Inflation of primary results

[LittleMissGreen]

There is often talk on here that people think that primary school results are inflated. It might not be as common as 'reported' as it would appears, as a school in Wales has just been placed in special measures after ESTYN inspection because of it (along with other concerns)...
"Across the school, the work seen in books and lessons during the inspection does not consistently match end of key stage teacher assessments. In most cases, pupils are working at a much lower level."

news report here

Yep, it happens. What's your point?

My point is simply that it doesn't happen as much as people appear to think - otherwise presumably OFSTED would pick up on it. There are often posters saying that grades are held down in KS1 to show better value in KS2 grades for example, or that the KS2 grades have been inflated so that they can show enough progress through KS2.

Worse when they go to secondary and they have slipped over the summer and the expectations are so much lower in Year 7 than in Year 6 .

That is difficult to argue using the article (i'll admit I haven't read it). If they have said work in books is consistently below levels reported then that has to be a noticeable difference otherwise the school would argue back. In some cases the difference may be a sub level but its likely that in many it was 2 sub levels or more otherwise it isn't noticeable and wouldnt have been reported.

In the cases you refer to, a single sub level WOULD make quite a difference - the difference between making expected or good progress at ks2. It also is likely to be done with key children - he's made over expected progress so lets keep him down a sub level in case that progress slows.

I agree with you that it isn't as common as people make out and, actually, isn't honestly as shocking or terrible as people make out. The differences between sub levels is nothing and very subjective. But I disagree that 'Ofsted would pick up on it' - lets put it this way - I've worked in a school that boosted every child a sub level the week Ofsted arrived. Nothing was said. The data looked a little better, the kids roughly fitted the data. No problems. But its the wrong way to do things and really pisses off teachers who've worked hard to get the kids where they are only to have their data ignored and changed.

I've worked in a school that boosted every child a sub level the week Ofsted arrived. Nothing was said. The data looked a little better, the kids roughly fitted the data. fair enough - I assumed that would be 'obvious' difference, although to some degree I suppose it couldn't be given the wildly varying levelling that pieces of work on here receive.

(The quote above is actually from the estyn report rather than the article.)