Levels dropping between KS2 and KS1

[ConfusedGovernor]

I'm a governor at my children's junior school. And they've just given me loads of stats about progress etc, to read before our next meeting.

Can anyone tell me why the average writing NC level has slipped so much in Y3?

So the average child who got a level 3 in KS1 (at our feeder infant school on the same site) are now only graded as a 2a (6 months after they were given a 3) ......

The infant and junior school are on the same site and are very 'friendly' with each other. And this gov meeting is a joint one between the infants and the juniors.

My own child was downgraded 2 sublevels in reading and 1 sublevel in writing. Which I was upset about - but I didn't realise they'd done that pretty much across the board....

Are there any explanations besides very cynical ones?

(That it's in the Y3 teacher's interest to downgrade the children, then she can claim good progress, and in the Y2 teachers to inflate grades so that she too can claim good progress....)

Not a teacher, Confused, but I would guess that you have hit the nail on the head with your last comment.

Level 3 in year 2 is not the same as level 3 in year 3

I'm not sure of the reason but I have heard it again and again - I think the testing is easier KS1 maybe?

PS the same seems to happen from KS2 to KS3 ie year 6 primary to year 7 secondary

It would be helpful perhaps if Y2 and Y3 teachers levelled the writing together to establish they have the same expectations of what a level 3 piece of writing "looks like". It shouldn't be too difficult to arrange ... perhaps in the summer before children change schools.

But all the teachers on here continuously say that a level 3 is the same whichever year you get it in.

(Obv the teachers in RL who have downgraded your child are going to tell you that it's not the same...)

And there is no testing in Y2 - it's teachers assessment, so they can't claim all of the children in the whole cohert were just having a good day.....

activate the levels aren't from a single test but from continuous teacher assessment of work produced over a full year often moderated externally.

mrz - It would be helpful perhaps if Y2 and Y3 teachers levelled the writing together to establish they have the same expectations of what a level 3 piece of writing "looks like".

Do think I can raise that at the govs meeting without annoying both schools? (probably not)

Would that be beyond my remit as a governor? (not sure)

Would it just sound downright insulting? (I think so)

you're right mrz - it has changed for DD's year but was testing for the others IIRC

Lots of schools work that way confused and similarly between Y6/7

A level 3 in Yr 2 should be exactly the same as a level 3 in Yr 3, but unfortunately a lot of teachers still aren't confident enough in giving levels. And as you say, OP, there is the danger that at the end of the year teachers are inclined to 'give the benefit of the doubt' while at the start of the year it's in their interests to mark more strictly. Shouldn't happen, but it does IME.

One thing I would suggest is to check what methods both schools are using to level the work- are they both using APP? In which case the APP profiles should be passed up from the infants to the juniors as evidence.

I also agree with the suggestion of having joint staff meetings occasionally to work on moderation. A lot of the APP wording can be interpreted in different ways (e.g. 'in some pieces of work' 'usually' does x,y,z' 'mostly accurately'). So a good discussion can help to set the standa rds more clearly.

Another possibility is that the Yr3 children are finding it quite difficult to settle into the new school and are therefore not showing what they're capable of. If the expectations are generally much higher in terms of behaviour, sitting still, handwriting and presentation of work etc then it could be that as a group they are focusing a lot on these other issues. Meaning that the quality of their written work suffers. Again, if this is the case it could be addressed through dialogue between the Yr2 and Yr3 teachers.

I would also suggest passing on some of the literacy books from Yr2 to Yr3, if that doesn't already happen. IME that can help to ensure that expectations are set high from the start.

In my school from summer half term all Y2 children use a new exercise book for their writing which will go with them to Y3 to illustrate what they were capable of at that point

"Do think I can raise that at the govs meeting without annoying both schools? (probably not)

Would that be beyond my remit as a governor? (not sure)

Would it just sound downright insulting? (I think so)"

Remember your remit as a governor, and as a governing body - is to be challenging and supporting your school. So I would be asking for the head's explanation of why the Year 3 assessments are lower than those coming up from the infant, how secure are the teacher's assessments in Year 3 (are they externally moderated?)

Suggesting joint moderation need not sound critical - it's so important for the children (and that is why you are there!) that assessment is accurate and rigorous so that children who are not making the expected progress are identified and given extra help. So - given that Year 3 results are lower particularly in writing, how is this being explained to parents? What interventions are in place to accelerate progress?

And than, having got some answers, you need to get into the school for a monitoring visit to look at assessment - how do teacher's know where children are? What targets are set - are these shared with children, do they understand what the next step is for their work? IS there evidence of interventions, how are these evaluated.

Lots of questions - don't accept anything at face value, ask to see evidence.

Thanks everyone. This has helped. I will ask why the levels are so much lower, and if the two schools could do some joint moderation.....

While I have you all here

They break out all the stats by SEN, EAL, G&T etc etc.

I would like to see the SEN stats broken into 2 categories - those with SEN that includes learning difficulties, and those with SEN that don't have a dx of MLD or SLD.

Is that a reasonable thing to ask? It doesn't seem right to have a general SEN bucket, when you would expect someone with MLD to make poor progress, but not someone with ASD or Visual Impairment or a physical disability etc.....

Why would you expect someone with MLD to make poor progress and not someone with ASD or VI or Physical disability? Why would you expect anyone to make poor progress for that matter?

OK, I think I'm going to be very unpopular at this meeting

So on average the kids on the SEN register are about a whole level lower than the expected level for the year. Which I want to question.

I (naively?) thought that if you had a dx of MLD or SLD it would be acceptable to be on average a level less then where you should be.

But that if you were on the SEN register for any other kind of reason that it wouldn't be acceptable.

Mrz - do you define 'adequate progress' the same for all students? (ie 2 sublevels a year in KS2)?

Do you think it's not acceptable for any child to be below the expected level for the year?

When school say it's because they have MLD - what can I say?

When school say it's because they have behavioural issues or just 'SEN' - what should I say / ask?

Some children will be starting at a much lower level than their peers so even if they make good progress they will remain behind for some time so when looking at where children are at any point in their school career you have also got to look back.

There are many, many reasons why children are on the SEN register all of them impacting on a child's ability to progress so saying it is unacceptable is wrong. Many children go undiagnosed but have very real difficulties non the less - the important thing is the difficulties are recognised and support is offered.

when the school says a child is behind because they have MLD ask what the school is doing to support the child.

When the school says it is because of a behavioural issue ask what they are doing to support the child?

There is no such thing as "just" SEN but ask what they are doing to support the child.

Finally I would ask how long children remain on the SEN register.

Ok, I'm still confused

Should I ask why kids on the SEN register are on average a level behind where they should be? or should I assume that is fine?

Should I just ask what kind of support children are getting, and how long children remain on the SEN register?

Or should I ask nothing?

(Previously the HT has said that parents are pleased with the SEN support - and certainly I am pleased with the SEN support my 2 are getting)

Some children may be a level behind but they may have started more than a level behind so they are making good progress. The idea is to help children close the gap.

I would want to know what the school does for children who are on the SEN register and I would be concerned if most of the children stayed on the SEM register for a long time. Obviously some children will be on the register for all of their school life but for most it should be a shortish visit.

Thanks, this is all a big help.

I'd agree with joint moderation - my DDs' school did this a year ago with all work being assessed by teachers who didn't teach the child - it was an eye-opener to a lot of people and led to a lot of changes to make the systems more joined-up.

TBH I haven't seen any evidence of artificial downgrading, but I accept it may happen in some schools.