KS 1 sats levels conundrum

[aegeansky]

DC has just finished KS1 and we have the results here, including level 3 for reading, which, I understand, is as far as the scale goes at this stage.

Now I know from direct observation that one child in DCs class is a completely phenomenal reader who can read with full comprehension and at speed, books that are levelled NC level 5 or higher.

What does the school do in this case - still put a level 3 on the report?
That would be very confusing for the parents, surely?

As I understand it yes, they would put level 3.

Presumably the parents know their child is a great reader. I am sure the teacher has mentioned it - even if they had not seen it themselves!

Don't worry about it.

The KS1 SATS test can only give up to a L3.
The teacher assessment or APP level is more accurate.

Thanks Clary and Goblinchild. Interesting to hear that. Presumably the narrative part of the report is another way for the teacher to make it explicitly clear what level of ability is apparent?

I was just thinking how confusing it would be to see just a 3 when the child obviously has an exceptional ability.

On our reports we have a level for test result and a level for teacher assessment, but it would only be in years 2 and 6 where we complete statutory assessments that you would find a large disparity, usually we would use a test that matches the childs ability as a means of backing up a teachers assessment ( so some of my yr 5's had to take a yr 9 KS3 SATs paper as they needed one that went up to Level 6!) In yrs 2 and 3 we are really stuck with the official ones ( although I suppose any seriously bright child could sit a test from a further year too!)

primarymum, interesting to hear that. In this school, only one level is given. it's presumably drawn from combination of the statutory tests and APP but it doesn't say.

The tests is Y2 are just one very small part of the teacher assessment - which is the only result which legally has to be reported (although a few schools, like primary mum's, report both).

But the teacher assessment has no ceiling on it, and occasionally there will be children who are assessed as level 4 in Y2.

Also - confusingly the reading mark isn't really about how well they read. Because they have to write the answers to a comprehension test. So my DS can read, and understands, everything but is only a level 3b in reading - despite being on level 5 reading books - because he is not able to write his answers to the questions. (He's in KS2 not KS1).

But again - that's just the test, a small part of the assessment. It's true that only the first 2 assessment focuses (foci? ) are about fluency - the other four are to do with responding to texts and understanding authorial intent, etc. Teacher assessment would not always require a written answer - in guided reading, for example, all the answers would tend to be oral.

This is interesting!

My son is considered very able and has always been given the top level 'allowed' in any given year (ie, 3's at end of KS1, and now in Y4 they are just beginning to give him level 5s). They admit to me that he is capable of pretty much whatever they put in front of him and could achieve higher levels.

Obviously, as a parent, I would love to see him reach high levels at a young age, but as a teacher I have to look at it and think what's the point? They have told me that in year 6, if he's still progressing at the rate he is at present, they will allow him to be assessed at level 6. That's great, but supposing there was no ceiling and a child achieved a level 7 or 8? What do they do when they get to secondary?

Musicteachingmum, interesting question indeed. I don't think there is much of an advantage in galloping miles ahead, from what I've seen. Often, there are areas of the child's development that aren't keeping up and that's where the effort should go - making sure the child is a balanced and happy person.
Having a prodigious lead in ability may be curse as much as a blessing, especially if the child starts to hang its identity on the fact.

On the other hand, I think it's a bit odd if schools can't plainly state that a child is phenomenally able in one area or another, in language that the parent can understand. Here, because the KS1 sats seem to be capped at level 3 (which is a comforting, but not unusual level of attainment), it must be a bit odd for those who have a child at the limit of the ability spectrum in one area or another. It just won't show in the numbers, right?

They aren't capped at level 3.

This is from Assessment and Reporting Arrangements 2010 document:

"At level 4 - for children working above the level of the tasks and tests, teachers may also use the optional
tasks available on the QCDA Tests and exams website at www.qcda.gov.uk/optionaltasks,
as well as using the level 3 tests and writing tasks."

Feenie - thanks. Sensible solution.

Sorry, Indigo. I should have said, this child is also a phenomenal writer, so the format of the test wouldn't be a problem.

Feenie - interesting, but I know many schools wouldn't use this measure - giving a child a level 4 in KS1, means they would need to be given a level 6 in KS2 SATs (not allowed,other than teacher assessment), otherwise the child will be deemed in the statistics to be progressing slower than they should and certainly won't help the all important Value Added scores.

But as long as you can prove that your teacher assessment procedures are robust, that shouldn't be a problem. It isn't at our school.

I didn't think that SATs were designed to test the ability of the children, anyway, but rather the ability of the school to teach all abilities of children up to a certain level? So a parent would surely only be confused if the school was useless at telling them how their child is actually doing? Or if the school had become so obsessed with SATs that they only taught to the test, to the detriment of many of the children in the class (which is why I think SATs are largely a waste of time...).

Rabbitstew,

so a parent would surely only be confused if the school was useless at telling them how their child is actually doing...<

...and the school would be useless at telling them if they were unable, as Musicteachingmum has suggested may sometimes be the case, to give an unusually able child the right sort of assessment.

Not unable, just unwilling! It's sad

musicteachingmum-giving a child a level 4 in KS1, means they would need to be given a level 6 in KS2 SATs (not allowed,other than teacher assessment), otherwise the child will be deemed in the statistics to be progressing slower than they should and certainly won't help the all important Value Added scores.

Well, I'm stuffed then as I have given two of my yr 5's a level 6 this year! If a school is desperate to rely on tests as the cornerstone of their assessment ( and to me this is the wrong way round, but each to their own!) then there are plenty of tests available up to and beyond level 8, so no child should be held back because of a lack of appropriate tests!

My son's recorded attainment "topped out" at level 5. Bloody pointless, IMO. I'm not aware of him being tested at a higher level or of any teacher asssessment of him at a higher level. I was told in yr4 that he was beyond a level 5 for reading, maths and comprehension, and it appears that the school then thought "Right, job done on that one". His Yr6 SATS will presumably all say 5 and his report will tell me nothing more.

We're sending him to an independent school for secondary.

aegeansky - you seem to be confusing SATs with ability assessments (which means you didn't read my post properly). A good teacher has plenty of ways of assessing a child. A SATs test is not one of them and wasn't designed to be - it's just a poor method of testing the teacher. Hence them being a waste of time, particularly since, as Acanthus has pointed out, some schools have become so obsessed/scared by them that they have stopped assessing and testing children appropriately, but have simply started teaching to the test... I really don't think you need a SATs test to tell a good teacher or school from a bad one, so in all ways, SATs tests are a waste of time, and frequently misunderstood by parents to be an assessment of their children's achievements.

Y2 assessment is a teacher assessment - based on lots of sources of evidence. As such, they are an assessment of a child's achievements - and their attainment.

rabbitstew

isn't it understandable that SATs are thought of as ability assessments when the rubric of DCs report says that the end of key stage assessment is based on the results of statutory tests?

Sorry, however you cut it, that's what parents think. I'm not a teacher, and doubtless, from what you say, there are other assessments in tandem. The confusion isn't in me, rather it's seemingly built into the system and the ways in which schools communicate (or not) with parents.

aegeansky, I think you are right that your school has communicated poorly with you.

I think my ds's school has a very good awareness of my ds's strengths and weaknesses and I don't think SATs will make any difference whatsoever to their or my opinion on this. They are not an IQ test, nor do they test every area of a child's development.