Sats level 6 people...

[crazygracieuk]

Are your dc teacher assessment grades level 6 or above?

If you pass the level 6 paper then does that equal a ks3 level 6 or is like like primary and a level 3 on ks1 sats being easier to get than a level 3 on y3 optional sats where you need to know more.

My ds is teacher assessed at 5a and in mock tests has been "passing level 6 papers with flying colours". If this turns out to be true does that mean he's been taught to the test well (he started learning level 6 work after October half term) or could he be a level 6 at maths? (he is the one who wants to know the latter)

Friend in the playground with similar ability child says that maybe they are not confident assessing level 6+ in primary so give a 5a and leave it to secondary to assess level 6 and sub level (this is a new school and second year that anyone has graduated)

and a level 3 on ks1 sats being easier to get than a level 3 on y3 optional sats where you need to know more.

Not true - a level 3 is a level 3 across the board. KS1 assesment relies on teacher assessment using lots of level 3 evidence, and Y3 should be doing the same.

Level 6 papers should only be taken if the teacher assessment is also level 6. Some schools are just 'letting' their level 5 children take it to see if they scrape it without necessarily having been taught the level 6 objectives - scraping a level 6 test does not a level 6 child make!

Yes, Feenie, that may be true, but are the schools allowing their children to scrape level 6 giving the statisticians the impression that it does?....

And is level 6 going to become the new level 5? ie is the new gold standard going to become parents looking for schools where 40% of children get level 6s instead of level 5s, and nearly 100% get level 4s?????

but are the schools allowing their children to scrape level 6 giving the statisticians the impression that it does?...

Sounds to me like they are. I don't think the level 6 test will last long, given its misuse.

And no, I doubt it, to your second question.

Level 6 papers should only be taken if the teacher assessment is also level 6. Some schools are just 'letting' their level 5 children take it to see if they scrape it without necessarily having been taught the level 6 objectives - scraping a level 6 test does not a level 6 child make!

I am somewhat concerned that this is what is happening with dd. Parent's evening in October, she was 5a & the teacher said she "may" achieve L6 by the end of the year(this was before I knew anything about L6 papers being an option this year). Whilst she may have had some extension work approximating L6 standard in the earlier part of this year, things have been very much geared towards L3-5 e.g years 5 & 6 were previously grouped according to maths ability, since February, all year 6 have been taught in one group.

To be fair, that doesn't mean that the teacher wasn't teaching level 6 objectives to her group - he/she would have to to demonstrate progress from 5a.

True!

I guess I'm concerned about any knock to dd's confidence. I'd welcome being taught L6 objectives to stop any 5as stagnating/coasting but am doubtful about the testing at that level.

There isn't that much difference between L6 and L5. The childrne wouldn't have to do a whole new curriculum for L6, just a few new topics.

Also, why is it wrong for a primary to say a child is L6 even though they might only be a 6c? Secondary schools give 6.1, 6.2 etc. What is the difference. I have found that my Y6 leavers always find Y7 work far too easy as they cover everything L4+ again.

I've taught level 6 lots of times - it's a lot of work. A child entering y6 with a 5a could expect to be a reasonably comfortable level 6 by the end - but a 5a child could easily fluke a 6c by one mark and not be a 6c, the same as sometimes a teacher assessed child at 4a can sometimes scrape 5c by one mark when they are not.

I agree that y7 teachers shouldn't repeat so much, and I've met lots of bored expupils too. But sending children up as flukey 6cs just by letting level 5 children 'see' if they can, without teaching level 6 at all, which is what seems to be happening in some schools will not help our case!

But if they 'fluke' a L6 on the test doesn't mean that is what the teacher gives as their TA. I did the optional L6 papers last year with my entire class. About half of them got L6 on the papers, but I only sent two up to secondary with L6 TA. Now if secondary schools actually paid any attention to the information we send them, there wouldn't be a problem, but we all know most don't give a damn about what lowly primary teachers think.

Just curious. Ds's school is entering children for the L6 maths paper next week - approx 10 children from a 4 form, highly performing year group. These children have been taught L6 stuff since Christmas. So far, so fine.
I'm just wondering whay they aren't entering anyone for the L6 english test (reading test?). There are a lot of v bright children in the school, so out of a year group of nearly 120, you would have though a handful would be up to L6? Can anyone suggest reasons why?

Do you know that they aren't entering any? Just that I have had a conversation with a parent who, because their child isn't entering any paper 6s, didn't know any child was. Their opening comment was "Isn't it a pity they're not stretching the children with paper 6s". Wasn't sure whether to burst their bubble by saying they were some doing it or not, as clearly they thought their child would be doing them.

I don't know whether the reading is harder, or perhaps harder to teach towards. In dd1's school, (5 form enty) the entire top set and a few of the 2nd set are doing the maths. I don't think anything like as many are doing the reading.

All parents got a timetable wiith the days/times of papers, inc the L6 maths papers, which DS is doing next Tuesday, so we haven't been kept in the dark
I am interested as he was a 5a for reading and writing at the start of Y6, so thought he would be capable of sitting the L6 reading one too, but no-one at all has been entered, and I don't get why, as they obviously aren't ideologically opposed because they are doing L6 maths...

All DCs who get L6, fluke or not, are a massive feather in their primaries hats.

And a massive pain to the senior schools, who are then required to demonstrate unrealistic levels of progress in the next few years.

DD2 may get maths, but as I've said else where, I'm certain the high school maths mistress won't be convinced.

If she gets reading that's great, she hasn't done loads of cramming and is naturally good at literacy.

Anyone got any ideas about why my DS's school is doing L6 maths but not reading?

Because no one is working at a level 6 in reading, but they are in Maths!

Hi Feenie
I said up-thread that my DS was a 5a at the start of Yr 6, and his teacher has said he has had a really good year, so I can't understand why he would not be sitting this test. He is in a year group of almost 120 children, 50%+ who got L3 at Yr 2, so I can't imagine he is the only one working at this level...
I just wondered why they were testing L6 in maths and not reading - seems strange.

Because she doesn't consider he is working at a level 6. You could ask why.

There was a thread about this some time ago. Seems that a L6 in reading involves more that having started y6 with a 5a and having had a good year in English. The texts are directed to older children and there is a question of being mature enough to grasp their meaning, subtext, etc. Just because you can read Bleak House or 1984 it doesn't mean you're ready for it IYKWIM

ok back to being confused now just when Ithought I had understood this L6 thing !!

I thought L6 was an extension paper for primary yr6 therefore how can the texts be directed at OLDER children

Sorry hardboiled,,,,I think i get what you mean now in "older children."....you mean they have to have "brain and maturity "of a child older than they are...???

sorry yes what I have been told is that working at that level in reading comp requires a certain maturity. Yes, texts will be more challenging.

Well, I've not asked his teacher because it's not important really, but I do think it strange. As I said, it is a very bright year group, so I find it very hard to believe no one is working at L6... DS has always read years ahead of his chronological age (and yes, with comprehension and emotional and intellectual maturity), and it was literacy that school have always praised him for ahead of maths...
I was assuming DS would get a L6 in his teacher assessment at the end of the year even though he hasn't sat a L6 paper, so I shall wait and see

I work in a Grammar school (top 25% not superselective top 5%) and usually in each year 7 cohort about 12 (of 120) children come up with a Teacher Assessment of L6 in Reading. When retested in September, the English dept usually only agree with half of those securely being level 6. So 6 out of 120 in a grammar. It's really a bigger jump from level 5 to 6 in English than in Maths because of the level of maturity required to respond to the texts in a sophisticated manner. I have all excellent readers in a Book Club I run but there is a variation in ability to understand nuance.