4As in Yr4 - how unusual?

[SilverBellsandCockleShells]

I went to parents' evening yesterday. We've recently moved our 8yo son because we knew he was bright and felt he was underperforming and our decision appears to have been vindicated! After predicting a 3a for him by the end of the year after their initial assessments, they have now assessed him as 4a for maths, and 4b for English, and reckon he will improve to 4a by the end of the year if he continues to focus and improve as he is doing.

Obviously this is good! I was just wondering how good. Are they the kind of levels you would expect the top children in a yr4 class to be achieving? Or is it more exceptional than that. I'm vaguely considering scholarships but don't want to push him if he is just averagely outstanding, if such a thing exists!

[swallowedAfly]

we're not halfway through the year - we're at easter. 2 levels per key stage is the expected progress. so in years 1 & 2 that is a level a year - it slows down in key stage 2. ie. a level per 2 years.

[redskyatnight]

A child at 4A now may well be a 5c by the end of the year though? So assuming they finish the year at 4a/5c and then make a full level's progress over the next 2 years they will finish Y6 at 5A/6C.

mrz above quotes that roughly a third of children get level 5 or above in KS2 SATs. These won't all be at 5A or 6. I'd like to suggest it's less than 10% getting 5A/6 (don't think these results are available at a national level?) based on a statistical distribution. That would be about 2 or 3 children in a class of 30, which is about the level I was expecting. So whilst OP's son is "above average" he is rather more than "just" above average.

[Feenie]

I'd like to suggest it's less than 10% getting 5A/6 (don't think these results are available at a national level?) based on a statistical distribution.

The percentage of children attaining level 6 in Reading last year was 0% - so less than 0.5%.
Maths was 3%.

[mrz]

rabbitstew a level 4A in Y4 doesn't equate to a level 6 in Y6 in government statistics so your DSS school is an anomaly

[Elibean]

My dd1 is in Y4 at a very mixed intake (high level EAL, average level FSM) primary in London. She is a safe 4c on everything, and is on the top tables - so I would say a 4a is very good.

She is predicted 'at least' level 5s by the end of Y6, but as for some reason levels at her school tend to have a sudden surge upwards in Y6 they are telling her to aim for level 6s

[kilmuir]

Its good but not exceptional. DD2 was on similar levels and now in year 6 is taking level 6 sats papers but so are a few others in class. She is bright, but also quite hardworking

[swallowedAfly]

elibean - allegedly some school fiddle the books by under grading at lower levels so they can show a higher added value in later years when their levels suddenly go up. don't know if it is maybe to do with that?

[rabbitstew]

It would appear, mrz, that on mumsnet my children's school is not so much of an anomaly! I would view a school whose results closely followed government expectations on progress all the way through every year with a certain amount of suspicion - it's all a bit neat, really, whereas children come in all shapes and sizes and mine most certainly haven't followed many of the rules of supposedly normal child development. You also have to factor into that the fact that teachers come in all shapes and sizes and what works for one child doesn't always work for another, meaning that in any year, a child may make particularly good progress with one teacher, but less with another, albeit that overall, both teachers do pretty well by their whole class.

[rabbitstew]

No point undergrading in any year other than year 2, as it's from those SATs results that they assess progress between years 2 and 6, so no advantage whatsoever to make year 4's results look comparatively bad, particularly for the teacher concerned in that year. What teacher wants their class's results to look BAD?

[mrz]

Really rabbitstew ... that isn't the impression I get.
The government doesn't have nice neat expectations for progress all the way through ever year so your suspicion needs to get a different focus.

[rabbitstew]

Really, mrz.... If the government doesn't have nice neat expectations, then why are you referring to government statistics projecting the levels children should reach by year 6???????

[rabbitstew]

... it was you, after all, who suggested my children's school was an anomaly to get children from 4A in year 4 to level 6 in year 6, wasn't it???.....

[mrz]

really rabbitstew ...
statistics are based on outcomes/facts /results of previous years
expectations - belief that it should happen ...but then it may not. I have expectations that my son will tidy his room tomorrow ...but I may be disappointed.

[rabbitstew]

Statistics do no represent the facts for any one school, they are a collecting together of all figures, from hugely differing schools, creating something that does not represent the reality for any individual school. So you have no way of knowing how odd my children's school's results are - for all you know, there are lots of schools like my child's hidden within those statistics.

[rabbitstew]

I have an expectation that my child will clean out his guinea pigs tomorrow, but I know I will be disappointed if I don't nag him and know that he will do it if I nag him enough. So I guess my expectations are more confident than yours!

[swallowedAfly]

oh so parental involvement affects outcomes then? glad we agree on that.

and you now appear to be agreeing that 'averages' taken from whole populations are not great indicators for individual schools let alone individuals.

i get the impression you just like to argue and would wiggle all over the place to continue an argument rabbitstew. consistency doesn't seem to factor in.

[mrz]

"Statistics do no represent the facts for any one school, they are a collecting together of all figures" exactly the data from the National Curriculum tests represent thousands of schools not just one rabbitstew and if thousands or even hundreds of schools were making a full level progress per year the NC data would be very different but that is one set of data there is much more available to schools that is not available to the public or parents.

[prettydaisies]

OK - I teach year 4. I currently have 2 children who are 4a for reading and 1 child who is 4a for maths. The other class has 1 child who is 4a for reading. So in my school, your child would be doing very well. I fully expect, and will be disappointed if they don't, the children in my class to be at level 5 at the end of the year and level 6 in year 6. I'm busy teaching them what they need to know.
As an aside, about half my class are reading at level 4 and about 1/4 are working at this level in maths and in writing. These are the children who will go on to be level 5 at the end of Y6.

[rabbitstew]

I have access to the national and county data that is available to the school, mrz, as a school governor. I also know how other schools in the locality are doing. I think your view of the statistics is wrong. My children's school is in no way odd.

swallowedAfly - I never said parental involvement has nothing to do with it - in fact I said the contrary, that the levels do not assess ability, but input from the school and parents.... so where is the wriggling about in that? You just don't understand how the "average IQ" is assessed and it is not in the same way as the government collects data on SATs....

[rabbitstew]

So, going back to what I have already said... if the child concerned is unusual in his school to have a level 4A in year 4, then he is doing extremely well, not averagely and may well be bright enough for his parents to consider scholarships.... in what way is that inconsistent, swallowedAfly????

[mrz]

I'm sure the parents who have children in other lacal schools will be happy for you have their child's data rabbitstew

[rabbitstew]

In fact, surely you are the inconsistent one, if you hate talk about averages and think they are meaningless, yet claim that a child with involved parents MUST do better than the average. You have clearly imagined, on the basis of no data, that what is "expected" is a mean of all results ever collected by schools, and have decided that this "mean" is skewed by lots of neglected children with special needs that psychologists refuse to acknowledge as having any kind of special need.

[rabbitstew]

I don't have their children's names, mrz, I have their results data.

[swallowedAfly]

iq is on a bell curve - with 100 as the highest point - ergo 90 is below the herd and a disadvantage.

i managed to miss that you were a governor.