KS2 teachers: criteria for sitting a level 6 paper?

[Iamnotminterested]

Given that there will be such little time between the standard 3-5 SATs and the optional level 6's for marking, would a child be chosen to sit a level 6 paper based on their continual TA though the year?

Definitely SATS t ds's prospective High school.

SATs (at the level of single marks) in Maths at DS's prospective High School too, though no other subjects are in sets until Year 8.

DS (Year 6, run-of-the-mill state school which shows an admirable relucatnce to play league table games) was working at a secure Level 5 at the end of Year 5 in Maths, so he and the rest of his maths table have been working from the Level 6 objectives all year. As you would expect from good teaching, his teacher has looked at where they are and then taught them what they need to keep progressing - including bringing in a teacher from the High School to do extended high-level problem-solving activities one afternoon a fortnight. I should imagine that he will sit the Level 6 papers, as all of his group got 95-100% in the one and only 'Levels 3-5' SATs papers they have seen this year. They don't do extended SATs practice - one round of papers in September to see where they are, and I think perhaps one more before the 'official' ones - though I think that as part of their work on Level 6 objectives DS has done occasional relevant questions from Level 6 papers.

Been speaking to DS and he says they are doing level 5 and level 6 work in class.

So, seems like, as often happens, parent gets it wrong

Agree with Fennel that it can't be that hard, the L6 in reading. DD1 is apparently on for it, and nobody greets me at the school gate with tears in their eyes at the terrific privilege of teaching her. (Mind you, I maintain a sullen belief that reading isn't that hard anyway. Only leads to English degrees and a life of journalistic penury.)

I take everything that has been said.
BUT I am pleased the optional L6 is back. My DS (Yr5) was 4b across at the end of Yr4 and his target at the end of Yr5, which teachers say he is meeting, is L5. I understand there used to be nothing beyond that. So I wonder, without a L6, where would he go in Yr6? He is a boy who follows his progress and the teachers reports with interests. Surely it's not a great motivation to see you have not moved level in a whole year. I am not saying he will comfortably achieve L6. That's to be seen! It's just good to have something he can work towards to IYKWIM.

So I wonder, without a L6, where would he go in Yr6?

But schools have always been able to teach level 6 objectives and teacher assess at level 6 (which has 50% weighting with test scores) and in your ds's case they should have.

Sorry, I thought if L6 was out of the question with Sats, then it would be also for TA. That's what I was told by another mother. Thanks Feenie

But it's only reading. You just, you know, read books. AS the fancy takes you, and to the level that suits. You don't need a SATS assessment to read.

One of life's true primal pleasures, reading. And like so many other primal pleasures, a grade is irrelevant.

She maybe right about your school - some couldn't be bothered to chose to impose a ceiling of level 5 where there wasn't one. But the statutory rules have always been perfectly clear. It suddenly matters now that it might appear in the league tables.

motherinferior I totally agree with you BTW but...
Now I am really confused. All this talk about L6 is only to grade reading? They don't sit L6 maths or writing? I believe they do!?

Oh, I have no idea about the other subjects. But frankly, am not that bothered in any case. It's only SATS. A set of tests that a bunch of 11 year olds are expected to sit.

She was just talking about reading personally. Any subject can be teacher assessed to level 6, and always could. This year, for the first time since 2002, there are level 6 papers for reading and maths.

More to motherinferior... Even though I am with you, the reading assesment is never about reading as you describe it, is it? It's about knowing how to answer a reading comprehension. Not the same. My DS loves reading but hates reading comprehensions which he finds incredibly boring. I too would find it very boring if I had to answer questions about the novel I am loving so much right now. Some emotions, some of the things you experience as a reader, cannot be explained. You explain them, you kill the emotion.

Oh, I'm not sure about that. I don't think texts are some kind of sacred experience. You can analyse, and look at how the narrative works, how the words are constructed, and indeed how you as a reader interpret this. The study of words and texts and narratives is important. Albeit perhaps secondary to that primal pleasure.

Agree, they're not sacred. I did comp lit in high school, yes I enjoyed it. But once you start deconstructing something, the pleasure becomes intellectual. It supplants that primal sensual pleasure with something different. I just wanted to note that there is a different between your description of reading and what they asses in school as reading.

Hmm. Not sure the pleasure is intellectual; IMO the visceral remains. (I have two ENglish degrees.)

I am a writer (in another language) and spend my day having to painfully analise and asses what I write, so maybe that's why I don't want to have to do it with other people's writing!
Definetely intellectual for me. Not sensual. So let's agree to differ!

The real reason level 6 has been reintroduced is to pacify pushy parents. Just like loads of homework in primary schools, education experts and teachers don't like it and know it doesn't any good, but parents like it, so reluctantly schools have to do it.

So are you all saying that it is not possible for a dc in Y5 to be TA as lvl 6c in maths and lvl 5b in reading? now. That's what DS1's last half term report said. Was the teacher being, erm, economical with the truth?

Suehulk my very technical DH was very when DD1 said exactly that about music theory.

Feenie, I so often agree with what you say on these threads!

I teach secondary English and I would say that in an average year at least 50% of the Year 7s I get who have achieved Level 5 in their SATs are NOT working at Level 5.

My school does not allow us to report regression on interim reports unless there is an extremely good reason.

So, I have a choice. Lie on the report, keep everyone happy, give the child unrealistic expectations and unattainable targets for the rest of their school career. Or assess honestly, incur the wrath of my Headteacher and try to explain to a parent why their child has 'gone down' even if they have a fabulous, clever child who is working hard. It's lose-lose for me, AND the child.

If I start getting 'Level 6' kids in my head might explode. I've been teaching for 11 years and maybe met one 11 year old who could read and write at Level 6.

I agree with kingthistle. In order to gain L6 in reading at sec school, we would usually be expecting an essay, in which the pupil discusses the techniques and aims of the author, how the writing is fit for purpose, the specific techniques of language used, such as sentence srtucture, hooks, and analysis of how successfully the author fulfills their aim, with extensive quote and reference to text. Most Y7 are more like L4, with a few L5, on entry in this sort of assessment. They often make fairly rapid progress once started.

I think whwtnis often forgotten- and has definitely been forgotten by policy/schools getting kids to take some GCSEs early, that doing well qt subjects like English qnd history requires emotional maturity. I'm sure it's possiBle to teach the criteria for completing a level 6 paper in "reading", but a 10/11 year old just wouldn't hqve the equipment to understand on a deeper level what's going on in a piece of literature.

I am often very sceptical both in reql life qnd on here when people talk qbout the books their primary age children are reading. It goes right back to the debates qbout book bands in Reception. Decoding might be fine- comprehension? Not so sure.

And I speak as the owner of a very able year 6 reader (when do we stop calling them vry able readers, by th way, not just "readers"?) technically, he could read anythingnyou put in front of him. But he's a 10 year old boy! He's certainly able to read Wuthering Heights, for example- but he would be completely baffled by it!

Er....I read WH at seven. And Jane Eyre. Wasn't wild about WH but formed a long-lasting adoration for JE which meant I wrote my MA thesis about it.

Me too - and Little Women on which I did my dissertation for my English Lit and Primary Ed degree.

I understood them on a certain level at 7 - but would say I got something different out of each novel every time I read them thereafter.