Another Sats query

[sittinginthesun]

Just wondering, but having read other threads about Sats results, do schools achieving high results at Yr 6 just practise more, or is the teaching genuinely better?

Schools around here, including DSs', generally achieve around 85-90% level 4, and 23-30% level 5, but there are two locally who got 97% level 4 and 50% level 5 this year. One is a church school with notoriously "pushy parent" intake, but other is a bog standard primary.

Some one, some the other. And a lot depends on the catchment. Have a look at the value add.

Another thing to remember is that in a very small school, one or two less able children in a class can make the SATS look worse than they are.

Sorry, there really isn't an easy answer!

Yes, ability of the class will have a big impact. You'd only need a few higher ability kids to skew the statistics.

Value added is the better measure but even that would be open to different interpretations because, as seeker says, there are just so many factors around the child's home life, for instance, to also have an impact on the data.

Our school has very good SATS result, around the 95% level 4 and 50 -60% level 5 this year, it is a small village CofE primary and the % is very dependant on the class, the year before last our result were lower % as there were more children in the class with various levels of SEN and in a class of 20 each child represents a high %, all the children in that year achieved very well it just so happened to be that for some of the children level 3 was their great achievement and that was shown in the value added scores (101/102).
The raw scores of how many children achieve level 4 or 5 is not very helpfull on it's own, you have to look at all sorts of factors, the most useful number is the value added score.
In the case of our school the children do well due to consistently good teaching throughout the school, the intake is quite middle class although not exclusively, it is probably about average for village schools in our part of the country. The children do not spend great amounts of time doing practice tests there are no special revision classes, a comprehensive and varied curriculum is taught throughout Y6, we are no hot house school just a school with great teachers, management and ethos (and a head teacher who feels that the SATS system is flawed and would rather we didn't have them, she was disappointed when our school was not able to join the boycott).
I must say I get quite twitchy when people say that the schools that are rated outstanding and get high results for the SATS are soulless exam factories with nothing but SATS practice papers through most of Y6 as where that may be true in some schools t is not true of all, it feels like people want to take away from the success our pupils and school have worked hard for, I don't understand why some people can't seem to accept that while some schools do doubt do play the system when it comes to ofsted and and teach to the tests through Y5 and 6 most schools that do well do it by being good schools with good teaching! I will get off my hobby horse now, I just feel like you can't win, you are rubbish if you do badly and rubbish if you do well, I know this isn't really what this thread is about, the SATS results are a tiny bit of the picture, going in to a school, seeing how it works and talking to the head and teachers is the best way to decide if a school is the right one for your children.

Results can be down to any number of things:

• The cohort - (what the kids and their parents are like) biggest factor
• Mobility - ie how many kids come and go during KS2
• Teaching
• Tutoring
• Pastoral care
• Leadership
• Cheating
• Teaching to the test

Even schools next door to each other will have different cohorts. The FSM, SEN and EAL stats are one indicator of how the cohorts vary.

50% L5 is very high. So either they have a very high achieving cohort - or something else is going on.

We regularly have 50% + level 5s, Indigo - around 70%ish in reading usually (not this year - 50%). I think mrz's school's level 5 English is good too - neither of our schools teach to the test or cram, and we all believe that Y6 children are entitled to a broad and balanced curriculum.

So not necessarily suspicious.

In my opinion, in areas where secondary schools places are competitive, ie. kids have to pass 11+ or academic exams, primary schools can have high levels of kids acheiving L5, as they have to acheived this level at least to pass 11+ or academic exams. For that parents will tutor their DCs as state primary schools may not teach what is required until later in Y6, and 11+ or academic tests take place during the autum term.
Agree as well with what it had been said before, with a class of 30, all you need is 3 kids not reaching level 4 and that is 10% of the class.

No 11 plus here - and no tutoring either

Feenie - Are you getting above 50% in Percentage achieving Level 5 or above in both English and mathematics - Wow!

But in your's and MRZs case the 'something' that is going on is extraordinarily good teaching. :)

I think my new school is good - but still the teaching is patchy. Some of the teachers are brilliant and some aren't. (We got 20 - 25% L5)

To get 50% L5s you need most of the teachers to be brilliant, I think. And everyone else who works in the school - HT, SLT, TAs, Dinner Ladies.....

Whereas at my old school none of the teaching was brilliant :) (It got far less at L5 - with FSM of 2%!!!!!! )

So, yes getting 50% L5s is hopefully a sign of great teaching. Just saying it ain't necessarily so.......

Hi again

Thanks for all the information everyone. I am really interested to hear about the level 5 results.

We live in a suburban area, quite mixed catchment, but generally quite affluent. One of the high results schools is a church school, with it's own admission rules (officially church attendance, but a lot to do with who you know ), and parents do tutor etc, as many aim for selective private secondaries.

It is the other one that intrigues me. Year after year high results, mixed catchment - although parents do move into the road just to get a place.

Our school is lovely, children seem to thrive, and are confident and polite. Can't fault the teachers. I'm just interested to know why other schools consistently get higher results.

I would agree that good teaching is the single factor that makes the most difference to any child. Certainly in our last Ofsted all teaching was found to be good or outstanding.

Good teaching, academic parents and straight luck or the lack of it!
DD1s years had 2 or 3 really near misses on level 5 English. Meanwhile she scraped level 5 on the pass mark with a scribe they got her at the 11th hour, she's dyslexic and the school were diabolical at recognising this. They only did something when they realised what a mess she'd make of their results without the scribe she'd probably have got 3 English 4 science. With she got 5 in both (4 without help for maths).
Her school
Is on the reporting limit so 5 level 5s is 50%, 2 is 20%
utterly meaningless