progress 8 based on KS2 SATS

Agree that it's bizarre the sixth form entry was not based on predicted grades or, more typically for an independent school, an entry exam.

That was the problem, the secondary school was using target grades as predicted grades!

Very odd that the offer at sixth form was made on target grades and not predicted.

These are the targets that my school put on pupils' report so definitely shared with them. It was a total joke for DD. Her school was one who boycotted the SATs that particular year and didn't do the science one. As a result, the system allocated her the average level 4b and then targets reflecting this, so it meant that her GCSE target was a B when she'd only ever had As and A*s at all her exams.

Obviously once explained it didn't matter, but then had to go and seek the explanation as the school certainly didn't bother to explain, all I got from teachers was that it was utter nonsense and to ignore, however, it did become an issue when she applied for 6th form and offers were based on target grades (independent school). The school was great though, I went to speak to the Head of year and agreed to manually adjust the target to an A*. Thankfully, she'd also already done her first mock test by then (in November, so earlier than all the other local schools) and was able to share these results.

I am still to try to comprehend the benefit of this system. How can it be any good for the school if it is not accurate?

the student should never be given them

Agreed. DS1 went through secondary, having gone straight into Y8 from a Scottish primary, without any SATs-related targets, and once we'd got our heads around the alien concept of levelling it all seemed quite straightforward and focused on how he was performing at the time without any reference to how he'd done at primary school.

This time around should be a doddle, we thought, but no. The first Y7 interim report was a very pretty and colourful diagram detailing whether or not he was on target in various subjects, without giving any information about what his targets might actually be. By the end of Y8 we have a list of mostly grade 9 GCSEs to aim for, which is no more helpful. He is bright and a high performer in a couple of subjects, but there's no way he's in the top whatever % in everything. Not even close. It's no use to him to be given misleading information, and it's certainly no bloody use to the poor sods charged with getting him these grades.

FFT targets have been set like this for years. However, they are targets for the school, not the student, and the student should never be given them. The targets the student should be given should be set by a teacher who knows them and be realistic.

the publicity about the SATS were due to how difficult they were and that 11 year olds were being labeled as failures by the DoE if they didn't achieve above average. what you are discussing on this thread are targets not results which the teaching unions have been fighting against as they are being used as a stick to beat the teaching profession with

Because so much of what is going on in education is such a load of crap that teachers are losing the energy to endlessly point it out. It's a small turd within a massive heap of dung.

You're all correct to be in disbelief over this - your fears are founded!

BreconBeBuggered You've hit the nail on the head. At the other end of the scale, your son's friend who's a gifted athlete or artist but perhaps a bit useless at English or Maths (at this point in his life) has a ridiculously low target grade for the P.E. or Art at which he excels.

Sorry if I've missed a previous post where you've stated your son's age. When he gets to Year Nine, I expect his tutor and / or head of year and individual subject teachers will support him (and you) in choosing GCSE options which he'll enjoy and in which he has the potential to achieve highly...according to the teachers' professional judgement rather than the mad statistical predictions. You can start asking individual subject teachers at parents' evenings from end of Year Eight / start of Year Nine whether they think he'd be suited to the GCSE.

I'd been thinking DS2's projected GCSE grades were some kind of administrative cock-up, with predicted grades for Art and PE being as high as for English and Maths. He does give everything a go, so the accompanying comments in my view aren't that useful about the standard he's (not) reached. How stupid. Why didn't I guess it was part of an alleged 'system'? The school must be stuffed with teachers praying he won't attempt anything that involves physical coordination of any kind for GCSE.

As PP have descibed; feel for those of us who don't teach English or Maths as we are beaten by the targets that these KS2 results generate

to be fair, he did get As for everything else, just not any subjects that required any level of manual dexterity!

spanieleyes - that's pretty much what happened with my DS. He got level 5 in English and level 6 in maths sats, and therefore his targets in year 7 for art/dt/pe were high level 5/low level 6 - on his report they continually put 'seriously below target' until they did their own assessments at the end of y7 and his targets were adjusted to 3a. It's completely ridiculous how they expect a person who's good at english and maths to be good at everything else, let alone predicting GCSE results from some tests you do when you are 10 /11

i was pulled in to my son's school at the end of year 7 as my son was not achieving his target grades, he had achieved very highly in his SATs and was therefore targeted A grades across the board. He had not achieved the A grade in art, dt or PE. I had to explain to the poor year 7 teachers that he would never achieve an A grade in these subjects as he had severe dyspraxia ( diagnosed when in year 2!) and his skills in these areas were equivalent to a 7 year old! He never did achieve above a C in all his years at secondary school and his report comments for PE were generally of the "well, he turned up!"

IT is madness!

My DS got level 4 across all English (with reader and scribe), level 5 for science and 6 for maths.
So his average points score that set his year 7 targets was 30 and his target for end of year was 34. (Using schools own system of points against grades)

His end of year 11 target across all subjects is 50/6/B (using old grades against new grades against schools own points system).

At end of year 7 he got 38 for maths, 30 for English and 34 for science.
And apart from computer studies (38) and geography (34) he didn't reached the progress 8 targets set in any other subject.

In fact in a few he made no progress at all and has ended year on 27 - lower than his average posts score!

What really annoys me about FFT targets is that schools misuse them - I'm not sure how many on SLT actually understand statistics. They're an average target, which means that they will be accurate over a large cohort. They should not be used to assess the achievement of a small group (e.g. A class) and never for an individual. By their nature, some students will beat their target, some will meet it and some will miss it, and this says nothing about how hard that student has worked or how well they've been taught. It's only when this is put together with the results from a large number of other students that a picture will emerge.

And yet we often have teachers being denied pay rises because their class (or an individual) don't meet their target, and students being singled out and forced into intervention if they're failing while other students are praised for beating their computer generated average target. Madness.

Summer you have pretty much nailed it.

Teachers performance management depends on progress 8 targets. They are used as a stick to beat individual teachers, departments and schools for their "lack of performance". These targets are based on ks2 results. They have been for a long time but progress 8 wasn't a "thing". Previously the headline figure was a percentage of A*-C grades including English and Maths.

Secondary teachers are tied by these targets and will do everything in their power to get students to achieve them because quite literally their job is on the line.

The Year 11s who've just done GCSEs didn't have a SPAG Sat, although they did have a few spellings. They were the last year to have a writing Sat rather than teacher assessment so the English Sat is based on reading and writing papers and 10 spellings. There were also no level 6 papers so the highest you could get was level 5. This will be why what they base the targets on will be changing.

Ignore all the ridiculous numbers and look at comments on effort/understanding/application to learning in reports (or at parents' evenings).

Children do not 'improve' in a linear fashion. sometimes they plateau, sometimes make slow/rapid/erratic progress and sometimes they regress. If they choose their GCSE options wisely, and put in their best effort they should achieve their best in the exams.

If they are happy and confident to try new things, and not 'put off' by failure but motivated to learn from any, they will do well in life.

The whole idea (or usefulness) of predicting a GCSE grade from a child's result in a few tests at age 10/11 is nonsense. SATS are nonsense, and this current government's attitude to judging the quality of education and progress/achievement is nonsense.