All levelled out.

[morethanpotatoprints]

Ok, levels don't mean a thing to me. I have no idea what level my dd is currently working at, in any subject.

With so many posts and threads on here, I wondered why so many parents are bothered. I'm not being judgemental as I used to like to know what level my dc were, but I don't know why.

Completely agree that levels are irrelevant if you know you're child is doing well. However, DD2 really struggles at school academically so it's really important to us to be able to see a tangible improvement year on year and levels are the only way to asses this.

Of course we can see she has improved in many aspects, but it's so important to know if she is slipping further behind where she shoud or could be.

Conversely, DD1 is yr7 and doing extremely well, but have had a huge shock over the last year re-learning what these levels really mean post yr6. DD1 was level 5's accross the board in yr6 so getting a report assesing her at 4A in French and Spanish was a real shocker. Equally, finishing yr7 with a 6C in english takes a bit of adjusting to. If we had adopted the idea that she should go up at least 2 sub-sets each year at secondary we would be dearly dissappointed. (bit of a not so stealth boast though, she finished yr7 with 7B maths )

My point is that yr6 levels have absolutely no bearing on assessments at secondary school. I wish I hadn't agonized and focused so much on levels with DD1 because there was no need. She is, and fortunately, always has done well so no concerns.

Sorry, major cross post with rrbrigi

The headteacher of the high school DS1 is about to go to has said he uses yr6 levels as a 'good marker' of who's heading for what grade at GCSE and then applies their current levels (yr8) to it to qualify before setting the 'sets'.

Essentially that's what they are, an alpha-numerical 'rule of thumb'

I think you would know if your child was that far behind, without the need for a level. The difference in ability between a 7 year old and 16 year old is pretty obvious.
I can understand why a person whose child was struggling may find it a comfort to know their levels, but still don't think it necessary. I have this with dd, she struggles with English but it doesn't worry me as there is so much time between 9 and GCSE English.

How do you know that she struggles if you do not know which level is she in?

or if you do not know which level she should be?

I think Acrimonyx raises some good points.

I think you don't ask questions when you're own impression of your child's ability and the work they can do is fine.

When you watch your DD struggle to play games with nursery friends (who attend other schools in the LEA) which involve reading/ counting (both of which she was struggling to do and they ended up helping her) - I can assure you alarm bells start to ring.

I also suspect that you become interested in NC Levels when you have a nasty surprise at KS1 SATs (having had 3 years of parent/ teacher meetings telling us she was doing just fine, we're too demanding, it's all under control, etc...

As a parent I want to know how she's performing against NC sub-levels, because the 'teaching' is actually happening at home and not at school - so I'm trying to work out if I'm covering all the bases, because I'm just guessing.

It's important neurologically that childrens brains are developing and firing off neural pathways in all directions. If a child stagnates in a subject they are not developing those pathways and storing information properly which can be a problem later on. It could also mean that they get stuck, or find habits to bypass their lack of knowledge or understanding which will prevent further learning.

I learned this when my daughter was pretty much neglected for a number of years by the LEA. The educational psychologist told me that she had developed other routes for learning where the normal route was 'blocked'. Once these routes become well worn you can't go back and correct it. I hope that makes sense. And you can't do it later in life - although an old dog can learn new tricks, it's very hard for them to unlearn old ones.

So understanding that they are moving on fairly consistently and progressing is important - and you can't do that without levels.

We didn't know DSS was 'that far behind' officially because we had him for high days and holidays. Whilst we had serious concerns early on his Mum insisted that he was 'doing fine' and when you are 200miles away with no 'proof' you have to trust the reports and the parent who's there 24/7.

However, a 2a in year 4 meant we could take positive action to help him without being accused of 'comparing children' or 'being unrealistic' as regards where he should be academically.

Drivinmecrazy- there are a couple of misconceptions in your post- please forgive me if I correct them?

The 4s your child got in MFL at the end of year 7 shouldn't have been a shocker- they were new subject to her so she has done very well indeed- it's extremely unlikely a child could go from a standing start to a level 5 in a new subject in a year!

And year 6 levels do have a bearing on assessment in secondary schools- it is a continuum. Children do sometimes mark time a bit in year 7- everything is so new and strange. But the levels plod on. Or will do, til Gove scraps them!

curlew I do still believe that NC levels are greatly eschewed between primary and secondary. My DD1 finished yr6 with 5A in english but has had to work really hard to improve to a level 6C end of yr7. Many of her friends have stayed static or indeed fallen sub-sets.

This, to me, indicates that either secondaries work to a totally different scale or YR6 SATs are such a poor indicator of a child's ability they are worthless.

rrbrigi

We all need to know how to read and write and I think you would know whether your child struggled or not. I know my dd is good at reading and poor at spelling, I don't need a number and letter to tell me this.
It also tells me what she needs to improve.
I know what she is capable of mathematically, where she can improve and what she needs to do to be capable. I don't even need the nc for this.

Probably it is just me. We are from another country and I need to know where he is compared to the national level at his age.

If you've got the time and money to HE, go ahead - but you can get it all for free at school, performed by people with years of training and experience. And it's free childcare - you could spend all day doing something else - training to be a teacher for instance!

I'm never quite sure what to think about the levels. I think (don't we all!) my DD is pretty bright and I hear her read, talk to her ask questions and she seems to be progressing. However I have no idea at all what a normal trajectory of progress is for a child of her age.

