What percentage of level 3s might a primary in a 'good' catchment report at end of KS1?

[mostboringchatnickname]

What sort of percentage might get level 3s in a primary in a leafy, affluent area (am making huge assumptions there about the incoming cohort of kids...)

And what sort of levels would ring alarm bells? Or would none of it matter?

Are your bells ringing, so to speak, OP? Or is this a made-up primary?

If it's a primary I think you really have to look at KS2 results not KS1.

Yes bells been ringing for a while about the lack of challenge for higher ability children and then the figures for level 5s miraculously turn good by year 6. Funny that. Obviously not the same cohort of kids and there can be some variation but...

How do you think they get all those level 5s if they don't challenge the HA children?

They may simply let the children be children in KS1

They may feel it's more important to ensure the majority of children are ready for KS2 and not stretch the top group

The teacher may give cautious teacher assessments by nature (some teachers are very cautious ticking off skills)

They may deliberately play down KS1 to make KS2 progress look better.
This improves their Value add score.

Does it matter, No!
VA scores need to vary by a lot to be significant.
DC will go to senior school at there expected level without having been pushed before they were ready.

A very few may have got a bit bored and the odd parent stressed that's all.

I live in an area like that 55% get level 3. What percentage at your school?

I have no idea! Our school fits your criteria but league tables only publish ks2 sats results sorry!

Targets for KS2 results are largely based on KS1 results, so if they are getting level 5 in Year 6 then a large proportion of those children probably either got level 3 or a 2A in KS1 SATs.

Geez 55% get 3s in your school. Nationally only 9% boys get a 3 for writing but I guess there's bound to be variation. Is it 3s across board? [tragically feeling less chuffed with ds's results]

DS finished in July at a school that would fit your description - I think the figures were about 70% L3 in Maths and English for girls, 60% for boys and about 80& in science (published voluntarily) for both genders.

Wonderful school, really wish it went up to KS2 :(

Level 5 at the end of KS2 doesn't mean the school stretch the HA children. It may mean, as it does in our area, alot of external tutoring (either parent led or private) in order to get into private secondaries or the selective grammar schools.

Of course the school still wants to think its down to them .

level 5s at the end of ks2 doesn't mean the higher ability children have been stretched at all ime ... 40% of the children in ds's class got 5s across the board last year, but many, like ds, had been coasting along at level 5 for the previous 2 years

Vicky2011 - 70% L3 in maths and English for girls, 60% for boys and 80% for science.

I bet it doesn't go up to KS2, you didn't need to add that bit.

I am questioning why only 20% of children got level 3 in some subjects and far less in others.

There is much talk of the head keeping KS1 levels lower to show added value later. Yes there is a LOT of tutoring too.

My Dc's school certainly is not middle-class and leafy-ville - although the playing fields and grounds are beautiful. As a comparison, from what I can remember from last year when DD2 was in year 2, about 35% got L3 for reading, about 20% maths, 15% science and 17% for writing. But only about 8% failed to get to a 2B.

Our catchment is as you describe and I can't remember the exact stats we were given, but I think a far higher proportion than 20% got level 3. Has the value added score been low historically?

My son was at an infant school, that had only 8% at this level in his year.

Lovely school, though. Very caring. A very large % of the children were recent immigrants with limited English.

Yes generally 3's across the board I think 90% got a 3 in science. Those results seem consistent year on year.

Only 9% of boys get a level 3 in writing Polly? Wow I had no idea it was so low.

If it's a separate Infant school, it is statistically likely they will assess their children higher than if it's an all through Primary school. Yes, it is to do with value added, but this is all about "measuring the school" and it really doesn't make any difference to your child if someone decides they are a 'comfortable 2a' or a 'downhill and with a following wind 3c'. the only issues occur where the Infant school scores their children very very generously, and then the child becomes bothered that they seem to stagnate, when really all they are doing is actually moving up to being a solid '3'.

Yes Betty - it was letting the school down hence the idea that this might be why the KS1 levels are being kept low. Other evidence of it too.

In one subject area the level 3 % was well under 10%, another a little over 10%, another two nearer 20. I am struggling to believe that this can be the case.

Wouldn't the LEA have noticed this sort of thing and be asking questions though?

That's interesting Imnotinterested - do you mean that there is a certain "grade inflation" in the top year of the school. So if a school is infants only the assessments may be very generous but if it is a full primary there is no incentive for them to do that, as they will the progress even faster at KS2 for a decent value added score?

Pretty obvious now you've pointed it out

How big's the school? In a very small school, one child can be worth 10%, and results can vary significantly year on year.

Vicky2011 - precisely. Although no infants only would admit to it. And I obviously have not said it.

One form entry school.