Levels - do they have to tick every box or most to get a particular level?

[whydoesitalwaysrainonme]

If a child can do 90% of the things on level 4c but there are one or two things at 3a would that mean they'd get a 4c or a 3a?

I don't think it works like that. They do the test, and there's a cut off point in the marks for each sub level.

It's teacher discretion, really. Some parts of the level descriptors are weighted as more important than others. At 90%, though, it'd probably be decided as a 4c.

Seeker, I think the OP is talking about continuous assessment, rather than SATs papers? I could be wrong, though.

Yes I'm talking about teacher assessment. It was an example and my dc is in year 2 anyway so it's based on both the paper but more the teacher's view.
we are thinking more 2a versus 3c but I put that as it was the first thing that came into my head.

Ah, but 2a to 3c is a MASSIVE jump. I know it might not seem it, but it really is. Especially in reading.

As for levelling, I would normally call it a 3c if it really were only one or two aspects.

For example, I have a v. bright pupil who can do some level 4 maths, but cannot multiply by 10. Can divide by 10 and 100, but not multiply.

If I didn't allow any gaps, the child would be a 2a, rather than a 3c.

Another example - where a child is a level 3 writer in all other ways but has relatively poor handwriting. What would happen then?

Handwriting is only a very small part of the assessment-in the SATs it's only worth a few marks so shouldn't make that much difference to the overall level.

3a, by our reckoning

So asiatic in your school they'd have to tick every box?