Flight paths in secondary are nonsense and demotivating for pupils SAY OFSTED

In the context of additional needs keeping a close check on progress is vital in terms of creating measurable success criteria for any interventions given. For which there needs to be data collected and trajectories plotted as the results of interventions may not be instant.

It’s all guesswork and most of the time flat out made up, because if leaders expect students to have made a certain amount of progress in a term, that’s what the data will show, one way or another.

Of course we know it is guesswork. However, this all becomes very pertinent when ascertaining whether additional needs are present or being met. Because the very definition of which children require individual funding is reliant on them being seen to need additional help long term.

it’s that the data isn’t worth seeing, or meaningless out of context.

I'd rather decide that for myself. I say that as a parent who has officially asked for my child's school record before. The information on it would never have been disclosed to me otherwise. My child did have a Statement of SEN at the time. The record really confirmed to me how the teachers were assessing, the (lack of) reliability of the methodology and their attitudes towards my child's potential. This information helped me help my child who now is achieving well without a Statement or any additional 'help'.

We know data helps. Teachers have always collected data! Teachers still do! But there is nobody on this earth who can accurately predict what gcse grades a student will get from a KS2 mark. And anyone claiming they can is a liar. It’s all guesswork and most of the time flat out made up, because if leaders expect students to have made a certain amount of progress in a term, that’s what the data will show, one way or another.

Meanwhile in the teachers’ own markbooks are non-standardised, non-pretty, non-colour-coded marks that actually tell the tea truth. But don’t fit neatly on a graph or stick to a nice straight line, so will never get used.

Or, in terms of looking to the future, a mirror could help you decide when to have your next haircut. Without the mirror there is just less information full stop. Even if the mirror has a crack in it, or is distorted it can tell you more than no mirror

Data helps.

It’s not that teachers don’t want parents to see data, it’s that the data isn’t worth seeing, or meaningless out of context. For example, I keep a spreadsheet of marks scored on exam questions by my upper 6th class. It’s just for me - of course students get their marks back but there’s no point showing parents the mark sheet because it really wouldn’t tell them anything without my interpretation- I know if I set a question that was deliberately easy or hard, if it came at the end or start of a section of work, if it represents a good or bad effort for the student or class as a whole. The best way to communicate the information to a parent is face to face at parents’ evening, or via email if they have concerns at other times. Sure, you have the “right” to see them but they’re not being withheld from you if you don’t.

So how would you check progress, Lougle? How would you decide which students might need extra help to achieve? Data has to have some meaning. It is just like checking your appearance in the mirror. Yes, it might not tell you everything concerning how you appear to others but, at least, you can see whether you visibly have spinach stuck in between your front teeth!

I'd be really interested to see what evidence schools intend to present to Ofsted. Ime, simply saying "because we say so" didn't get very far with Ofsted. Maybe they have had a re think but if they have sadly there are a few local heads who have lost their jobs based only on Ofsted demanding "proof" in the form of data and refusing to accept professional judgements from SLT and LA school improvement partners.

Where teachers are open and transparent then, yes, it's great. But where teachers are defensive or out and out fudging marks, possibly because they are at risk of capability or no pay progression, I think there's a risk that the reality won't be apparent until students sit external exams in yr 11.

I'll be interested to see how it plays out, whilst being relieved that my children are no longer in school.

"Are you sure P8 is no longer a "thing"? I took this from FFT website..."

Progress 8 is different from a level of P8. Progress 8 is still a thing. P8 as a level for children with SN is still being used right now, but it's not the same thing.

I think, tbh, that there will always be levels of some sort. You can change the name of them, but it won't take away the perceived need to classify students as doing well, or not progressing as they should.

noble, I think you are assuming that the data and context is completely meaningless just because it has limitations. The data exists and has been collected and stored about my child, anyway and it is my right as a parent to see it. Why would you deny me this? It's is information which is up to me to use my own judgement dismiss or act upon it. It would highlight any area whereby I might investigate further, at the very least.

From you posts, you suggest all the data collected is meaningless. Grades are pretty meaningless. So what, if anything would you communicate regarding progress to parents? What standards would you hold yourself to account by? Because all professionals have to conform to some sort of standard...

A number of secondary schools near me are not providing working at or predicted grades for KS3. They have advised that it is assessment without levels and producing GCSE working at grades in KS3 is nonsense. They also claim to be backed by OFSTED with this.

I am inclined to agree with them because if I look at my dd's year 8 & 9 reports and her current working at grades in year 11 it looks like no progress has been made in a number of subjects. I know this is not the case from the work she produces and her efforts. I can only assume her KS3 reports were inaccurate.

Yes, but grading systems have changed a lot in recent years. Parents need extra information so they can place the new grades within a context.

I’ve been teaching 16 years and certainly managed to pass on information to parents and provide transparency before flight paths were ever thought of, so they’re certainly not essential.

There isn’t a standardised way of assessing progress (or even any way). Flight paths is schools making stuff up. Teachers object to extra workload when that extra workload involves making stuff up to appease parents and SLT.

A good school / teacher will explain how a flight path is formulated and it's limitations. It does serve as a guide only but an important one as parents and students need some degree of communication concerning how the student is performing up till now and what the picture would look like if they would continue with the same rate of progress. A current grade is meaningless, without putting it within this context, for a course that has not been completed yet. A parent will not know how much material is yet to be covered or what is to be covered in greater depth within which the student could improve their grade with, for example.

As far as 'appeasing goes', I must say, this betrays a very 'us and them' attitude within teaching as opposed to a partnership where transparency and good communication between stakeholders is a given.

X-post. Ok so maybe I am arguing at cross purposes.

As long as I can get a report which says currently headed for around and about this grade range I am happy.

I don't want or need it to have come from SATs. I need it to come from what my DC is doing now, everyday at school.

Teachers reckoning based on personal knowledge what grade a pupil will get at GCSE in Y9 is not flightpaths.

But then as a parent, I've had experience of teachers predicting As and A*s for my yr 9 pupils because they wanted them to choose the subject for GCSE. Not based on attainment or achievement in that subject, particularly, but just on the basis that they were hard working, well behaved and achieving well in core subjects. Is that any better than basing it on data plotted on a flight path?

Neither are perfect and I think there should be a combination of opinions and data but I'm not convinced that it should be either/or.

So.

Suppose I'm a supportive parent of a DC who has limited bandwidth for extra work. (No supposing, I am and I have such a DC).

Without something like 'flightpath' or measuring against a set standard, how am I mean to know which subject is most deserving of time and effort for extra support at home?

Especially since passing appropriate and sufficient GCSE is so critical for opening doors for other courses later?

Who is more likely to know the standard of a DC? A parent who may have 1 or 2 children (and say 6 at the very most), or a teacher who teaches 100s?

I get that SLT might overcomplicate things. But this is where subject teams need to stand firm and say no we can't do that but we can do this.

But I refuse to accept that teachers have no idea how my child is getting on and can't give a best guess which will be more accurate than mine would be. I'm not going to sue if they get it wrong, I just want to know whether/where to provide extra support.

Are you sure P8 is no longer a "thing"? I took this from FFT website

Progress 8
Although DfE will publish provisional Progress 8 scores early in October, schools are understandably keen to get a handle on their scores for 2018.

At the end of the post is a table showing how provisional Progress 8 benchmarks (overall, English and maths) have changed compared to last year for each prior attainment group. Averages for participating schools in 2017 were very close to published national averages, always within 0.6 points and within 0.2 points for KS2 fine levels of 3.9 and higher.

professional judgement

And the ones going out to emphasise their professional status generally weren't.

Professionalism generally involves a system of standards...