Expected sats levels

[wobblo]

Is it likely that a child on 2c's at the end of y1 will be able to achieve a L3 by the end of y2 or not?
Thanks

It's certainly possible.

Children are meant to make a whole level in Y2, so should be about a 3c.

But then some LEAs prefer 3cs to be reported as 2as, and some children don't make a whole level and some make more.......

Thanks
so it's not unreachable then? That's reassuring.

Why does it matter so much at age 7?

My dd finished year 1 on 2 2b's and 1 2c and I've just discovered that 3c wasn't even her target for the end of year 2 it was 2a's across the board. Bit puzzled.

caffeinated I forget, which year is your DD in at present?

Indigo is right, they are expected to make a full level of progress in year 2 - expected, not guaranteed, obviously. FWIW in my DD2's case it was spot on.

Caffeinated - is it s primary school (not an infant school)?

My bet is they're trying to artificially keep the levels low so that their Y6 results look better. (ie it's better if a L2 makes a L5 then if a L3 makes a L5)

What Indigo said.

It is a infants school she is in year 2. So that's why I was so baffled its a infants school that generally achieves 50% level 3's slightly less in writing. Her teacher said she might surpass her 2a target in reading and scrape a 3c.

That is puzzling.

She does have a nqt maybe its that?

Target grades are normally a whole school policy.

Most schools set a target grade of 1 whole level (3 sublevels) in Y2, but some schools only set a target of 2 sublevels. (I believe some schools even set a target of 4 sublevels!)

So her targets are unlikely to be a result of having an NQT - although how much she actually learns will obviously be partially dependent on how good her teacher is.

Perhaps her Y1 grades were over-inflated? And school are covering up? (They will never ever admit to over-inflating grades.

Even more puzzling at October parents evening I asked about targets and she said she wasn't prepared to share those but she would say she was happy to share dd was one of only 3 kids who started year 2 at the same level they'd finish year 1 on and all the others had slid back over the summer.

We got a new head last June so maybe It's a change of school policy. She got all 9's at the end of eyfs and I thought at the end of last year she was in a really strong position to get level 3's. I'm not upset that she's unlikely to get them, 2a is still a great accomplishment. I'm just a bit baffled as to how her targets were so low. I did ask at the last parents evening if she'd struggled with work this year or if she had concentration issues and the teacher said absolutely not.

Why shouldn't you be upset!

A third of kids (nationally) get L3s - why shouldn't your DD!

Don't let MN culture of pretending it all doesn't matter influence you. A 2a's fine but not brilliant. Not brilliant at all if your kid is clever.

It does matter - it matters if your kids is bright and is achieving below this.

Oh indigo I had been upset when I found out. I'm not sure what has gone wrong the school seems to have no answers. Maybe she has plateaued out not all kids who start ahead stay ahead but school doesn't seem to have an explanation. I have been working on things at home and she picks up concepts quickly. When I questioned her teacher she just kept saying dd has done really well because the goal for the end of year 2 is 2b. Which it isn't its the expectation. But it certainly isn't the expectation for a child leaving year 1 on 2c's and b's. Dd daughter is a studious swotty kind so I'll carry on working with her at home over the summer and hope the change of school and teachers gets her back on track.