I want her to progress at a normal level and I want her to fulfil her potential. I think the levels help me to understand if she is doing what is expected or more at a certain point and whether she is maintaining that trajectory.

I think I need conversations with teachers to understand this as well.

DD is a pretty stubborn child who I can see (and have seen) deciding she does or doesn't like doing something, so the levels are a good opportunity for us to step back, talk to her and teachers about whether she's working hard at school, enjoying her lessons and if she needs to do anything different - therefore setting her up for the best chance of fulfilling her potential in later life.

On a seperate note - I agree with comments earlier that the grades in later exams are a minimum requirement to open doors later on.

I've had to have quite difficult conversations with graduates who got 1sts at University but didn't get a B in GCSE English, therefore the company I work for screened them out of the application process.

Primary school is the opportunity for children to learn how to learn - if they miss that opportunity they will constantly be playing catch up - I need the levels to make sure that doesn't happen to my DCs.

But why do you need to know their level for them to progress. Surely if you felt your dc was behind others or not progressing either you or the school or both would do something to improve this. E.g I am working on spelling a bit more because dd isn't very good here. How on earth does a level make any difference. If they are 3,4, 2c, 4a etc its irrelevant when doing GCSE or for future life.

I can see where you're coming from. I worry very little about levels simply because I know my dc are doing well. In the long scheme it doesn't matter whether they got a 1a or a 7a at KS1 SATS if they come out the same at the end.

If you know there's little space between your dc scraping by and "below expectations" then you may get a bit obsessive in knowing what they're struggling with, because you are worried that a poor year could have long term repercussions.

In some subjects falling behind at one point can effect later life. Dm tutors maths. Sometimes adults who have no qualification in maths come to her. When she goes through, she finds that they missed (away/ill/never understood) what looks like a simple concept. But it has effected the child, and then the adult to be convinced they don't understand maths, so they don't try to understand and give up easily, maths becomes a closed book just because of a year they struggled during.

Another problem with a report where no level/stage etc. is that as parents very few of us know where they should be. Again dm has had to have difficult conversations with parents who have been used to reports saying "He can now count to 100, and add single digits. He's worked very hard and we're very proud of how well he's doing".

Teacher is viewing that this dc has done very well considering maths is difficult for him-parent reads it as dc is top of the class in maths and isn't being stretched, and doesn't realise that what is written is low level for a year 5.

Unfortunately levels are not perfect in this-having had a couple of awkward conversations where a parent has obviously got the idea that their child is in the top level for the year, when I've been aware of children in the same year scoring a full level above that.

I've been thinking that next year I might do a chart on people who ask "how good is this level in year whatever?" because people joke on here about that is usually a stealth boast as the dc is usually doing very well. It would be interesting to see what proportion of questioners do have children that are at the top end of where you'd expect.

If you are not HEd then it is very, very hard to know how your dc is progressing. We tend to do non-school activities out of school - I don't sit around testing her maths and spelling. I've worked in education for decades and I admit that I would have NO clue how dd was doing at maths (i.e. is this OK for her age or not) without feedback from the school. Levels are a kind of shorthand way of reporting on attainment so far. Either testing of any kind is useful and relevant - or it isn't. I think it is (but very hard to get right). If you don't - then that is a completely different planet mindset.

Acinonyx

My 2 older ds went to school and we were given a level after 1st SATS and levels after 2nd SATS, in Maths and English only.
I knew exactly what their strengths and weaknesses were and didn't do school work with them.
I have found that what they do at school and the nc is only a small amount of what they actually learn and are capable of learning.

'I have found that what they do at school and the nc is only a small amount of what they actually learn and are capable of learning.'

I don't disagree with you about that at all. But where the narrow targets of school progression are concerned - I like to know where we are on that ladder and personally I would find that very hard to judge with some kind of levels as benchmarks.

without my own spelling is a minus level....

I know what my child can do, where she has strengths and weaknesses. to know level i s simply to compare them with others in the class and in the cohort. I know that my child will change a lot between now and secondary school and between year 7 and year 10 or 12. I also know that some people blossom later and I have taught in university many brilliant people without qualifications who then go on to get degrees in their 30s. The obsession with levels is detrimental to us all and does not consider the child as a developing whole. I hate it.

OP. Personally I do not know what an 8 year old should or should not be able to do. Having levels at primary helps me know what general area, if any, my child needs to work on to get up to 'national expectations' or 'average' or (if I were pushy) 'above average'.

Yes, I know more or less what the next steps should be, but without the level I don't know which area they need a boost in.

ADD1 moved around schools a bit, and I was told she was 'doing fine' and 'making progress'. Then I found out she was a 2a in maths end y4. Only then it became clear we needed a real concentrated effort.

(At secondary it has become even more important, as books don't come home and there are more subjects. The reports contain level information. Without that we would have little idea of ability / progress, and where we might need to provide additional support from home.)

So, I guess that if knowing levels won't affect the amount of, or direction of, extra stuff you do at home, then they are irrelevant. However if like us you want to provided directed focussed support on the weakest area then levels assist in knowing which area to address.

Poppy I disagree, actually. I was a very high achieving child and life has taught me that it really really matters in certain well defined areas - and in some more surprising ones too.

Mind you I'm talking about qualifications in general here, not SATs levels which are often arbitrary and political. I'm considering keeping DD2 at home for SATs week next year.