School refuses to give levels at consultation

[Millie13]

Hi I am a parent of a local school and we have just had a parent consultation . For each child I asked what level including sublevels the children were on ( for English and maths) and what their targets were for the end of the year . I was informed that the school will not give this information out to parents. They will only receive an end of year report with levels . However I would like to see how much progress has been made since the beginning of the academic year and I don't understand why this information is top secret and being kept from me .

I have asked before and had a meeting with the head which proved fruitless as she refused to give me the levels and it turned into an interrogation about why I had an interest in levels . I had to justify my reasons for asking and never received them! .
Could anyone please elaborate on this and how I can obtain them? Are they within their rights to withhold this information ?

TheGruffalo2

Not sure which side of this divide you are on (teacher or parent) but in simple terms

A teacher's job is to educate the next generation

standards are agreed (nationally) as to what a child should notionally be capable of doing at certain junctures in their education (for primary Y2 KS1 SATs/ Y6 KS2 SATs).

If one presumes that teacher's are indeed highly trained educators and professional -

In theory it shouldn't be particularly taxing to explain to a parent where their child is at against national criteria (and I take your point that there are several in place NC Levels/ APP points/ etc.... & the general point that NC Levels are soon to be dropped).

In short it should be possible as a parent to understand fairly precisely that your child is doing poorly through well against these observable measures (observed by highly trained teaching professionals) and what you as a parent should be doing at home to help support the next steps for your child.

It is the fact that each school handles this slightly differently that is perplexing to parents - I suspect if you asked a doctor how they handled testing for meningitis, assessing a break, etc... - there would be a great deal of consensus.

I fear, for me at least, that a group of people in a type of work handling things by standards and in similar ways rather defines professional behaviour/ ethics for me.

PassSellByDate

And if you cannot have that level of detail where is the accountability for ensuring adequate progress?

Or the accountability for ensuring children with SEN have had their special educational needs adequately met or indeed whether a pupil has any special educational needs, or not?

I personally think this just reflects actually how much a child's attainment reflects the subjective nature of teacher assessment. However I would be relieved if someone could prove me wrong...

^Sorry that was following on from what PastSellByDate said.

TheGruffalo2 Mon 31-Mar-14 11:11:48

However, APP is not compulsory and it doesn't exactly match the NC levels.

Indeed - on the other hand and again taken from Getting to Grips with Assessing Pupils' Progress:

One of the key objectives of the three year strategy is to link classroom assessment reliably to National Curriculum levels in order to track the progress of individual pupils and intervene accordingly.

Presumably assessments prior to this weren't reliably linked to the NC in many schools?

We know that schools which have robust tracking systems in place achieve the best rates of progress and are well placed to help pupils when they fall off trajectory.

Nothing contentious there, seems like common sense.

So whilst APP is not compulsory, we do know that it really works – and that’s why so many schools are embracing it. These schools know where their pupils are, where they need to be, and how to get there.

This here is the issue. So what if it's not compulsory, if it's done well (just like phonics) does it work better than anything else available even if it's not perfect (just like phonics)?

It seems to me that the most likely reason for Gove getting rid of levels is to allow businesses the chance to develop new programmes to assess children against tweaked criteria (because of course there are still criteria). Even better by saying that schools can go it alone there are lots more customers to buy those shiny new programmes.

Who knows but even one parent complaining that the school won't share detailed information about their child's current abilities and progress against the national criteria is one too many.

By the way TG2 I take it that, despite not saying so, you do agree that the guidance is clearly saying a child doesn't need to have met all of the criteria at a level to be awarded an 'a' sublevel?

Past - absolutely. Sometimes it seems like elements of the teaching profession have the same sort of attitude that some Doctors displayed before they had to start sharing information and giving patients choices. We know best, are far too busy to share information with you, leave it to us, trust us, we're Doctors.

Ultimately the risk a teacher faces when sharing information with a parent is that the parent might make a judgement about the accuracy of that information (i.e. does it sound like their child or not). Some teachers are happy to take this risk, others, it seems, not so much.

I understand why parents would be annoyed at school not reporting progress and also data held on their child.
However, with a non existent NC and levels being scrapped surely you can trust the teacher telling you about progress.
The levels are insignificant now anyway.

I would expect a child to have achieved all of L2 criteria and some of L3 to award a 2A in writing.

TG2 by some do you mean 1 or 2 criteria from L3?

If you follow the guidance then at least 3 criteria would equate to 3c, or are you just saying you don't follow the guidance?

morethan can you kindly explain what you mean by 'a non existent NC'?

