To think it won't help me or ds to know he's in the bottom 10% of children

[Minifingers]

when he leaves primary? Or my oldest ds to know he's probably in the top 10%?

This is what the government is suggesting - that children are ranked into 10 ability bands when they leave primary.

I know how able or otherwise my children are - I read their school reports, I look at their SATS results, I talk to their teachers.

What will ranking them in this way do other than give them an overwhelming sense of failure or complacency?

if your child was in the third decile for maths, would you tutor them like crazy to get them to the top - in the knowledge that you are setting them up to fail against naturally brighter kids when the spoon feeding stops

No, of course you wouldn't, not if you're sensible. But you would have an idea of your child's ability in Maths. Accept that they're never going to get an A* but you could, for example, look at the curriculum and pick out some topics they're particularly struggling with or that would be of use to them later in life.

if your child was in the third decile for maths, would you tutor them like crazy to get them to the top - in the knowledge that you are setting them up to fail against naturally brighter kids when the spoon feeding stops

Sadly, the majority of parents at my dc school would go down the tutoring route, but they believe that their child will stay at a higher level because of this, rather than inevitably finding their own level eventually.

"And that's the problem isn't it deadlydonkey that academic success is seen as the be all and end all, and children who aren't academic but are good with practical things aren't given the same kudos."

I do find this way of thinking so old fashioned and bizarre. Children are not either academic OR good at practical things. Some are good at both- some at neither. The apologists for grammar schools always say things like that- "so much better for the non academic children to be taught practical skills- what do children like that need with Latin or Maths? Teach them arithmetic and metalwork"

curlew you're taking my post too literally. I didn't mean children are good at one OR the other, they are just examples. Whatever talent a child has, be it sport, art, Maths, computers, cooking...whatever...it should be encouraged.

Dancergirl
but this testing actively discourages it : because what cannot be measured in a test is ignored

Why old fashioned and bizarre?

Surely all children of all abilities should be valued?

At my dc primary school, there is a prize giving at the end of the school year.
There is a maths prize, and English prize and a Good Citizen prize. The first two go to academic children, the third goes to one of the teachers favourites, who, surprise surprise, is generally academic.
Where is the sports prize, the art prize, the science prize?

Nobody has said that less able children should not be taught academic subjects, but if by teaching metalwork, woodwork and other skill based subjects, it means that the academic under achievers have the opportunity to shine and feel like valued members of school, and recognise that they do have a place in society, why is that being an apologist?

At school, academic success is seen as the be all and end all. This should change rather than expecting all children to be the same, and thinking they will be driven to better themselves if they find themselves in the lower deciles.

Worried
with electronic timetabling, sets are much more fluid now : DCs school has a shuffle nearly every term. 5 up 5 down in each set in each subject grouping

amicissimma
but your comment just shows how UTTERLY out of touch politicians and others are about what goes on in school.

my private selective gels school did exactly what you say : gave my parents no warning at all that I was bunking ALL my lessons.

my DCs comp (and most others like them) monitor every child in every subject every term
I get reports home with current levels and expected levels : and as they are NC levels to year 9 and GCSE grades from year 10, its really really easy to see where they stand

this has been in place for years but the politicians have not looked

"You may not find it helpful to know that your child is in the bottom 10%, but you might find it very useful to know that your child who was on say, the 70th centile when s/he left primary school is on the 20th in Year 8. So I hope they use the information to follow each child's progress through school."

This is what NC levels do, surely?

Stupid idea & generally comparison is divisive.

Maybe rank MPs first...then go from there. Could do it on their ability to achieve for their constituents....I'm sure we could come up with other suggestions or just rank the cabinet

My DC's high school manage to teach extremely well without streaming in y7. According to their GCSE results, anyway.

I already know I have a DC in the top 10% and a DC in the bottom 10%.

What is wrong with NC levels?
why not just annually give CC IQ tests, and not actually bother teaching them anything.

"I think it is very helpful to be able to monitor your child's progess against his/her peers."

It doesn't measure progress. It measures where your child is at 11. And then it ranks them against their peers nationally.

I'm amazed how many people are STILL arguing that this test will be useful for helping parents identify their children's learning needs. I can only assume these are people who a) either have no children and know nothing about our system of education in the UK or b) who have children but have taken so little interest in their education that they've failed to notice that they are already assessed yearly against national curriculum descriptors for every subject.

Banding like this isn't a reflection of how well someone has done, only how they compare to others. That's not what education is about.

At the extremes, if everyone fails, the top 10% have still failed. Should they be pleased they are in the top 10%? If everyone gets an A, should the bottom 10% be criticised?

It doesn't help. Even if everyone improves, there will still be a bottom 10%. So achievements can seem irrelevant to those that feel like their hard work has got them nowhere.

Daft idea imo.

Why are people so unaware of how children are monitored and assessed in schools at the moment?

"Why are people so unaware of how children are monitored and assessed in schools at the moment?"

It's staggering isn't it?

And there are people out there who are just as ignorant, who are making education policy.....

NC levels are close to useless though.

Some children aren't even given the chance to sit the level 6 papers in Y6, and it's widely believed that SATs are more about testing teachers than they are about assessing children.

If they were reasonably accurate tests then there would be no need for levels to be given as teacher assessments as well as the tests.

Tests and assessments are fine as long as the information gained is used effectively and is beneficial to the child.

Why are people so unaware of how children are monitored and assessed in schools at the moment?

Some won't have children. Some will have children that aren't at that stage yet. Some people will have children that are no longer at school. Some people don't live in the areas affected.

You might find NC levels 'useless'.

I don't.