What's needed to move.from a 2a to 3c in writing?

[numbum]

Just curious really. I've scrambled my brain trying to work it out for myself using online grids.

Can any teachers (or anyone else in the know) simplify it for me?

Excuse the random full stop in my title! Oh the irony...

Is this any help? www.primaryresources.co.uk/english/pdfs/3targets.pdf

There is a lot more to it than this (as you know from looking at the APP grids already!) but I quite like this simple pyramid that shows the progression for what is expected from L1 to L3:- PYRAMID

www.andrelleducation.co.uk/_content/212/The%20Criterion%20Scale.pdf

BetsyBoop what does the CL stand for in the punctuation line?

CL = Capital Letters :-)

For level 4

Can use sophisticated connectives, eg. nevertheless, uses justification and deduction! That's funny. I know lots of adults who can't do any of these things!

Thanks EcoLady...tis obvious really.

Thanks all. I'll have a look at the links later when I'm less frazzled!
Mrz, as a teacher, if you had a year 1 child working consistently at a level 2a, would you push them on to be a level 3 or develop them further in different directions with their writing? Is that even possible?

DD's teacher has said they'll be working to move up levels but I'm not sure I'm happy about it

(I'm concerned about DD, I'm not boasting)

Developing them further in different directions would essentially be moving them towards a level 3

Ok that's what I thought. So it all goes hand in hand then.

Thanks

Moving levels as far as SATS marking is concerned requires the child/teacher/parent to identify which aspect of writing is most in need of work. For some children their grammatical skills, punctuation, handwriting etc are great, but the 'composition and effect' may be weaker. Or vice versa. When I taught Year 2, we would usually end up with around 8-10 3c writers by the end of the year, and for most of them composition and effect was a real strength and raised them up to level 3. They tended to be articulate children who used expressive language in both spoken and written form. Also, bear in mind that many schools are reluctant to level children too high (ie a level 3 in Year 1) because if they enter Year 2 as a level 3c they are meant to move 3 sub levels in a year and that would mean them entering KS2 as level 4. Unfortunately as teachers are under massive pressure to 'prove' how they have moved the children on each year, you end up with a ridiculous numbers game. But I won't get started on that...!

because if they enter Year 2 as a level 3c they are meant to move 3 sub levels in a year and that would mean them entering KS2 as level 4

That's a major part of the worry for me. That's a of pressure for such a young child. Writing does seem to come naturally to her but I dont want them scaring her just because of targets

I find it mad that we dont just level them to what they should be.

I thourght they accepted less progress at keystage 2 then keystage 1.

so are lots of teachers dumbing down kids grades or not helping them to achieve potential because of these targets?

I wouldn't worry about the school putting pressure on her as she is obviously way ahead of her peers in writing. The pressure on teachers (and children) is more about getting the required numbers of children to reach national expectations by the end of a key stage. End of year expectations for year 1 would be 1b.depending on the school, there will also be an expected number of 2cs (your daughter has already exceeded this). When she gets to Year 2 her teachers will be asked to predict the children who are expected to achieve level 3 by the end of the year. She will doubtless be one of these. I expect her current teacher may actually leave her as a 2a 'officially' until she is in Year 2. If writing comes naturally to her and she is doing so well, I wouldn't worry too much about her levels. The Year 2 teacher at the school may also be a good person to talk to about expectations, as the Year 1 teachers will be focusing on getting the majority of their children to a 1b let alone a 2a!

The problem is children don't progress in a nice linear upward slope because they are human so sometimes they have spurts and sometimes they have periods of consolidation which most schools and teachers understand which is the danger of taking what was a target for a whole key stage and chopping it into yearly targets ... 2 full levels a key stage is a realistic target ... expecting it to happen as a sub level per term is stupid IMHO.

I believe that very high achieving children should not be expected to make 3 levels of progress in Year 2. If you are on 2a or 3c at the end of year 1, 1.5 or two sub levels of progress during the following year is still very good. The reason expectations for progress in key stage 2 are lower is that it takes a lot longer (and more maturity) to move through levels 3 and 4. Levels 1 and 2 are more about developing the basic mechanics of reading and writing, and can be achieved relatively quickly if there are no difficulties. From that point on, the higher maturity and range of skillls and evidence required make slower progress likely . Data analysis in key stage 1 dont take account of this, although the situation is usually unusual enough (ie a child achieving above 3b in year 2) for teachers to take account of this in individual cases . This is another example of how standardised measures of progress fall down

Started reading this with interest as am going through the same thing with my DS. Trying to get the extras needed to move to level 3.

He, however is 8yo and year 4

My comments apply more to literacy and particularly writing: continued fast progress in Marhs is plausible, and able readers can develop fairly mature inference skills in Year 2, although this would be rarer

Therefore, as they are working at a higher level, a child who entered year 1 working at 2c or even 2b swould still be doing very well if they were working at 3b/a 2 years later, moving forward 1.5 sub levels a year.

A child who entered year 1 working at 1c and completed year 2 at level 2c would be more of a concern, as you would expect faster progress through levels 1 and 2 if there were no additional needs.

2C is a huge sub level Djwkin which is why children who are 2C when they enter KS2 take a long time to progress ...much longer than to move from 2A to 3C IMHO

I know that with year2 writing says, you could achieve level 3 by getting a high score for composition and effect, even though your writing would be completely invented (though phonetically plausible and readable) spelling, rudimentary or absent punctuation, and capitals and lowercase mixed. As long as sentence structure and expressive language was used, the child was assured a high level.

I agree Mrz that 2c is another broad church that children can also stick at. Level 1b can also take some time (children not achieving key things that keep their level down). Once something clicks (eg full stops) the teacher can assess them as 2b. However, levels 1 and 2 are still traversed more quickly than higher levels as a general rule I feel.

I can see that a 3c is a level 2a that is sustained, independent and shown in a range of contexts, and that this move can be effected fairly quickly. 3c to 3b/a does take longer though.