I don't understand the grading system in year one...

[ElfOnTheTopShelf]

Does not bode well!
DD got her school report today.
It says:

In Year One, a child working at the level expected nationally would attain a level 1b.
In Year Two, a child working at the level expected nationally would attain a level 2b.

On her own individual report, she has levels for reading, writing and maths.

In terms of the numbers and letters, is the first level 1c, then 1b, then 1a, then 2c, 2b etc
Or, 1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c?

Thanks!

1c is lower than 1a, etc. 1a is one place below a 2c.

1a is higher than 1b.

Thank you. I thought that was how it worked, the old A B C method, but the numbers threw me

I don't understand why they are grading six year olds.

As long as a child of that age is engaged and making progress, who cares?

And the system seems dreadful. I give it a 1f (Whatever that means...)

Clearly invented by a silly person.

This is the first year I have seen a grading on the report. But last year, she was in foundation so I am not sure whether that is why.

Judging from the number of threads I wonder if they have just introduced it (to general confusion). My dd is year 1 but no grading at her school, thank goodness.

It's ok they have announced they are scrapping the levels

Great, when do they scrap them?

How will they be assessed if they scrap levels? Surely the best idea would be to not tell parents other than at SATs times and use them internally or provide proper explanations of what they mean!

Ah, but who determines how much progress is enough -the school or the child?

I spent years 'making progress' and being 'near the top of the class' only to discover when I moved to (a thankfully very good) upper school that I was quite considerably behind where I should have been. If my parents had been able to compare my attainment to the national average then they may have been less willing to swallow all the assurances of my mediocre middle school that all was going wonderfully.

But these are six year olds. Writing in particular at that age may or may not be something the child is ready for. And if they are not, it is no indication at all that the child is going to have a problem. This grading serves no purpose other than making parents worry when so much is going on with their children developmentally that being a bit "behind" can be utterly normal.

A decent teacher should understand what age appropriate progress looks like, surely?

Barbarian - middle school =age 9 or 10+, yes? Very different to grade children of that age than six year olds.

"A decent teacher should understand what age appropriate progress looks like, surely?"

but then the government would have to trust teachers

media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/l/secretary%20of%20state%20letter%20to%20tim%20oates%20regarding%20the%20national%20curriculum%20review%2011%20june%202012.pdf

Rancerdoo The government cares! The LA cares! Ofsted cares!

Yes, a decent teacher does know. But we need to give The Authorities all of our letters and numbers so that they know too.