Data question relating to GLD and KS1 results.

[pickledsiblings]

If a school has 80% of their EYFS cohort with a good level of development (GLD) at the end of YR and the National picture is closer to 50%, would you expect the KS1 sats results to be significantly higher than National the following year?

Then I'm completely lost

You said that your other DC was doing better at the same stage, but that you aren't comparing. That your expectations are higher but theirs aren't low. You are talking about low phonics scores but seem more bothered by the end of Y2 levels.

I'm not trying to be picky, honest, I'm just totally confused!

So far as I can see, the thing you are most bothered by is the fact that the target for your DC was a 2B. Obviously I can't speak for the teachers and I can't talk about the actual writing he has produced. However, I can vouch that if the school were not setting challenging targets, it would be picked up. What were his end of Y1 levels like (if they released them)?

Additionally, your expectation was only achievable through additional 1:1 tuition from you. The school should have set a challenging but realistic target based on what they have seen at school and what support they can provide. All the signs you have mentioned help a writer, but they do not indicate, nor guarantee, a child's ability to reach a certain level IYSWIM?

Sorry if I've completely misunderstood where you are coming from!

Looks the mix up comes because sometimes I'm writing as a governor and sometimes as a mum.

The school sets aspirational targets. They are not however aspirational enough for my DC.

This state primary is truly wonderful in many ways but it can't do with my DS what a pretty mediocre Independent one did for my other 2 DC.

What is that? It's not that my DS wasn't capable of more, he was! Why didn't the school know that?

It's not a huge problem but it does bother me, not for my DS, but for the other DC that could be pushing ahead. Otherwise, DC get in the habit of not doing their best work.

Phonics results depend on many thinks. Good teaching yes but also on many underlying problems: dyslexic tendencies in that year group, hearing problems in the cohort, speech problems etc. SEN, available resources to provide support for that year group etc etc. it really depends on many factors. I see no point in playing a short game with your child's education: the school should do that. Play the long game, no point in getting 3 in KS1 if no capacity to maintain and develop. Are they developing nicely? Are they pleased and nicely challenged bunt striking a balance? That is what matters.

A challenging target would be to achieve two sub levels a year. At the end of year 1, your DC would have been assessed as, possibly, 1a. Is this correct? Going from this to 2a or higher is a big ask. If he was a 2c and is now being asked to get a 2b, then this is not much of a challenge. You need to stop comparing apples and pears. There are plenty of children who do as well as their peers, but do not streak ahead to level 3 in year 2.

I do not quite see why you are worried. You just need to ask if your child has made good and expected progress. If he has done well, why do you expect more? My children were state and privately educated and my state school was better for infant teaching. The independent school was ok, but no comparison to the good state school. All children are different. Also you should not really compare the schools as a governor, and definitely not be looking out for your own child.

Where I live we have children who have to retake the phonics test. They are good readers. It seems the test does not suit all children, especially some who have figured out reading for themselves. They don't always follow the rules! Maybe the children in your school are like this.

If a child can easily achieve a level or two higher, then the school's aspirations failed that child.

Someone said that two sub-levels a year is a challenging target, but doesn't that depend on the child? One child might be challenged to achieve one sub-level. Another might easily sail past three sub-levels. Isn't that the whole point of 'differentiation'?

'Good and expected progress' is meaningless if the child was capable of so much more.

The standard expectation of children to make good progress is two sub levels. For some children that is a monumental amount of progress.

Some of mine were predicted 3 sub levels. One of those actually made 4 sub levels (but that is not the norm). Some were predicted to make 3 and only made 2 despite huge amount of effort and additional help. It is not an exact science, for obvious reasons!

I may have misunderstood but I didn't think that the child in question easily achieved a higher sub-level. They received additional 1:1 tuition. With this additional support, yes, many children would be able to go up a sub level. But there isn't that amount of support available!

Teachers are judged on the amount of progress the children in our class make. Why would we set them unchallenging targets and not push them to achieve as much as they can?!

