pass but not the average score nationally.

It is explicitly government policy to raise standards so that the proportion meeting expected standards increases.

(The reference you're making is Michael Gove in about 2013 where he said entirely stupid and mathematically illiterate things to the Education Select Committee about how all schools should be able to achieve a "Good" rating while also saying that one of the prerequisites of that rating could be to perform above average.)

That’s not how you said it is it ?

And I’m not disputing that. But objectively, they are not difficult tests. I’d save the anger and fervour and disputing how the scores are calculated for a fight worth having in their shoes. And that’s if you even consider them valid/important in the first place. Mine did well in them, if you believe in the metrics used. However, they’ve meant nothing later on in their school careers. Nothing at all!

Wasn’t it the Government that said that all children should achieve the average score of 100, which they were then told they couldn’t as it was an average!

But 100 is the minimum scaled score for a child to achieve age related expectation. Anyone who got between 80 and 99 didn’t reach that standard

@drspouse

You can scale to raw scores here

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/key-stage-2-tests-2024-scaled-scores/2024-key-stage-2-scaled-score-conversion-tables

Then the test stats are in Appendix A tab 17 onwards.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-test-development-handbook

From the appendix: Standard Error of Measurement in raw scores of 4.5ish in maths and 3ish in the other two.

For the scaled scores the SEM will be smaller, maybe half, because of the compression.

The 95% c.i. will be 1.96 times the SEM you calculate in the step above. (Technically that assumes the SEM distribution is normal, but other govt commentary uses it, or rather uses 2x, in illustration, so that seems reasonable).

It wouldn’t be a mumsnet thread without one poster accusing another of “projecting” or “are you ok” or “do you find this triggering”

They are standardised scores. In the tests we Ss range from 69 or below to 130 or above.

Projecting what ?

it was a cruel comment to make. The child in question has been adopted by OP who’s first language is not English and with Additional SEND needs not projecting at all just reminding you that not everyone is the same.

Projecting, much?!

I think you're approaching this in a slightly odd way by expecting a CI for your child's individual score.

This is an exam. Exams don't give a confidence interval of the result. They give you a score out of a total. These are scaled to allow meaningful data comparison between years but beyond some very minor adjustments to allow for minor variations in the difficulty of the test, to ensure the 100 and 110 scaled scores hit in the right spot, your child's score means nothing more than "this is the score your child got in this particular test."

Where a CI is useful is in what the score means. And you get that to a certain extent in the population- and school-level progress and prediction scores that draw upon SATS, and secondary schools may initially draw upon those population level predictors to set initial targets and place in initial sets.

But these tests themselves don't purport to give any broader meaning on the individual level than to tell you how your child performed in a test on a particular day.

If you want to know exactly what percentile she's in for this cohort rather than using previous years as a proxy, you'll have to wait until they publish the statistics later in the year where each score gives you the exact percentile of children it relates to for that year. But it's been pretty stable over the years so il
not sure why you're averse to using previous years as a proxy.

Don't overthink the SATs OP. They're to hold the school accountable rather than anything else.

You don't need all this intricate detail to see that your DD may benefit from some extra support in Y7, which has already been arranged. Far better that she gets support she ends up not needing than she's overlooked and struggles.

Most secondary schools only place a very light weight on SATs or primary school reports and usually assess the kids as they find them when they arrive. Whilst in my experience it's true that kids who get high SATs go on to achieve well at GCSE, the reverse is not necessarily a given. Many children are later starters and find themselves in Y8 or 9.

There is no need for all this nitpicking over disappointing SATs results. Move on, leave them behind and forge ahead with secondary school.

Sorry should have tagged the poster. That to was to MollyButton who said not passing could provide more support at Secondary- not necessarily true.

Not necessarily true. As the kid who just scrapes the pass will have a higher Progress 8 target grade for GCSE - so the school will more likely target intervention to those who are less likely to meet their P8 target grade (over a student who has lower SATs scores and therefore a lower P8 GCSE target they are more likely to meet as its lower.)

Oh and the end of your comment is just mean and the reason why so many children maybe academic but lack basic skills in humanity and kindness.

great for your children they can do maths and English but shame they don’t have a parent who will teach respect.

there is many children for a multitude of reasons might not get the scores your precious wee ones got !

Read the thread - it’s not that she is not worried and she knows the issues her DC faces.

that I've said mean in my OP when I mean median. Gah! My supervisor would have my guts for garters.

good job you started this thread before emailing the head Op

you’d have made a right t*t of yourself!

I wouldn’t worry about your interpretation of the data. I’d worry about why your DC is so significantly behind and what you can do to help. It’s so arrogant to assume you know better, because you disagree with the scores. All of mine have gone through state schooling and have got greater depth in all areas. The Sats are not that hard!

And how will the confidence interval help your DD - it’s irrelevant and not available . The bandings are in my post of 12.16.

Op have you decided whether to “educate” the head teacher?

We have established up thread that it’s not the case !

Quite clearly an academic Op who is very much struggling and not wishing to address the elephant in the room…, DD is significantly below her peers on this particular academic marker

Well this is what I mean, my daughters primary she just left is a one form entry mainstream primary and at had 5 with educational needs. They are all going to mainstream secondary’s apart from my daughter.
one had a play date recently and she couldn’t read a simple poster.
but going to one of our biggest state schools.

I would agree. The ‘under 80s’ will have traditionally been managed through primary, but typically transfer to special schools or units within mainstream at transition.

However, more recently special schools have become so oversubscribed that there is simply no space for these children in Y7. Temporary (unsuccessful) accommodation in mainstream or last resort home ed is then the result. I know of 3 children last year going from 1 primary, and at least 2 this year, who are having to follow the mainstream route.

There's very few below 80 in mainstream. I've taught 5 I think in 15 years.