what levels would you be expecting clever Y7s

The highest I've ever given a y7 is a 6b.

DS is getting various 6s in individual tests on English and Maths and they gave him 6c's on his interim report last week. In year 6 they only tested to level 5s)

5b for Science, then a range from 4b down to 2a for humanities. The tutor said not to worry about the low numbers as they are starting almost from zero in those subjects.

He is what I would call clever, but doesn't work that hard, and is quite relaxed about it all.

[BTW, by 'APP-style collections of evidence' I only mean that, as a teacher when assigning a level for a pupil, the expectation is that I spread out in front of me all the evidence I have about a child - their written work, notes made by me during lessons, any 'tests', any notes from group work etc - and use that the highlight what skills from each NC level they have demonstrated, in whatever form the school normally uses. I don't mean collected files of collated evidence, just normal 'continuous formative assessment' teacher assessment type stuff.]

Noble,

It is - IME - normal practice when teaching primary to be asked by SMT for levels for children in Reading, Writing and Maths at least termly, and often half termly. Different schools do that in different ways - some through tests, but APP-style 'collections of evidence' to track progress against the core elemnts of each level are probably more normal.

I appreciate that in secondary there are perhaps not enough lessons per week to get such a clear idea so quickly of where each child is through their verbal and written work - and obviously that is MUCH harder in 'more rarely timetabled' subjects - but I am surprised that there is such a huge switch from continuous assessment to 'it's not a real level unless it's beeen tested in an exam covering the whole syllabus' when moving from primary to secondary.

Proper SATs style exams, socharlotte? Covering the whole syllabus?

Most schools just normally do topic tests covering the material since September. In my subject (maths) at least, a one hour test on a handful of topics is certainly not enough evidence to accurately level a student. Even from topic to topic the level of work varies, so we might do level 5 angle work, then a bit of level 6 algebra. If the child is brilliant at algebra but rubbish at angles then what level would that put them at? If the test is all level 6 material and they flunk it, what level do you give them?

Levels are only designed to assess progress between key stages. It's a bit dodgy to use them to assess progress year to year. It's ludicrous to try to use them to assess progress over a few months. Sublevels are also meaningless in any sense other than 'scraped a level 5 on this particular exam'= 5c, 'just missed a level 6' = 5a. A difference of one mark on a test can be the difference between meets and fails to meet expectations.

SATs were only 6 months ago. Any attempt to numerically quantify progress since then is bollocks, IMO.

My son yr 7 is at 6b maths and 6c English, considered bright.

noblegiraffe Our school does exams for the Y7s in November/December in every subject. Why would the levels be bollocks / SATS were 6 or 7 months earlier? [confused}

If I was asked, I'd say whatever they got in their KS2 SATs. If I said anything else I'd only be making it up anyway.

If you want a relatively decent level assessment, ask me after the Y7 exams in May. All else is bollocks.

TFM,

I agree, and I'm not suggesting that those levels are what it will say on his report. I'm just offering the evidence I have to date, which I agree is incomplete and partial.

Hmm. Not keen on APP either TBH

In secondary, ultimately what we are working towards is a GCSE grade (or an EBC for year 7, but as we have no idea what that will be, we don;t know what we are working towards!).

APP is of only limited use in assessing a student's progress towards a GCSE grade. In my subject anyway.

The Fallen Madonna - completely agree - collections of work should be levelled - APP criteria states that the measurements should be applied to a range of pieces and even though APP is now archived, in the absence of anything else, we're still using it. We get children to submit portfolios of work half termly.

I hate levelling individual pieces of work. In fact I don't do it. I do level tests, but they come with a health warning. The validity of levels increases as you go through the year, and you get a rounded idea of a student's strengths and weaknesses.

Of course, we have to report with sublevels half termly

3b1g - yes good point - MFL and other subjects they've not had specialists in before will have a lower starting point. Our Level 8s are in the minority - I'd say about three or four in the whole year. About another 8 are getting secure 7s and quite a few 6's. This is a bog standard state comp by the way. The usual yardstick is that they'll make two sub levels progress per year from primary, though there is usually a fall back in the first half term as you'd expect after a long summer holiday and a new start in a new environment. Where the top end do well though, it's usually more about the ceiling placed on them by SATS so they can only achieve a maximum of a level 6 in year 6, when in fact they may be capable of more. I'd say that's true of our top end.

We haven't had a full set of levels yet, but levels DS (bright, in local comprehensive) is achieving in assessed work in his books and any tests etc mainly seem to be 6s - not just in the subjects he was assessed in in Y6 SATs, but also in subjects like Geography where I do not know his levels from last year.

He may well be higher in Maths - I believe that his termly assessment paper could go up to a 7b or so, and as Maths is his 'thing' then he may well be a highish 6 or a lowish 7 for that.

It depends on which subject. If it's a new MFL that they've never studied before, then I don't see how they could be getting anything above a 4a.
There seems to be some discrepancy between levels assessed in Y6 SATs and levels assessed at the beginning of Y7, especially in Maths.
At this point last year, DS1 (bright but not exceptionally so) was getting level 5s in most subjects, with 4s in Latin and German and 6c in his strongest subjects.

Should clarifiy - I work in a state middle school in a deprived area.

Maths - we had a couple of children at 7b in July last year. English - our best Y7 was a 6a.

Depends on the child. Some of my year 7s are achieving level 8s in English and Maths. What do you consider to be clever?

I found this information from a Bucks co-ed grammar school which surely gives a rough guide:

learning.royallatin.bucks.sch.uk/file.php/1/Student%20Progress/yr7_expected_progress_summer.pdf