SATs in year 2 - is it really necessary???

[Notcontent]

Ok, so I am not British so find a lot of things perplexing!!

But I just find the while idea of testing 7 year olds a bit pointless and also have concerns that at such an early stage judgments may be made about their ability - because really, at 7 children are at many different stages of development. To cite an example, my dd didn't get reading at all in reception. She slowly started getting it in year 1 and then this year, in year 2, she has really flown through all the levels and is now a great reader at lime level. Her maths is ok, but she is just starting to get it, and I hate the idea of someone making a judgment about it.

There aren't any schools where low results would be acceptable ipadquietly or so I've been told.

We were due a visit this year but got a "get out of jail free" letter due to good results but will no doubt get a visit next year when we have major staff changes after years of very little movement [sigh]

We had a very ordinary cohort in Y6 last year, so results looked much flatter. So as you can imagine, they had all sorts of preconceived ideas about not stretching the more able, etc, before they had even walked through the door. We were able to turn it around, but it was very draining.

Thank goodness it's half term! Ahh, sleep - I have missed you this week!

mrz First hand info. The children in the school came in with low entry data. They progressed 'too much' during the year (according to the HT), so the YR teacher was asked to give lower EYFS scores, thus setting up the cohort to make good / outstanding progress over the next 6 years.

With the new EY profile, as accountable data is only going to be available on entry into Y1, the same sort of data massage could easily happen. And then, if they get rid of levels next year... Woooooooo! What will happen then?

Well done feenie. All over now.

ipadquietly First hand info ... The children arrived at a very low level made excellent progresss ... the SIP said who did we think we were (named a school in a nice leafy MC village) head refused to change results as children had worked hard and their effort deserved recognition ...moderators confirmed profile results ...children continued to make excellent progress and OFSTED v impressed

That's great mrz, but the lack of integrity in some schools worries me. The HT I was told about was willing to lie in order to 'guarantee' a good to outstanding ofsted inspection in a few years' time. And getting a young teacher to collude with his plan is reprehensible.

If this kind of small-time cheating is going on, what is going to happen when unscrupulous HTs are in charge of pay next year?

Thanks, ipad

No way of telling, really - some schools would target a 1a as average at the end of Y1 and therefore on target to reach 2b, and some schools would view 1b as below average at the end of Y1.

Depends on the child and the teaching. It's definitely not unrealistic, though.

Have they said what he is likely to attain in Y2?

Am I right to think the average for the end of Year2 should be 2a?

no

what should it be then?

www.gov.uk/national-curriculum/overview

Obviously am a bit thick, as i don't see what the average should be for KS1, year 2 on that. But then if people know and don't want to share, that could be why?

No, it's a level 2 - no sublevel.

Check the right hand side if the table in the link, dotty.

Of

Age - 6 to 7 Year -Year 2 Key stage -KS1

Assessment -Teacher assessments in English, maths and science Average level of attainment - level 2

Yes, 2b seemed to be quietly dropped a few years ago.