In key stage 1 it was 1 full level per year (2levels per key stage) whereas key stage 2 was 2 levels over 4 years

Looks the 1:1 work that I did with my DS was pretty basic. I bought some simple handwriting books and he worked through them (2 small books) on his own. I also bought a Schofield and Simms spelling workbook which was just like more handwriting practice but reinforcing correct spelling patterns. I also encouraged him (on about 3 occasions) to write creatively for 10 minutes and not worry about punctuation/spelling.

You are right mrz, a whole level was expected between Y1 and Y2.

Every school I have worked in, has used two sub levels as the basis for all children and then amended for the individual children.

pickled I think it's great that you did the extra and it would be lovely if all parents did. I'm not sure those things alone would have necessarily achieved the additional sub level, but you know your child and are better placed to judge

I now see why you were looking at the Phonics, with a view to raising that and thereby raising the Year 2 results.

Good phonics teaching will undoubtedly help but I think I would want to know more about how writing is taught in KS1 if I was concerned about it, is there a governor dedicated to literacy?

Looks I think DS's work in school improved because I EXPECTED MORE OF HIM than his teacher did (an experienced teacher whom I have a lot of respect for).

Something else I have just remembered is that DS in that same Y2 class got himself into the top maths group by asking the teacher if he could do the work that the other group were doing because it looked like fun. She gave him the opportunity and his maths took off.

What is the measure of a child's potential?

I know IQ tests etc. aren't prefect but I think they could provide at least some measure of when a child might be underachieving.

I think underachievement amongst higher ability pupils in primary school is quite difficult to spot.

I have asked this before on MN, but what strategies do teachers have in place to help them spot these high ability DC? I suspect that the precocious readers are thought of as high(er) ability. I very deliberately didn't teach DS2 to read before he went to school as I wanted him to learn phonics (properly, from a qualified teacher) along with his peers. In retrospect I think this may have been a mistake as it resulted in DS being thought of as 'average' which he just isn't.

IQ tests aren't actually a good measure

Sorry lost part of the post.

of course cognitive ability is important but we are realising that intelligence isnt fixed so regarded as less important than other factors.

If you look at the prime areas of the EYFS profile you will notice they arent academic subjects yet they are seem as the most important indicators of future success.

Research carried out by Prof Christine Pascal and Tont Bertram (Accounting Early for Life Long Learning) placed Dispositions and Attitudes to learning as the key

Bright children with the 'right' disposition and attitudes (such as my DS) still all too easily underachieve in the State sector ime.

Our school teaches the children about growth mindsets and learning behaviours ('stickability' etc) but I'm not sure that helps with the particular issue of 'bright' children underachieving. Targets are teacher set after all.

CATs could indicate a minimum expected 'level' of performance and if that is not reached then work could presumably be done on addressing dispositions and attitudes.

That's not my experience so sorry it's been your's

CATs can be very limiting as they assume fixed intelligence

I'm honestly at a loss to imagine why any teacher would set limits for any child. It's to every teacher and schools advantage to ensure all children reach their potential

I'm honestly at a loss to imagine why any teacher would set limits for any child. It's to every teacher and schools advantage to ensure all children reach their potential.

Me too mrz.

Of course I know it's not done intentionally.

CATs offer a snapshot of intelligence that could suggest a 'floor level' below which a student shouldn't drop iykwim. I'm not suggesting that they should put a ceiling on any child's ability.

So for example if a CAT profile suggests that a DC should be capable of level 6 in Y6 (in old money :)) then anything less would need explanation.

There are lots if reasons why a child may not reach the suggested CAT potential ...and many nothing to do with school

A level 6 at age 11 has very little to do with cognitive ability more to do with experience and maturity which few 11 year olds possess. Remember level 5/6 was expected level for 14 year olds which explains why so few primary children achieve level 6 (equal to a GCSE)

Well then, how would you suggest that 'potential' is measured mrz*?

Or is it not something that needs to be measured?

If not then how do you makes sure that no child underachieves?

By underachieving I mean regularly working at a level that provides insufficient challenge. Is that how you would define it?

It shouldn't need measuring the teacher should be aware when the child is finding the work easy and when it's too challenging.

So if it's too easy, what? Pupil finishes quickly? What if they are a slow worker?

And if it's too challenging, what? They make a lot of mistakes. What if they just need it explained to them a different way?

I don't think it's a simple as you are making out.

It's certainly not as simple as your method