School Report - 'as expected' - good enough?

[EmilyBingo]

My son has come home with a school report. Yr 4. Lots of subject areas and most areas are 'as expected'. Am I being demanding by wanting to know more? 'As expected' in the state system to me sounds a bit like he is not doing well.

Meeting targets, making expected progress, are supposed to be reassuring

When people do that at work they get pay rises,right?

Has he had any recent tests? Can you access his results and then ask the forum whether or not his results are appropriate for your son's age?

I think it depends on whether you feel your child has achieved/is working at their potential.

When we were told my dc1 was meeting expectations we were delighted, as was she.
If I am told on my dc2's report that she's meeting expectations, I will be disappointed. I will also be asking questions because I know (and previous reports etc have indicated), that she is capable of much more.

Hi EmilyBingo:

I find 'as expected'/ 'below expected'/ 'above expected' levels very confusing because to date I've never been given any sort of realistic check list of what precisely my child should be mastering in reading/ writing/ maths. I just endlessly get told 'we're working to the national curriculum' which I suspect means nothing to most parents.

I use two things now as a yard stick to work out if my child is 'on track':

Campaign for Real Education has detailed and 'plain English' descriptions of what the 'ideal' curriculum should be here: www.cre.org.uk/primary_contents.html - just select curriculum area and then look for year/ age range. Now this is ideal world stuff and your school may well not be working to this level - but at least it gives you an idea of what is in theory possible.

The draft national curriculum documents for primary school are now out - and again it has been written in such a way that parents can follow what key skills should be mastered during a given school year. This is a more accessible check list of key skills to be taught & mastered by students (possibly why it isn't warmly received by teachers). For each year there is a list of the skills a child should master by the end of that given academic year. Again - this is probably more than your school is currently doing - but it is a good yard stick of where the government is intending to set the benchmark for learning in future:

draft English curriculum: media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/draft%20national%20curriculum%20for%20english%20key%20stages%201%202.pdf

draft Maths curriculum: media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/draft%20national%20curriculum%20for%20mathematics%20key%20stages%201%202.pdf

draft Science curriculum: media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/draft%20national%20curriculum%20for%20science%20key%20stages%201%202.pdf

The nice thing about these documents is that literally 10 - 12 pages of reading and you have a good grasp of what your child should have covered in Y4. You can also learn what is ahead for Y5.

I'm not sure what your situation is - but these documents should help you to judge whether your DS is working well within the new national targets or there are some gaps in knowledge.

HTH

As expected means he is doing well.

It means he has made expected progress or attainment this year.

I think YABU.

Expected progress is demanding in state schools.

EmilyBingo & Indigo

The difficulty is that 'as expected' doesn't actually say anything - does it mean as the teacher expected? or Does it mean perforamnce against national SATs Levels ranges for a given year (or age range)?

I'm not trying to be difficult but I had 3 years of reports (YR - Y2) that DD1 was performing 'as expected' - she could barely read, she struggled to write and was unable to carry out subtractions with numbers over 9 (i.e. 10 - 1/ 12 - 2/ etc...) in March of Y2. My cynicism and anger grew with each year's report.

Although I totally take your point Indigo that at a school where they're doing their job well, to good and/or high standards and professionally - 'as expected' would always mean in relation to expected performance on nationally set SATs and expected mastery of the national curriculum to this point. Please please believe me that there are schools out there where that really isn't the case, where teachers word reports in such a way to present what parents want to hear, rather than genuinely inform parents of their child's actual performance or even areas of weakness.

I do understand the reasons why this happens, genuinely, but ultimately it doesn't help the child.

I'm not certain what EmilyBingo's own situation may be so I've suggested some independent & respectable summaries of what a child in Y4 should have covered/ be able to do. This seems a fair way of allowing a parent who isn't sure to 'ground truth' the information the school is presenting against their own observations/ understanding of what their child can do and has achieved.

I don't think EmilyBingo is YABU - I think she quite sincerely has no idea what 'as expected' actually means. As professionals teachers need to seriously ask themselves if this long winded reporting system is working. You all clearly hate preparing these reports and we parents can't make heads nor tails of them frankly.

I think schools chuck these reports out using their own jargon tbh. I think we all have the right to have a detailed report on how our children are doing in each subject. Year 2 has been a strange year or our ds... 4 different teachers, fallen behind in maths, not been pushed on things he s good at, almost just left to it. We are seeing the teacher on Friday as we need more info on how he's getting on and why he's not achieving. But that's another story ...

