3B now the Y2 level 3

[mumblesmum]

Our county guidelines are now changing and we will be expected to assess level 3 only when the child is a secure level 3. 3c will no longer be accepted as a L3. (I won't make comment on my feelings about this!)

I know this has happened to a lot of you. So, what happened to your data:
Reduction in L3s?
By how much?
Do you meet national average?

Anything else?

So if they are 3c you have to record them as 2a? Seems bizarre.

I don't understand the problem, that sounds right to me. Doesn't it make more sense to only class the child as a level 3 if they're secure within that level?

I'm not a teacher though ...what do teachers make of this?

Being 'secure' sounds sensible.
Otherwise when the DCs go up to year 3, the parents might be wondering why they've not gone up more.

Not quite the same, but it's the same with swimming badges. It's no good getting 100m badge if you can just make the 100m and you're all out of breath at the end.
You need to be doing it consistently, with strokes still looking good at the end.

I think it might be to try and stop the issue that it's easier to get a level 3 in y2 than y3. I know every year at the junior school there's angry/upset parents in y3 trying to understand why their child has gone down/stayed the same in levels.

I thought that was longtime the case, a secure 3b+ to get the Level 3.
Anyway, so what? Why care? They get reassessed at start of y3 anyway, & repeatedly after that, ime. It's not like KS1 SATs meant anything in long run.

fwiw,
DCnowy7: assessed as 2as & below; at or near top of y3 class by October half term; I was told explicitly that his y3 ability was not reflected in the y2-SATs.

DCnowy5 & DCnowy3: got some 3s, then kept up about how I might have expected; still above average where they got 3s & still on target where they were on target before.

I'd like to have what sort of level 3s DS got in year 2. I think different LEAs look differwnrky

Sorry that posted accidentally . Was meant to say that I think different LEAs treat level 3 in year 2 differently which I think is wrong as it should be consistent. I don't know whether DS was 3c or 3b (doubt 3a) in the subjects he did and knowing you had to be a secure level 3 would be useful. Or why can't level 3 be sub divided when reported to parents?

Defiantly needs to be made clear to parents that scrapping a grade in a test does not mean a DC is working securely at that level and certainly doesn't mean they are ready to move on to the next one.

Until you realise this Y7 reports make no sense at all.

DD2 may scrape the L6 maths paper. No way does she know the L6 work well enough for any secondary teacher to give her that grade. Her sister (3 years older) has only just moved on to L7 and she is no worse mathematician.