KS2 Year 5, Level 4b & 3C??

[Leaveitbabe]

Forgive me if this has been answered but I cannot get a clear answer via google. DOE pointed me here:

www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/assessment/keystage2/pupil/b00206193/ks2-results/level-threshold-tables

DD is Y5 and achieved
3C in handwriting this sounds low even though she has a glowing report for her handwriting i.e. very neat etc.
4b in Literacy and Mathematics

What do these scores mean?

Many thanks in advance.

dons anorack, the targets 2b and 4b are not average levels but targets. In most schools the majority of pupils will meet or even surpass them. Thus the average student will be working at a higher level unless the school only teaches up to the target level. If so the average score will in fact be below the target

Exactly witch - the average student will be working at a higher level than the expected 4b for Y6.

So a 4b for Y5 is not overly good, and in the absence of any SEN, less than the OP's child is capable of.

well said witch... that is it exactly.

they are a level which most children are expected to meet - not an average.

So a 4b for Y5 is not overly good

However, by your own criterea-if a Y5 is expected to be a 3a or a 4c, then achieving a 4b is one, if not two sublevels above!?

No - by my criteria a Y5 would be achieving 4a/5 in maths.

Alternatively, let's focus on the progress a child has made rather than writing their future in stone based on a snapshot of 45mins during what may or may not have been a good day for them.

No - by my criteria a Y5 would be achieving 4a/5 in maths

Can I ask how old your own child is currently?

I'd say DC is doing fine OP.
If they're getting 5a/b's at the end of year 6 you are on a heading to a top stream in most schools, if they're getting 6's they're well above the curve. Don't forget that the SAT's are only a snapshot of what DC is doing. Useful for taking a spot benchmark and spotting issues but are not the 'be all and end all' as regards how DC is faring.

Also, the curve slows considerably as they hit senior school as each incriment becomes more complex in it's requirements-hence the 7's in year 9.

I'd be giving out a big "well done you" and having a conflab with the teacher as regards the 3C if you're concerned. :o

leave it Rose...leave it...

Yes I agree that at the moment only a small proportion of children would be getting 4a/5 in Y5.

I feel that many many more are capable of this.

I feel that they get lower marks because the setting of maths in particular and to some extent reading is far too low, right from the start of the EYF profile.

I have a great concern for any child who scores lower than this because as an FE teacher of the 14+ age, for over ten years I regularly encounter children who have slipped what seems tiny amounts, who at stages like the Op's many would describe as doing fine or being on target or needing a little help with writing. Playing this forward does not bode well for the academic outcome at secondary, at all.

This is the group who for the past 10 years have been channeled into Btec courses, I have taught over 500 - and yes I would be worried if any of my children were in this position.

I have three children, 3, 5 and 7.

So weird, some of the statistics quoted on here! If you take a large enough sample of children's grades, you would get a normal distribution or bell shaped curve, with the majority of the children being pretty close to the mean and only a few significantly above or below. It wouldn't produce a very skewed curve like Rosemary and Thyme is describing, with lots more DC below the mode than above it.

The 4b level at the end of Y6 was, when originally devised, the mean average that children across the country were achieving. Later on it was decided that this 'average' should become the target, so children were deemed to be reaching unsatisfactory levels if they were below the target. Obviously a fair few would be bang on the 4b at that time at the top of the curve, but it is still ridiculous to turn an averege result into a target. If the top of the curve 4b was 20% of children 40% would be below a 4b.

Standards and teaching have improved and the current average is higher than 4b for the end of Y6, but not greatly so. If a child has a 4b at the end of Y5 they would probably get around a 5c by the end of Y6, which would still be above average.

Thanks MN-ers for this. I am at work and only just logged back on and it is great to see the helpful replies. I am awaiting a call from teacher this afternoon. I am a bit disappointed about the 3C as I thought she was doing OK, at least that was the impression we got at the Parents evening. Having said that but they always comment that she could expand her answers. She reads a fair amount too.

I am pleased that the 4b is good as we have been really bashing away at the maths this year but clearly to the detriment of literacy/English.

Thanks again and v.happy to hear further feedback.

Agree with the sentiment Rose but the fault here is clearly with the school for not setting out what's what and doing what all too many do-just handing out a list of 3c 4a 4b and not putting in a table explaining what the national averages are.

Not everyone's children are going to achieve the same-one child's best may well be another child's lazy.

OP wanted to know where her DC sat and saying 'well, above average to average but that's not saying much with todays standards' isn't really that helpful in my opinion. Especially when it is a snapshot test.

Yes it is lower ability children that are fed from secondaries into FE collages for NVQ level 1 qualifications - this is the heart-breaking groups I have taught.

At some point every single one of them slipped a tiny bit in their learning.

At that point neither school nor parents patched the gap.

The gaps grow.

Regardless of whether or not you or I think that 4b is good today, it is my strong view that any gaps in knowledge should be addressed immediately - if it were my child i would be looking to stretch that 4b to a 4a and the 3c to a 3b and to do so now, over the summer holidays and the next term.

But this thread is NOT the right place to air your views. The OP asked if she should be concerned and several posters were able to put it in perspective for her.

Start your own thread on your points, Rosemary, and people will happily debate. But don't give a worried parent misinformation about how you feel about national expectations, that's not fair.

OK. Teacher has called back there is a typo and it should be 3a not 3c. So I think there is some work to do but he says she is where she should be. He also said that there should have been an explanatory note with the report explaining the results. We will receive that this evening. Is 3a acceptable at Y5??

If she improves by the usual 2 sub levels next year she should be a 4b, which is the expected level. So I would be happy with that. She is reaching the expected level at the subject she is weakest in and doing better than that in her strongest subjects. There's always room for improvement, she may do better than 2 sub levels!

3a is just short of a 4c. If you're concerned go in and have a chat to the teachers-they'll know whether it was a good, bad or indifferent result for DC, based on their usual level of work.

Personally I'd be discussing where we could improve things but I don't think there's any reason for mad panic at this point :o

My daughter is yr 4 ( visual SEN and fine motor issues)
She has 3B numeracy 3B for one writing and 3A for reading
She is moving onto typing in future as her output is compromised by her physical limitations
It is well worth asking what strategies they are putting in place to support her to make those sub level movements concrete.

Rosemary your first post on this thread is just plain bitchy and appears to be aimed at putting the OP in her place.

Others have explained how the expected and the average levels are not one and the same better than I, and that the OP's dd's levels are nothing to worry about, so I'll leave it at that.

Although I can't quite resist throwing a at Micheal Gove Rosemary. Sorry

Bitchy, weird, etc etc for daring to suggest that children can do better then an anonymous standard setter has decreed - what's so wrong with aiming high.

There is nothing wrong with aiming high (assuming you're not setting children up to fail that is...).

Reread your first post, Rosemary. Surely you can see how your tone might be construed?