Schools should continue using levels until they've replaced them with something else, and they are going to have to measure a child's progress against the statutory requirements of the new NC somehow.

I mean a few of the bullet points ticked off, but not a full AF awarded as probably not all the bullet points in the AF, or not the compulsory AFs to award a 3C.

However, with a non existent NC and levels being scrapped surely you can trust the teacher telling you about progress.

IME sometimes you can and sometimes you can't. Teachers are fallible and do get it wrong sometimes. Being cagey about the data they do possess however, would not instill me with confidence.

I am reminded of this thread for example.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/primary/1862438-Teachers-do-not-adhere-to-Statemented-1-to-1-support-do-not-believe-in-sub-levels-make-APP-assessments-up-How-much-of-what-parents-are-told-by-schools-about-teaching-is-a-box-ticking-exercise

tired

just what I said really. Am I wrong that the NC no longer exists? Levels are soon to be scrapped?

I know that schools are still following the old NC until the new one begins but at present there isn't one.

Mrz - we had a booklet from the dses' school describing the things a child had to know to achieve each level, and then the additional things they had to learn in order to go up each sub level.

I am not imagining this booklet, or lying about it - but as I said, this is a number of years ago - it could be ten - and maybe it was unique to their school, and obviously no-one produces them any more - but don't tell me I didn't have a piece of information that I know I had.

morethan well your take is a bit different from mine I think.

My understanding is that the new NC is in place for some children now, will apply from September 14 for most children, while for those children currently in year 1 and year 5 the old (and current) NC will continue to apply until they've finished year 2 and 6. SATS test will be based on the old NC for 2015 and on the new NC from 2016.

For those children still being taught under the old NC, the old levels will apply.

For those children being taught the new NC, well I'm not as up to date as some people here I'm sure. However whatever the term and measures used, I pray think children's progress will continue to be measured, including keeping the / a point system.

The main difference in practice is that school X's assessment system may not be as easily comparable to school Y's system. Although again, unless this is some plot to bamboozle Ofsted, some comparisons will hopefully be able to be drawn (if only by Ofsted), over and above comparing SATS results in 2016.

At no point, as far as I'm aware, will the NC no longer exist, the new one simply supersedes the old one, and there is plenty of over lap in many of the subjects between the two.

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius there are no official sub levels only full National Curriculum levels, schools use various methods to sub divide the full levels to work out c/b/a.

Both the DfE and Ofsted measure progress in whole levels only.

There are no levels in the new national curriculum SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius

Assessing without levels

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.

STDG if you search on Google you can find lots of documents detailing a particular school's take on sub-levels.

One school might decide that to achieve a 2a, a child needs to know 2, 5 and 10 times tables. In fact knowing multiplication facts is only listed in L3. The L3 APP grid states: use mental recall of the 2, 3, 4,
5 and 10 multiplication tables. So it is clear that this school has decided that for 2a a child must know 2, 5 and 10 because of those times tables listed in L3 these are the ones most easily learnt first.

Other school's chose different criteria to fit into their own sub-level system and that is probably the booklet that you remember. This was a school or LA led exercise. The DfE only ever issued the APP grids and that system was always a best fit assessment. Using the DfE system two children both levelled at 2b could have different knowledge and strengths and weaknesses.

Apologies, not 2'b' but a secure L2.

There was mention of a new curriculum with tests and scores on a grading scale. What are the theoretical advantages over that of what we've got now? I'm not sure what's envisaged, but if the tests and scaled grading are formalised and examined, then isn't that more administrative overhead (precisely what we don't need) and what would it tell us that we don't already know?

Sorry, when I say we, I mean by that the parents of children who are already paying close attention to what they can and can't do, rather than waiting for someone else to tell us. But then, that is rather a circular question. Because if the parent is making her own assessments then any assessment system is hardly likely to be welcomed!

Scrub both posts!

Why do you assume more administrative overhead CG?

It will tell you what your child knows related to the new curriculum which you don't know now.

I suppose it depends what's meant by the word test. Formal testing suggests formal administration, evaluating tests etc, etc.

Which happens now CG but will be replaced with a new set of tests reflecting the new content

New Test Formats, nicely summarised here

Have I read recommended 55 minute test for KS1 on grammar, punctuation and spelling

hahaha

The designs for the Mars Explorer haven't been finalised yet. Could KS1 perhaps do some equations for re-entry. I gather some of the laboratories are having problems with those.