To be pleased levels have been scrapped?

[pickingstrawberries]

I always felt they were completely meaningless.

They were often inflated, presumably so that the poor teacher didn't have to concede to a child going 'backwards' in his/her class.

They were always subjective anyway, especially in subjects like English, and made a mockery of MFL teaching at secondary level.

They meant parents and children alike obsessed about a number and not real actual technique or knowledge.

Anyone else glad to see the back of them?

Sorry to disappoint but although 'levels' have been scrapped, they are being replaced by an equivalent. 'Levels' were linked to the old curriculum and so had to go, but children will still be officially assessed at year 2 and 6 with ongoing teacher assessments throughout. At yr 2 and 6 the results to their 'SATs' will be reported as a scale score basically showing how much above or below age related expectations they are working at, and in all other year groups they we be teacher assessed in whatever way a school decides but basically to say if they are below, at or above age related expectations. Teachers pay progression will continue to be mainly based on the progress the children in their class make...

So pretty much exactly the same as levels but with much more scope for inconsistencies between schools With teacher assessments.
(Primary - no idea what is going on in yr7-9)

I think a lot comes down to common sense.

Many secondary schools are using GCSE grades for Y7-Y9 so there will still be a pressure to show measurable improvement.

They haven't though really have they? They've just been replaced by a different kind of level that doesn't consist of letters and numbers. I can't really see the point in changing it, it's just levels by another name!

Not at DCs school, but I was just relieved parents evening didn't consist of an endless drone about levels for once!

I'm sure there will be, but the level system was always a bizarre and largely unnessecary one.

They've just been replaced by silly words that mean even less.
Right now gove is probably sat spanking the monkey with a big computer print out of numbers, swopping to letters instead is on the advice of his sex therapist who told him to spice it up.

When I was teaching I did know what the children's weak areas were without levels. It was always changing and always subjective, though.

I know. But that's why levels were so silly. Ended up just mimicking what other teachers had put down.

How will the government compile League Tables if each school is using its own assessment system?

Will there still be externally marked papers for Y6 pupils?

Ego

I liked national curriculum levels. I'm a secondary English teacher and I liked APP and the way it demystified writing. Levels enabled students and teachers to understand and verbalise what was expected, and how to improve, within a coherent, nationally recognised, framework. Obviously they were not perfect and in English, there will always be a degree of subjectivity.

If you think students will no longer be scrutinised in terms of levels and data, then you're very naive. Now there will be less transparency for students and parents. National curriculum level descriptors were a really useful tool in teaching English, however the constant focus on two sub-levels of progress was reductive and led to some worrying misunderstanding about the nature of learning. I think you'll find that Gove has thrown out the baby and kept the bath water...

Levels were stupid
But what has replaced them at primary level is equally useless
I also think dangerous.

It labels kids as failing and even kids know "emerging" means not achieving. And if your child is "exceeding" you don't have no measure of progress. And does "emerging" mean just not quite mastering one little skill or not a hope in hell of ever mastering this?
I would rather not have any of this bullshit but a totally subjective identification of my kids strengths and weaknesses from a teacher who still has the energy to care and to notice, than this meaningless box-ticking from a teacher harried and under ridiculous scrutiny.

I think they were bonkers, especially APP.

'This is a level 6.'
'The child is 14 and can't use paragraphs.'
'But it's a level 6 because we are not LOOKING at paragraphs ...'

That is a stupid application of levels. That is not how they were designed to be used. Any tool is only as good as the person using it...

Cause of the old system I know that my Dd is working approx 2 years ahead of expectation. Under the new system I will know she is exceeding expectations, but she could sit at exceeding expectations for 2 years and then I find out she hasnt progressed at all (extreme example i know). So how will I know if she is still progressing or not?

I think this is the issue mrsseed - and this is nothing against your DD by the way; I am sure she is ahead of expectations :)

But who decided what those expectations were?

Who decided she was 'ahead' of them?

You would know anyway if she was strong, okay or poor at a subject.

You'd know her progress but also how to support her through targets, I'd hope.

Weighing the pig doesn't make it fatter and all that.

There's a lot of just slapping numbers around and it's possible I was the only one guilty of this but I don't think I was.