Actually - having been there and done that - it is difficult to see your child is making good progress when:
- in your home country a child that young wouldn't be in formal education
- the school keep telling you their working 'at expected level' when they aren't.
I didn't know (although I suspected) DD1 was performing at NC L1 in Y2 until almost the end of the school year - but I knew things were wrong.
I knew that playing a board game like snakes and ladders was difficult for her - she was still counting up each square - whilst friends from nursery were simply adding in their heads.
I knew that she was struggling to read and on reading mornings could hear children reading much better than she was.
But the school kept telling me 'things will pick up next year' - 'she's one of the younger children in the cohort' etc....
I think the reality is that this is an area that isn't inspected by OFSTED and should be.
HOW SCHOOLS REPORT PUPILS PROGRESS DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR
and
HOW SOON SCHOOLS IDENTIFY STRUGGLING PUPILS AND INTERVENE
should be top of the list of things to detect.
As a parent (having weathered 7 years of parent/ teacher/ pupil agreements which have lots of things I MUST do and teacher's only need to try to ensure/ endeavor - and this seems to be the case for the new secondary as well) - can I say that the DofE ought to mandate that whatever system schools adopt that schools MUST explain how progress is marked and how they relate their system to old fashioned national curriculum levels or what is below average/ average/ above average progress in a particular school year.
I get that schools/ DofE/ OFSTED are aware that parents are overly concerned about NC L6/ etc... - but we do need a system that clearly conveys (and early) to a parent DC is failing at reading/ maths/ writing/ etc... and then procedures in place which mean that it may be possible to turn that poor result around.
I don't think my parents knew precisely what I was being taught and when (although my school books did come home - so they could see more of what I was doing) - but I think they got what A meant and certainly were alert to C or F as being NOT GOOD.
The simplicity of that system - hard marker or not - was useful - and whatever is adopted by schools - they need to make it clear to parents what the marks mean in terms of their child as a pupil (weak student/ o.k. student/ good student/ outstanding student).
I personally think moving away from longwinded report cards - to a brief summary against subjects (ye olde fashioned report card) - would constitute less work for teachers (win)/ clearer more efficient communication of key result to parents (win)/ more obvious signs of struggling pupil (win - if then intervention is in place)/ more obvious signs of high achieving pupil - (win - if opportunities to extend & challenge more talented pupils are also put in place).
But somehow I rather suspect this is more about stopping parents from asking too many questions/ figuring out what the gobblygook actually means. And sadly - test results will be out so late (indeed Y6 SATs at St. Mediocre yet to be released) - that parents will only find out far too late in the process there's problems.
Great system if your kid is doing well - but wouldn't earlier and more frequent communication of how a child is actually performing help children?
Sorry - I forgot that was your lowest priority.