Level 3s at end Year 2

[BeckyBendyLegs]

We've just had stats results for DS1 who is at the end of Year 2. DS received levels 3 in all except one area where he got level 2a. I really don't know what this means except that it is above average. Does this just mean he takes after DH (ie too clever for his own good)? I wish the school would explain these things! Basically I just want some explanation - I did google but nothing much came up to help explain what level 3 means.

Irregularegular, apologies if this is a dumb question, but were those figures you quoted for end of yr 2?

Percentage of children assessed as level 3 in Y2 last year.

Remember, that these levels (achieving a 2B at the end of KS1 and a 4B at the end of KS2) are expected levels though; the level that most children should be able to achieve unless there are extenuating circumstances.

Obviously-there will be plenty of children well above and plenty well below but it's considered an expectation that children should be able to get a 4B. Clearly, there will be children getting a 4B several years early, but does that mean that the basic cut-off point should be moved to a level 5!?

Here from satsguide.co.uk - although I believe the phrasing re 'able or gifted' is rubbish personally

Level Comments
Level W Working towards level 1, very weak
Level 1 Average for a typical 5 year old
Level 2 Average for a typical 7 year old
Level 3 Average for a typical 9 year old
Level 4 Average for a typical 11 year old
Level 5 Average for a typical 13 year old
Level 6 Average for a typical 14 year old
Level 7 Above average for typical 14 yr old
Level 8 Only available in maths

So, if your child is sitting the Year 6 Key Stage 2 SATs and achieves level 4, well done: level 5 signals a very able or gifted child: level 3 is below average and indicates your class teacher and you should work together to identify what can be done to give extra help and promote confidence and a desire to learn.

Additionally you may find bands 'a', 'b' and 'c' are given within the levels. This simply indicates a range within the level, a being the highest and c being the lowest.

SATS results, together with the teacher's assessment are used to stream your child at secondary school so it is imperative that you focus on them.

they are not touted as 'expected levels' they are touted as 'average levels'

totally different IMO

and IMO SATS results are not used to 'stream' at secondary - CAT tests or own tests when joining are though

in fact I'm not sure why I C&Ped that now

sorry

Expected levels

Yes,`i know all that from a primary teacher's perspective, activate. I wondered if GCSEs have a 'level' attached to them (7/8?)
If they don't, it makes the external marking of SATs in KS2 a bit of a mockery.

What do secondary school teachers use to predict GCSE performance in Y7? I bet it's not SATs!

I'm having a bit of a revelation here! External marking of SATs in Y6, TA in Y9, then GCSE.... is there any joined up thinking? Please enlighten me!

Thanks Feenie

I accept wholely that "they are not touted as 'expected levels' they are touted as 'average levels" is totally wrong and withdraw it from the discussion

sorry to be so wrong

It's a very enlightening article, actually. Reminds one of how much of a silly game it all is.

Have to admit to having only skimmed the article Feenie has linked to, but do wonder what the "average" levels in both KS1 and KS2 SATs are. I do know that 2b for KS1 and 4b for KS2 are the "expected" levels but I think that many people do translate this into average levels and so if their child gets 2a, say in a subject at KS1 assume they are above average when this presumably may not be the case.

And do the grade boundaries change at all (more for KS2 than KS1 I suppose)? Is a 4b now equivalent to a 4b from a few years ago?

They go up and down. I think 4b is around the same.

Lawrie - the 'average' depends on the cohort for your particular school. Most schools use a target tracker that tracks each individual child, so each individual child has an 'expected level' based on their progress through the school.

For example: My last year's cohort of Y2s had a very poor group of boys. Because of this, the year's average for writing was 2c (very low and disappointing). This year, the 'average' is 2B (variables of cohort and introduction of Read Write Inc (which I believe has had an effect)). This 'average', however, also hides the fact that over 20% of writers met L3, and, even more importantly, 2 out of 5 children achieving L1 exceeded their targets.

I'm finding this discussion fascinating! I know a lot more about these levels now than I did yesterday afternoon when I read the sheet attached to DS1's report with just a list of numbers for his SATS scores.

