I've found the whole Level 6 'as standard option' thing interesting to watch unfold.
When DD2 was in Year 2 a friends' older son wanted to sit the L6 paper in maths. The kid was bored out of his skull and learning more complicated maths at home. At school he spent his day helping other children (effectively an unpaid TA). He hated school so much the mother had to virtually drag him in - most mornings they rowed down the entire street.
The school (this was 2010) refused to allow him to sit the L6. But he was absolutely adamant he wanted the challenge. So the Mum rang the LEA and found out he could. The LEA rang the school and it was arranged that he could sit the L6, which he passed with flying colours apparently. Now for this family and for this child - it was about demonstrating that he had the higher ability. He wanted to argue with his very mediocre senior school that he should be allowed to skip Y7/Y8 classes and join Year 9 - which in the end (partly as a result of his scores) he was allowed to do.
At some point (?2012) L6 SATs were officially reintroduced and we entered the era of L5 becoming 'the new Level 4'. St. Mediocre was very slow to absorb this fact - continuing to tell parents that NC L4 was a very high standard and/or that staff only were legally required to teach to NC L4.
It is this second statement that I totally object to - and if the introduction of NC L6 testing at KS2 SATs means that schools now have to demonstrate capability to teach at this higher level - my feeling is all well and good - because for years children were more or less left to stop & stay put once NC L4 was attained at St. Mediocre.
And to add cynicism to this whole process - now St. Mediocre has voluntarily entered 50% of their Y6 cohort for NC L6 testing. Results are out today - and I don't know whether the school will supply their overall results to parents or just individual/ national results. However, eventually (?December 2014) the school's results will be revealed. I can only go by what DD1 brought home, what little work I saw in school workbooks at parent teacher meetings, what DD1 says - but I'm not convinced this 'higher ability' cohort actually was regularly working to L6 and I suspect a very low percentage of pupils (14 sat L6 Reading/ 16 sat L6 SPAG & Maths) actually went on to achieve L6.
I'll let you know in December.
-------
The point of this long story is that schools should be capable of stretching more able pupils into L5, even L6. I doubt our school was alone in taking the view that they just had to get as many as possible over NC L4 threshold and really their job was to focus on bringing NC L3 kids in Years 5/6 up to NC L4. A lot of kids spent KS2 upper bored out of their skulls - effectively doing busy work.
The reality of changes - reporting % making NC L4b+/ reporting % making NC L5+ - is that schools can no longer ignore upper ability children.
I totally agree that struggling children need help - and this can take up a lot of time/ energy - and understand that schools are really being stretched to be all things to all people at the moment. But... I am glad to see that more able pupils aren't left to just stew for a few years until they start senior school. I personally think it's a very wasteful approach - of talent/ interest/ good will toward school/ etc... - but I also think it can lead to some really negative behaviour patterns (not regularly doing work/ not respecting teachers/ not being challenged or stretched and finding that when you are stretched or challenged it's unusual or even unacceptable, etc...)