PSBD - did your DD get a level 2 in her Y2 SATs?

If so she was performing as expected.

If not, school were lying when they said she was doing as expected. School aren't free to make expectations up. All schools should have the same expectations.

But I do concede its possible school lied to you on her report.

On the reports we send out, we have 'Below / Achieving / Exceeding National expectations'. We also give attitude to learning grades.

We are not free to 'make up' the national expectations - so achieving at nationally expected levels would mean exactly that - that they were where expected for a child of their age nationally.

We give guidance in combination with effort grades - a child who is achieving national expectations but shows only satisfactory effort could be doing better. A child who is below national expectations but shows excellent effort is doing as well as can be expected.

You should read the level given in combination with your own knowledge of your child. Have they previously done much better? Are they working hard? Have they made progress? What does the text of the report say? If it says 'X has tried his best in every aspect of this subject this year', then you would be unreasonable - if that chimes with your perception too - to expect more of him. If it says 'X does not always pay great attention in class, and if he paid more attention to p, q and r could make even better progress' then obviously he could be doing better....

Sorry but I would be hoping for more than 'expected' unless significant SEN. Our local state primary used to get most to level 5 at 11 - I don't think that's an unrealistic goal for our children. If children regularly exceed expectations in Asia etc why can't ours & why do we think mediocre academic achievement is ok? Sorry but this fails our children IMO. Of course not all can get there but we should be shooting for the stars.

Are the expected levels really challenging? Why then are the children from Preps consistently ahead of state school pupils etc - at least IME. Most can do more.

(Should also say that we use APP in Reading, Writing and Maths (moderated internally and externally) to give levels. The APP grids are available from here:
www.schools.norfolk.gov.uk/Teaching-and-learning/Assessment/index.htm

For other subjects, the level descriptors in the National Curriculum should give you an idea of what your child should be able to do in those subjects. These are available on the final page for each subject from
www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/primary/?page=1

(The old National Curriculum is still the one in force at present)

At the end of Year 4, a child achieving at Nationally Expected levels - ie on track for Nationally Expected levels at the end of Year 6 - should be a secure Level 3, in other words should be able to do all the things indicated as Level 3 in the APP grids and in the National Curriculum. Bear in mind that these are very much 'skills based', not 'tick sheets of content'.)

Hamish,

It depends on the child, surely? For my children, I would not be happy if they achieved national expectations (except for DS in Speaking and Listening - as a previous selective mute, I am very grateful that he speaks at all).

For many children in the class I teach, national expectations are extremely challenging.

What matters, in the end, is progress. We should be thinking about 'are our children making good PROGRESS' - so all children, whatever their starting point, should be making good progress. For a child who starts above age expected levels, then good progress should mean they reach very high levels - so in your local state primary, some of those Level 5s may well have been relative failures, in that if the child had made good progress for them they could have reached level 6. For a chiold who starts way below age expected levels, then even if their final level is still slightly below what is expected, that would represent FANTASTIC progress.

It's a bit like saying that selective grammar schools are great because they get A*s at GCSEs - that is expected, or in some cases below expected progress for those children......

DS's report has "as expected" as working to national curriculum expected levels.

If your child was working ahead of expectations last year, this is a potential cause for concern. If they were behind expectations last year, they have done very well :)

Hamish,

Also, do you speak from knowledge of the National Curriculum / National Strategies / APP when you describe them as 'mediocre academic schievement'?

My experience of children from prep schools is
a) their parents always believe them to be ahead of their state school counterparts - having been in the very awkward position of having to explain why they end up in the lower groups of my state school class - and in one case straight onto the SEN register - I am not sure that this is anything more than a marketing ploy.

b) they are introduced to 'formal' methods very early, which 'look good' to parents as they 'match' our own school experiences. So e.g. column addition not number lines, formal grammar lessons etc. Again, in my experience, these are not underpinned by any solid understanding - they have been learned by rote as a recipe - whereas children taught through the state system have a much more robust 'experience' of e.g. the number system and therefore approach more formal methods of calculation later, but with more understanding.

I have no doubt that some selective prep schools, who have excluded children who have any difficulty in learning, do make faster progress, as they should with a more able single ability cohort. However my expecrience of children from non-selective preps is as above.

Teacher- I assure yyou - the pre-preps (selective and non-selective) in my area all teach numberlines first!

Sorry OP- not helping with your discussion.