I strongly suspect that those of you commenting that 5/6 is pathetically low for yr 9 do not work in education. If you base those comments on a few brighter children you know who achieve that younger then yes it will seem low. Having worked for many years I can tell you it is not low, in my current school the vast majority of kids score well above this but in my previous school we really struggled to do it, I am the same teacher working just as hard, the reality is that some kids are not as bright as others academically and that for the majority 5/6 is a challenging yet realistic bench Mark. Also schools which start secondary work early are doing their pupils a massive disservice, it is lazy teaching and causes massive issues (speaking as a secondary science teacher who has to try unteach misconceptions) it is far better to extend pupils breadthways and encourage a real interest in subjects which could have a future impact on such things as university application.

Gcse expected grades are set using ks2 SATS results. But a given level at ks2 does not automatically convert to the same gcse grade for every child. Age at entry to school (an august baby will have made faster progress than a September one achieving the same grade), scores in other subjects, 'family' background, postcode etc all come into play and the predictors are not set by the school but externally so they are comparable school to school. The lowest 'target' secondary teachers are allowed to set is this indicator. Hope that's useful.

Hi. Just to add to this discussion re GCSE's and national curriculum levels from a seconday teacher's perspective. The average is level 5/6 at the end of KS3. I teach History. If a child achieves a Level 5 in history at the end of KS3 we would expect them to gain at least a C at GCSE. If they get a 6, a B, 7, an A, 8, an A*. I stress the word least because it is entirely possible they could achieve higher. We get two predicted grades for each child. The grade they would be expected to get if they made the average/expected progress and a grade which would put them in the top 25% for progress. GCSE predictions are based on lots of data including KS1/2 sats, teacher assessment at KS3 and socio economic factors of the school etc. As a teacher myself with dc's i do think everybody gets too hung up on levels at the end of KS1. They are still very small children and progress may change hugely in the following years. As long as your child is happy and is enjoying school and, most importantly, and is being encouraged to have a love of learning, then you should be happy, be your child gifted or average or below average. That is what makes the difference as they go through school. Not what they get in tests when they are 7 .

Bloody hell, a teacher and i can't even use paragraphs . Sorry am posting on my phone and didn't notice until too late.

bulby also makes a very good point in that the reality is that nature is such that we all have differing levels of intelligence. In my 11 years of teaching i have found the level 5/6 average to be pretty accurate and a fair benchmark for the end of KS3. The top sets will achieve higher, the bottom sets will achieve lower.

And for the record, a level 8 is regarded as exceptional performance and only the genuinely gifted ( not your average bright child) will achieve this. I teach top set year 9 and they are a very bright bunch but only 2 have got a level 8 this year. Plenty of 7's.

What is a 2c in terms of year 1 then? My youngest was predicted to be at 1a/1b by the end of year 1 but was at 2c in maths by February/March and at high 1a.
He started the year very low, at reading anyway - he was below a level 1 but has gone up 10 reading levels.

elliepac, what would you expect of a top set maths group for the end of year 7?
My DC was a high level 5 in year 6 and has been teacher assessed as a level 6/7. They transfer to high school in year 8 here so goes in September and is curious how it will make a difference to which maths set that will be. Thanks if you can answer.

More on level 5/6 at the end of KS3:

In literacy, the climb in difficulty between KS2 scores (level 4+) and KS3 scores (level 5+) is very steep. This is because to attain 6+ in reading, for example, pupils will have acquired the ability to analyse a complex multitude of written forms, including canonical literature. They will also be able to write about those forms and their historical context in fluid ways, using analytical techniques that do not come easily at all.

I work at a grammar, and believe me, none of the pupils come to us ready to analyse literature - especially poetry, writing about which they almost universally loathe. Getting them to use the point-evidence-analysis technique (PEA, or PEE, or PEEL, or whatever any given school's version is) is a long and draining process. Without successfully completing that process, however, they cannot climb above a L5.

IMO, literacy and writing-about-literature should be taught as discrete subjects. Lit should be booted out of English language GCSE too. Fight the power! (Or maybe not.)

my knowledge of maths is not as great as it is not my subject. However, i have a year 8 form at school and they have just had their reports. The brightest children received a Level 7 in Maths at end of year 8. Although it will depend on the intake of the school, a level 6/7 at the end of year 7 would be enough for top set at our school i would think. HTH.

This is really interesting. Thanks everyone.

As you look at ks1 levels, what percentage of children achieving level 1 at the age of 7 actually achieve level 5/6 at 14, and decent GCSEs?

thank you elliepac. I'm not that concerned about levels normally, however the local high school insist on top set maths and science to be able to do triple science at GCSE and my oldest needs that to study to be a vet or forensic scientist.