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?

In a very unusual year, last year, there were no level 3s at my school. We have just got "Good" under the new OFSTED Framework. Obviously we were quizzed very strongly by OFSTED, but had the evidence to show that this particular year group had entered school well below the usual level, and in spite of good progress to reach National Expectations, had not reached level 3.

Ah, found it on the DofE site, 67% level 5 for maths and English, 62% for science teacher assessed or a few per cent lower than that as "results", I presume just from the exam.

Littlefish maybe I need to look at 2010's results too then.

Writing is way the lowest percentage - can't seem to find where I found these results. I think reading is over 20% nationally. I think that makes sense as writing is the thing that generally they (well my ds) finds most challenging.

National Curriculum (NC) level games definitely played at our school. A single form school - so maybe like Vicky2011 - they're trying to make the numbers work for them.

Each year we've gone through the ritual of seeing the NC Level reported at the end of the previous year drop 1 sub-level at the start of the new school year.

However - the new OFSTED inspection framework does now inspect whether teachers are accurately assessing students. If, like us, the inspection falls in the first half of the year - this can be a very dangerous game. DD1 was rated 3b at the start of this year and in December was swiftly moved to 4c working to 4b and moved to top maths group. We were intrigued by this, happy that our hard work at home was paying off for DD1, but thought we'd ask about things at the next parent/ teacher meeting. OFSTED inspected in January and a reliable source informs me that they picked up on the fact that the school couldn't document such swift progress.

We've found that our infant school gives level 3 too easily. When I taught year 2 I had a couple of children who achieved level 3 easily in the tests but I knew their strategies were not level 3, so gave them a level 2a. The problem for juniors is a level 3 is counted as a 3b, which it isn't as they haven't covered most of the level 3. There is often a dip in attainment in year 3 & 4 because of this. Level 3 in maths for example is more about starting to use your knowledge and understanding whereas level 2 is about facts.

I think the key thing people should be considering is 'is my child making progress and are they being challenged?' if you don't think so then go and see the teacher to discuss it. I think we sometimes get too hung up on sat results. Remember cohorts change in all communities. Ps I also hate this assumption that a level 5 child would be that whatever or because of what'sgoing on outside of school, possibly in schools but none that I know- teachers spend a lot of time trying to push all children- yes we fail sometimes but we do try!

Are KS1 levels for schools published publically anywhere?

KS1 results aren't published.

Infant only schools DO seem to inflate ks1 results.
It is good for them,but not necessarily for the child or the Junior school the children follow on to.

That's a shame - I wanted to compare our L3's with similar local schools' figures.

Mostboring some schools put them on their website or on their school profile on the dfes website.