Thanks montmartre - I'm aware that I was over-generalising from my own experience ... scarred by the experience of having to explain to ex-prep parents who assert that 'my child is brilliant, look at this column addition from their last school' that, as their child has no understanding of what they are actually doing and cannot, for example, add 10 reliably to a number or take away 2 over a multiple of 10, they might need to be in a lower group for a while....

Hi Teacherwith2kids. I do have knowledge of NC/APP etc. I do know what the levels 'look' like, how to level writing etc. I've had teacher training although not currently working as a teacher. I certainly don't claim to be an expert.

Children from prep schools come to our school and usually go to the top sets in the junior school (international school). Generally they work faster and are ahead of those who have been state educated. They are used to rigorous practice, homework etc. They may all be brighter but I don't think so. Ours is an unusual school and situation but it's a very large school and it's given me an interesting perspective. Progress through the sets also depends on the ability of pupils that join.

Personally I think it can be dangerous looking for a similar amount of progress each year based on a previous years performance. I prefer to see children as individuals who can surprisingly peak, plateau, and even regress. I think seeing things in this way can mean we unwittingly label children.

I want every child to reach their absolute potential and yes, I think that very often they are capable of far more than we know. I've seen this with my own children who have a reasonably ordinary intellect as far as I can tell. Also living out here I see perfectly ordinary children who are streets ahead academically because these are the expectations and the culture and society are hardwired to support and encourage academic achievement.

I had my kids report and "as expected" means that they met their grade target based on start of year grades. As expected didn't mean at national expected level.

OP I wouldn't have a clue what "as expected" meant either!! YANBU!!

My first thought would be 'expected for her', not even thought it would be a national curriculum level thingy! - they should explain that.

DD's old school (state), used to computer generate their reports, using multiple choice - no one noticed until a Mum with twins saw the wordings were the same - shocking I think and no idea of where they were for either their level or national.

Last night I received a fully comprehensive report, detailing each subject, her mark in the English and Maths test as a % and then what the % was over the year group, it gave me a clear understanding where she is at and areas to work on. I was more thrilled that she is 'polite kind, helpful and a pleasure to teach' to be honest. The whole thing surpassed anything we had in her old school, but I suppose that's what we are paying for.

Teacher - When dd started Yr2 in September, her new school went over numberlines, numbergrids etc. in the first term, to ensure all the children knew number placement etc. One thing I do see more off is Mental Maths, never did anything like this at her state school, but boy does it speed things up!

Not everyone is a 'clued up' how the system works, there should be consistent clear method of showing attainment across all LA schools.

Paddling re your comments: her mark in the English and Maths test as a % and then what the % was over the year group, it gave me a clear understanding where she is at and areas to work on.

I hear from so many that's meaningless to be compared against others in the year group etc. I think many think this encourages unhealthy competition (?) Certainly this approach seems to be wildly unpopular. To be honest I am not sure I understand why. Would you agree and what's your view? Thanks.

What's with all the teacher bashing on here?

"'As expected' in the state system to me sounds a bit like he is not doing well." The state system has challenging but realistic expectations. If you are saying that what the state system expects is not good enough for you, why is your child in a state school?

"This is a more accessible check list of key skills to be taught & mastered by students (possibly why it isn't warmly received by teachers)." The reason that it is not across the board warmly received by teachers is not that there is more opportunity to assess the teaching - that happens extremely regularly, with OfSTED, SIAS, PM management, online trackers, etc. It is because the proposed NC will be, in places, far less creative, stimulating and fun than the present one. For the children, not the teachers. There will be a new emphasis on 'rigor' and rote learning. Teaching lists of facts by rote learning is very easy teaching. Far less work than the creative work I do now. But I don't want it for my child.

Incidentally, some bits are fine, such as the 'new' requirement for a language to be taught from the age of 7 ... apart from the fact that Labour had already introduced that 6 years ago.

As expected means he's exactly where he should be, which at the end of Y4 will be a 3B. Well done, he's on target :)

I think that type of comparison would be great - but can't see state schools going for it, ours even try to hide top/middle/bottom table groups behind names ie shark/octopus/puffer-fish.

Why is it unrealistic to really push the boundaries? Why is it unrealistic to have really high expectations LaBelleDame? That's the thing. I think teacher's do a great job, it's the system...@ Rosemary - why don't they? What's behind the reluctance as you describe it?

I'm with you Hamish but you'll not find too much support on MN for anything that might be slightly viewed as pushing children to learn, if it's not "through play" and "at the pace of the child" it's tiger parenting and totally slammed, because of course children themselves are so very good at determining when where and how much they can learn.....