Maybe a technical question for KS1 teachers - how/when do you set targets?

[AboutAGull]

We had parents evening last week for dd, who is in year 2. She is doing fine, and is on target for 2a's for the end of the year, which for a child born in July who would much rather be playing, is great afaic.

However, her teacher did say that she was targetted for 3c's at the end of the year, so would most likely miss meeting her targets. I said it didn't bother me lol, as I was very pleased with how she was doing .

What I want to know though is, how and when do they set these targets? As far as I understand, level 3 at the end of year 2 means your child is ahead of the game, and tbh, dd has always been dead average at nursery and pre-school. Certainly nowhere near the top of the class - in either group 3 or 4 out of 5. So why was she predicted 3's?

Are their targetss just done on school/nursery assessments, or are there other factors at work (my mind is thinking - maternal education levels, sibling performances etc)? I know this is unlikely, but I just cannot fathom why dd had such high targets otherwise...

Any idea?!

Her targets for this year will be based on the previous years levels.

Is she at a Primary or an Infant school?

Call me cynical and I expect teachers would disagree but I strongly suspect that an Infant school is more likely to target children for level 3 where a Primary is more concerned to show their 'best' progress at the end of year 6 .
A child achieving level 3 at the end of Year 2 will be targeted a level 5 in Year 6, where if they were 2A, it would be the required '2 levels progress' if they achieved level 4.
I look forward to seeing what others think.

DD is at an infant school, where all the children transfer to a 'linked' junior school. About 50% of pupils get level 3's in reading and numeracy at end KS1, and the juniors gets a correspondingly appropriate number of level 5's at the end of KS2. I know the year 2 teachers check levels with the year 3 teachers towards the end of KS1, so I don't think it is that.

DD got 1b's at the end of year 1, hence my surprise at targets of 3c, as I thought it was one level progress expected in year 2. I just wondered if there was somethinig I was missing!

based on her previous level her target would be a 2B ... could the teacher have simply got muddled

The targets you are thinking of which take loads of factors into acount are FFT targets, and AFAIK they're not used till secondary school.

We use FFT in primary

Yep, so do we.

mrz - I did do a double check when the teacher said that, but she seemed to think it was a reasonable target and didn't say she neede to go and recheck it.

I wondered if the high targets are because her sister was a 3's across-the-board kind of girl in year 2. While dd2 isn't the same kind of child, maybe they assume she has the same potential as dd1, and that because dd2 is one of the youngest in the class, she might accelerate as she she goes through year 2 and therefore make more progress than an older, already more mature child might iywkim?

Otherwise, I just don't get why my (lovely) middle-of-the-road-in-terms-of-achievment dd was targetted to make such high marks . The school isn't exactly open about these things, so I doubt I will ever get to the bottom of it!

I just wondered if the teacher had got on the wrong line of a print out I start going cross eyed by the end of parents evening. Its happened to me as a parent at secondary. The teacher gave me another child's test results and when I looked confused rechecked.

Lol, I can imagine! DD's teacher had a print-out per child, with data on it and handwritten comments, so it was definitely dd's page. Plus, her teacher obviously thought it wasn't outlandish that dd should have these targets - and I suppose if dd is likely to get 2a's then she isn't so far off.

It just seems a very big leap from end of year 1, and makes me wonder what the school results are going to be this year if a child like dd was expected to do so well - that must mean more than 2/3rds of the year were targetted level 3's!

Many schools/LEAs won't award level 3 unless the child is a secure 3 (3B) which is a huge leap from a 2A.

I think our school seems happy to give a 3 without it being secure - I can't imagine 50%+ level 3's would all be 3b's . DD's targets were certainly 3c, but as I said, I am delighted she was on track for 2a's . She isn't exactly keen on 'learning' yet, she's much happier playing with her sylvanian families and dressing up .

mrz & feenie - you don't use FFT for Y2 targets, do you?

Don't you take their Y1 grade and add a whole level?

And then use FFT data as a separate indicator - but not for their targets?

That's how we work Indigo we find FFT gives a much lower target level for our children

The expectation is that a child makes 2 levels progress in KS1 which equates to a level per year

I was told in year 1 its not uncommon for children to make 4 or 5 sublevels of progress in year 2. Is that not right then? (My child finished year 1 on all 2c's so I'm expecting the target for this year is 3c's..) but I assume some children have things click and make rapid progress.

If a child is 1C at the beginning of Y1 they are above average so should (in theory) remain above average

Santac from my understanding many children don't start year 1 at a 1c level but are working towards a 1c.

Children don't progress in a nice smooth upward line. They have spurts and plateaus so make more progress one year (term) and less the next ...

My friend's dd reached level 3 at KS1 sat in maths but now in year 3 she is placed in the lower end of the bottom group.