How much difference between a 3b and a 3a?

[mrsshearsagain]

Dd ended her school year for numeracy on a 3b 'with elements of a 3a', how much difference is there between the 2 levels? I mean in relation to school terms and the amount of work involved.
Thanks

3-6 months. Depends how near she was to the 3a in the first place, hopefully theyve advised which areas she needs to work on, if not you can google maths levels and see what they need to be able to do for each. How long it takes depends on what is missing, eg using and applying concepts take longer to acquire than probability rules.

DS was a 3A at the end of yr3 with everything in a 4C covered except choosing his own strategies as he lacks confidence and in group work he again lacks the confidence to get his ideas to the rest of the group (they are set a maths problem to work on as a group) the ability is there (for a 4C) but the confidence is not.

Just wondering if it is the same for your DD.

Also his teacher was very big on showing workings out rather than just getting to the correct answer without showing how they got there. Which was an issue with DS but he seems to have got over that now.

His teacher said that there are massive differences in level 3 but admittedly she was talking about writing at the time (not his strong point) but I know it's the same for reading too.

oo hello. back again?

depends really on which bits dd has not got and whether they are getting covered in class in the next term...

"As part of our reforms to the national curriculum , the current system of ?levels? used to report children?s attainment and progress will be removed. It will not be replaced."

Leaving teachers and parents .... where, exactly?

Thanks babiesarelikebuses

waves at susie and simpson< Simson you know us too well, I think you have hit the nail on the head there, I have just looked at dd's target and it is indeed to choose and use appropriate stratergies, I would imagine she is only a few elements short of the 3a as that is where I was originally told she was, hopefully with all the work we are doing on increasing self confidence she will come on leaps and bounds next year.

Susie, my flameproof suit came back from the dry cleaners so I thought I would risk it

Hi mrshearsagain:

like others have said it's hard to know where this issue is. This table from Essex summarises some of the main criteria teachers might be looking for and may help clarify where the trouble lies:

www.langham.essex.sch.uk/uploads/1/0/8/6/10864354/_maths_assessment_grids.pdf

although it sounds like you may have got there already whilst I was looking for this...

HTH

The statement goes on to say

" We believe this system is complicated and difficult to understand, especially for parents. It also encourages teachers to focus on a pupil?s current level, rather than consider more broadly what the pupil can actually do."

"The new programmes of study set out what should be taught by the end of each key stage."

Mrz you forgot to add that unless your school is an academy and couldn't give a fig what those crazy coalition MPs are suggesting. Our school has already said they are keeping levels to track progress.

I happen to agree with much of this cazzypotsblog.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/are-rumours-of-the-death-of-nc-levels-exaggerated/

"Levels had originally been designed to provide an accurate snapshot of a child?s ability without necessarily referencing their year group. For example: a child may be working at level 4 in year 6 (average) or they could be working at level 6 (top 1%).

The drawback is that the systems used to assess these levels soon became so varied and complex that it was almost impossible to judge if they were accurate or not. When 3 ?sub-levels? (a, b, and c) were also introduced to each level, things became so ridiculously subjective that a teacher could, more or less, score a child whatever they wanted: ?Ryan is now working at a level 4a?. They could make a spreadsheet and show a couple of sub-levels improvement and thus ?prove? what a good teacher they were. Who?s going to argue? Probably no-one. Furthermore, if teachers couldn?t spot the deception then parents stood no chance, whatsoever."

Our school have already said they are keeping levels too.

DS is in the top group/table for numeracy but when they do group discussion work goes down to the next table as he seems to gel better with them and get his point across.

It could be worth asking if your DD could do something similar.

We also had problems where DS would refuse to give an answer if he was unsure and just say he didn't know rather than having a stab at it. But his teacher said to him that she would far rather he had a good go and got it wrong than not have the confidence to try in the first place iyswim. He is much better now although still hates to get anything wrong but will at least attempt stuff.

This is all for work in front of the rest of the class btw, not his written work.

I wonder how schools who say they are going to keep levels are going to match it to the new curriculum content and expectations ... we are waiting until the curriculum goes through parliament on the 1st Sept (possible changes following the consultation) and then see how well it fits.

Really interesting article Mrz.

I must say abolishing levels does cause me some anxiety as a parent even though DS has yet to receive any NC levels.

We have has this discussion on previous threads before and sorry to OP because its a bit of a hi-jack. The thing is without levels how will schools show progress and how can it be standardised across the country. I've got a brightish boy. I know what he can and can't do. If at the end of KS1 I am simply told that he can do the stuff for KS1 nc that doesn't really help me. What I want to know is that he has progressed at an appropriate rate over each year in relation to his own performance. Even something like beyond expectations doesn't help as we have seen with EYFS that can mean pretty much anything. How will abolishing levels help us to ensure that the most able children are also progressed appropriately. I would worry that the focus would again become on getting children to the expected level rather than getting the best out if each individual child. I'm sure a lot of that would depend on teacher/ school anyway and not just levels but levels are at least some sort of marker of what is happening at school for your child as an individual.

How did schools know children were progressing 20 years ago? Or did children not progress before levels were introduced

It certainly is a thorny issue mrz. I agree with the blog too about the subjective nature of sub levels, which invariably feeds in to the subjective nature of levels as there is always going to be a dividing line (high Level 2 low level 3).

The 'snapshot' analogy is quite telling, depending on how often a teacher observes an individual child a level sub level could be out of date almost as soon as it is written. Then there is the work load issue, how often is the child / their work analysed, perhaps easier for written work (although every piece may not be their best or representative) but understanding that is shown through discussion? Other issues such as behaviour I can also see would hinder assessment, a child may be perfectly able but you would have to go the extra mile to catch them at their best (working to their capability)...Then there is teacher's expectations, they may not even expect a child to perform in a certain area so rarely look for achievement. What I'm trying to say I can quite easily see that there can be a gap between attainment and ability.

I'm not sure changing an assessment system may reduce all of the variables, except perhaps the workload element. However a less rigorous assessment system may mean that there is simply less assessment done and less informed teaching...or not depends on how good the teacher is (as ever).

I'm not sure what the answer is but I know blind faith in levels and especially sub levels is misplaced