Year 4 SATs results - advice please

[Nell51]

I'd really appreciate your advice on our daughter's SATs results just received. She is incoming to the end of year 4.

At the end of year 3 her results were:

Numeracy 3c
Writing 3b
Reading 4c

She has just received the following results for year 4:

Numeracy 3b
Writing 3a (high)
Reading 4c (high)

The teacher has written high next to the grade.

My (basic) understanding (from googling) is that a child should should progress 2 sub levels so if I'm interpreting this correctly then she hasn't.

I feel very disappointed particularly as the reading score looks like it has hardly changed.

Am I interpreting this right? I'm going to speak to the teacher but wondered what your views are first and if there is anything in particular I should be asking.

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

Without knowing what her Yr 2 SATs were, I don't think any of us can say if there is a real problem.

However, I do think it is dangerous to say that if she hasn't made any progress in the last year it isn't anything to worry about just because she is doing OK against an average. The aim surely is to make steady progress across the all 4 yrs of KS2? If you don't then you get the horrible situations you read about on here where the children spend the whole of Yr 6 trying to catch up and cram for SATs which nobody wants - it must be miserable for the teachers as it sure as hell is miserable for the parents and children.

Our school learnt that the hard way and now they monitor progress very closely across the school with expectations that everybody makes some progress (ideally 2 sub levels a year but certainly 3 across yrs 3 and 4). The OP's DD would not be allowed to slip through the net. Yes children haver spurts of progress but if they are making none at all, even if their levels are OK, it should be looked at or the last 2 years KS2 are going be one big push and that is a shame.

But again, before you all jump on me, the OP needs to know what the SATs were at KS1 to see what the progress has been since then. Her DD may have done 3 levels in Yr 3 or none. It makes a difference.

I have similar issues with dt1. In year 2cshe was given a level 3 in all subjects. I did think writing was over estimated. (3b)
End of year 3 she was aapparently 3a in writing. Start of year 4 3c so actually going backwards.
She isn't of course because I can see improvements.

Interesting - my dd in year 4. Last year didn't make great progress but did make some. We were told that assessments for year 3 are harder than year 2 hence similar sats levels. Other parents to the same. Some parents simply thought the year three teacher was s hard marker.

wheresthebeach - as I understand it, as a governor of a junior school who struggles to show progress in the children because so many of them come up with high KS1 levels that they can't replicate in the juniors, the way writing is assessed in KS1 is different to KS2. There is a lot more guidance given during the writing at KS1 but KS2 they have to write without any help. It means that some don't look like they were correctly assessed in Yr 2 because they can't write to the same level in Yr 3 and Yr 3 teachers expect some to drop back or make little progress over the year. It is not so much the case of harder marking, although I suppose you could call it that, but different marking.

Nope, sorry, none of that is true - the assessments used in KS1 are exactly the same as those used in KS2, and of course the assessments in both are independent.

There is sometimes an issue in separate infant/junior schools, but they should seek to moderate judgements with other schools to solve this.

The Y3 'dropback' is historical, and stemmed from the days (pre 2005) when Y2 assessment was just the tests, and Y3 assessment tended to be the same. The tests had different rules (Y2 - not timed and equipment allowed at level 2, Y3 timed) and were not comparable.

Assessment should have come a long way since then, and both year groups should be using good teacher assessment and whole school procedures to arrive at their judgements, which should be about the whole child and their day to day working, and not just a test.

Sorry Feenie - it is true, at least it is here.

The infants get guidance when writing and their teachers select the best piece of writing from several attempts which is not how it works in the juniors. It is apparently not breaking the rules to do it that but it is not what the rules intend since it does seem unfair but according to Ofsted it is the way quite a lot of infant schools do it. The two schools do of course spend a lot of time moderating yr 2 and 3 work between them. they even go so far as Yr 3 teachers taking work back to the infants to see what might be different if a child is showing a significant slide back. They understand there are differences and where they arise. Still, the published levels on which progress is measured means that our school is not showing the added value that it could because naturally the infants are not going to lower their assessments or change their way of doing things unless they are forced to. External moderators and County assessors are all happy so we have to put up with it.

If you use the benchmarking that the Yr 3 teachers do at the beginning of yr 3 then there is real progress and this was sufficient for Ofsted to upgrade us earlier this year. Again, the benchmarking is not what is used to calculate the valued added so it doesn't show in the published results.

since it doesn't seem fair

I have to agree with Feenie - though my DDs' primary was a Yr R through Yr 4 (now 6 as we have gone 2 tier) school. No dip in Yr3 at all. If this is still happening it should be stamped on.

