A guide to national curriculum levels

[learnandsay]

www.stjohn.bucks.sch.uk/Newsletters/Newsletters/A%20guide%20to%20national%20curriculum%20levels%202009.pdf

and yes we get SEN children from outside the catchment

We only have VR 11+, no Maths or English involved (as such).

Our school's ofstead also says that parental inclusion is exemplary and that the children are extremely well behaved and well integrated into the school. But it stresses that the most able children are not challenged.

you do realise OFSTED will have spent a few minutes in each class and a whole day in the school to make those insightful observations

Ofstead publishes descriptions of its procedures and inspections on its website.

L&S, yes, but teachers on this forum will have experienced Ofsted inspections first hand, and have seen what those 'procedures' actually mean in practice - which is exaclty as mrz describes it. Total time spent examining most able children's work in my school's recent Ofsted inspection.... perhaps 15 to 30 minutes over the 2 days, based on a couple of minutes per lesson observation and one conversation with a child invited in to discuss their work.

In my area, btw, NO teaching for 11+ (which is VR only, and for superselectives only) is allowed in state primary schools. 11+ pass rates would therefore reflect only the proportion of high achievers who have parents rich enough and motivated enough to pay for coaching - in other words it is a good (if crude) measure of social class and parental income, but a very poor measure of school performance.

Could schools predict a lower SAT result for some children so as not to get into trouble that they don't achieve a 5 ie not gamble on a 5 as it would make them look bad if not achieved so underestimate to be on the safe side?

Schools don't predict SAT results.....

Some schools give lower levels at the end of reception and Y2 for just that reason MrsHeffley which is why league tables are a total farce.

They could, Mrs H, but if that child got a L3 at KS1 there would be questions asked as to why it didn't achieve a L5 at KS2; children are expected to make 2 levels of progress across a key stage.

(Which I always thought was a bit unfair, primaries have 4 years to do it in, Y3 to Y6, while secondaries only had 3 years, Y7 to Y9. Thank goodness we don't have to do the blessed SATs any more)

Schools don't predict SAT results..

No, they are predicted for them by the all powerful Data

Hmmm so does the computer predict the Y6 SAT(from Y2 results) or the staff?

Results at age 5 and 7 are reported to the government who use those results to predict Y6 results which in turn predict GCSE results etc etc

ah but Maizie in KS1 we only have 2 years to make 2 levels progress which is even more unfair

Also I thought the levels were set regardless of KS1 or KS2 whereas that document linked to suggests a level 3 in KS2 is different and harder to KS1?

You are right, yorkshiremother - the writer of the document is wrong and about 7 years out of date.

o does the computer predict the Y6 SAT(from Y2 results) or the staff?

All DATA is entered on a magic thing called RAISE ONLINE. It then tracks a child throughout its school career. You cannot escape its clutches. Ofsted interrogate the data consult it before inspecting you.

Which is where my oh dear comment came from ... one day I'll learn to keep quiet

For 11+ results in our area the wealth/tuition/coaching argument would just about hold up well if it weren't for one of the midtown schools which does well on the tests annually but isn't in an affluent neighbourhood. It's true that many of the neighbouring schools are in affluent areas of the town. And it's true that our catchment school is located in a deprived and socially troubled region. But there is an affluent area within the catchment and the 11+ results don't reflect that. And what's more the mixed intake school which neighbours it outperforms it by an order of magnitude at 11+

Put simply it under performs all of its neighbouring schools regardless of where they are situated and this, although it will be affected by the incomes of its families, this alone can not explain the extent of its under performance.

I suspect something in the ethos of the school neglects the exams. If the school has a tradition of doing well at the exams I'm sure it will expect to continue doing so. One of the academic heads actually mentioned his school's tradition of doing well in them. Although he did mention in passing parents buying tuition, perhaps not wanting to be seen to be taking all the credit.

Whereas when I asked about the exams at our catchment school I was given some answer that I didn't quite understand about being told if our children were not ready. And then the subject was dropped. It was only after I read on the LEA website how far below all of the neighbouring schools our school was that I began to see why our school didn't want to talk about the exams.

Oh, don't keep quiet Mrz. You are the voice of reason

Learnandsay, your school may change dramatically over the course of the next few years, as may the system of Sats, NC levels etc.

It is worth watching, but why panic now? If your child settles well, enjoys her education, and progresses well, then that is the most important thing. I know it's been said before, but you need to go into the school with a positive attitude.

I hope the school doesn't change dramatically. It's rated as good with several outstanding features. It's just not academically focussed. I'd be surprised if that changed because I think its SEN specialism is really at the core of its agenda. For me personally I'd prefer an academic school for my daughter. My focus is where she goes next once she has left primary school. But I realise that I'm only one parent. I think most of the parents I've come across are perfectly happy. If it was my choice I'd send my daughter to a different school, not because this one is bad, it isn't, far from it. But it just doesn't specialise in what I want.

I'm in danger of repeating myself ...
your local school could change beyond all recognition without anything changing simply because the next OFSTED visit will have a totally different focus and what was outstanding features in the last visit could be unsatisfactory features in the next such is the nature of OFSTED.

A school wouldn't get good if it wasn't meeting academic expectations.

Ah, but whose academic expectations would they be? I'm talking about my academic expectations.

It is entirely possible, learn and say, that you are completely underestimating the capabilities of the state education system.

mrz

Very gratifying to see "Some schools give lower levels at the end of reception and Y2 for just that reason MrsHeffley which is why league tables are a total farce."

I suspect that my DDs' school is likely to be one of these.

We have recently been ofsteded, got a good overall and noted strengths for children with sen and eal. One of our areas of improvement is for more able children to make better progress.

However I got an outstanding teaching a top set maths group, and we will be entering several children for the level 6 papers (only one of who has had tutoring as the child's parents were preparing them for a super selective), so there is good teaching going on even if it is not in every single class at this precise moment in the time. We have also made higher acheivers a priority and appointed a new member of staff with responsibility for this area. Therefore in 6 months time the situation should have improved significantly.

My point is that you cannot make assumptions about what the situation will be for your child based on historical evidence. As several have pointed out the chances are your school will have changed significantly by the time your dd is ready to sit the 11+.