I agree with mrz - children don't make progress in a linear way at all.

Serioulsy Feenie do not think that when faced with a benchmarking Yr 3 level which is different from the Yr 2 level that as governors we haven't asked why there is such a significant difference, that the school haven't asked the same question when it is impairing their VA and threatening their Ofsted rating? There have been months of work and discussion on what exactly is going on. We know what is happening.

Please don't bother to tell me I am wrong.

it might not be what is going on the OP's school but on the other hand it might well be. Our school would be explaining all this to the Yr 3 parents. Maybe her school haven't or haven't bothered to tell the parents and the OP is left wondering if her child is somehow lacking. She may well not be, it might just be the system.

If that is happening where you are BBB you need to report the schools responsible as they are cheating.

Oh the other thing is that teachers grade things a bit differently sometimes.

The infants get guidance when writing and their teachers select the best piece of writing from several attempts which is not how it works in the juniors. It is apparently not breaking the rules to do it that but it is not what the rules intend since it does seem unfair but according to Ofsted it is the way quite a lot of infant schools do it

The infants should not be given guidance for an assessment, and it is breaking the rules, which explicitly state that help cannot be given.

This is from the KS1 ARA 2013 (which is a statutory document).

6.2 Conditions for administering tasks and tests
The tasks and tests must be administered under appropriate conditions to ensure all schools are administering them to agreed national standards. In particular, schools must:
*?ensure children can work undisturbed and individually;8
?ensure children do not have access to materials that could give them an unfair advantage, for example wall displays or similar classroom resources; and
?ensure children are reminded that the work they produce in the tasks and tests must be their own and that they should not discuss questions or copy answers.
If any child?s response to a task or test paper does not represent their own independent work, for example if the child copies from someone else, the headteacher should be informed. The headteacher may then contact their local authority for guidance on the actions that should be taken.

Ofsted know, County know, moderators know Mrz

Please don't bother to tell me I am wrong.

Okay - I won't.

I will let the legally binding document do so instead.

Rubbish.

BBB you are gullible to believe everything you are told

None of what you posted Feenie, says anything about a child doing a piece of work, having a discussion about it after the piece of work has been done, in the conditions you describe, and then redoing the piece of work.

That is the loophole.

Nowhere does it say only do it once. In the interests of truth and fairness you would expect that they only did it once without any 'practice' runs and feedback but it doesn't preclude the school doing that from what that says.

Ofsted say they are not alone in doing it that way and have rated them outstanding (which in fairness they are - it is a lovely school)

Children may be entering the school with inflated grades but it has nothing to do with teachers being allowed to help during KS1 writing tests

Bless you, both. If I am gullible then so is the Ofsted inspector we discussed this with earlier this year.

BBB you are not allowed to redo the work. The child writes in test conditions the work is taken away and marked ...full stop!

OK.

I am not gullible enough to believe that BBB.

The teacher has written (high) next to 4c. It could be a typo, and is supposed to read 4a?

Flogging, if these are 'pure' SATs results (ie from the optional tests, with no element of teacher assessment) it seems to me more likely that the teacher may have noted 'high' because the mark may have been only 1 mark or so below the borderline for the next sublevel.

So if the Y3 are also 'pure' SATs results - ie a single test done on 1 day, not proper teacher assessment - then it may be that in Y3 in Reading the child may have just got into the 4c - perhaps scoring 1 mark over the qualifying score for that sublevel. Then in Y4 in Reading she may have scored only 1 mark less than the qualifying score for the NEXT sublevel, but still got a $c.

Also, IME of adminsitering the Y3 optional SATs at least, the Y3 reading test is one in which most children overperform compared to their 'true' levels from proper continuous teacher assessment. It was quite common in my experience for children to score a full level - 3 sublevels - above their true reading level in the Y3 test for Reading. (Don't ask me why we did the SATs tests, especially as we placed so much more credence in the much more rigorous teacher assessment levels - it was to do with a 3 tier system and transfer between schools after Y4).

If you have only been given test levels, and are using that to infer progress, then don't. Ask the school what their teacher assessment is of your child's actual, in class, progress - that will give a much more typical picture of their genuine progress.