Someone help me decipher end yr-2 report...

[fromheretomaternity]

DS just brought home his report. He has one 2A and three 3Cs. Any idea what the numbers mean??

Also will those be his actual SAT results or will they come later?

I think the 2a means he is at the average level expected at the end of year 2 and the 3c means doing slightly better, ie the beginning of year 3 level. But I'm only a mum not a teacher!

Year score is based on teacher assessment not scores from an external paper so they are the Sats results. Scores for sats are 1, 2 a B c, 3 a B c , average is 2 usually a is top end of the grade, 3 is the highest they can get in yr 2. I would say your ds sounds right on track, which subject had 2 a?

Stupid phone year 2 score

Slippermaiden has it. The expected level is level 2. 2a means he's at the top of that level, possibly nearly at the level above. 3 c means he is at the level above, but not yet very secure at that level.

He is doing very well with either 2As or 3Cs.

2b is national expectations. 2a is above average and 3c is significantly above average.

2b used to be national expectations. I think now it's gone back to just level 2, so 2c would be meeting national expectationsvas well.

There is no limit to the level they can get in the teacher assessment in year 2. It is possible to be given level 4. It's the test that's limited to level 3.

Ok thanks, I thought that 3c was maybe above average but wasn't sure what the 2a (writing) was - to be honest he is a messy writer so I'm surprised at that but there you go :)

So the SATS they did a few weeks back would have been marked by the teacher, not externally? And the scores in the report would have come from that not the teacher's opinion? Wish the school would realise it's not self explanatory - we have parents evening this week but with only a 5 minute slot I don't really want to spend time talking SATS methodology!

SATS results (as in the results of the actual tests) are not reported separately. The marks you've been given are the teacher's assessment, which take into account how he did in the tests.

Yep, Sats are marked by the teacher as part of a whole picture.
In the end the teacher gives the level they think fits best.
2a-3 is good he is working above average expectations in all areas.

Rafals that is not correct. Levels remain in years 2 and 6 for this year, so a 2c would still be below average. Next year, children will be given a scaled score in which 100 is average.

Writing doesn't mean handwriting. Or even spelling. It mostly means content with a bit of punctuation (and a tiny bit of spelling and an even tinier bit of handwriting).

So his writing could be illegible and he could still get an OK writing level.

Don't think his handwriting is OK if you know it isn't.

No, odyssey, the expected level at the end of KS1 is level 2 this year.

Hopefully under the new system we might eventually get everyone singing off the same hymn sheet, Feenie. It can't be that reassuring for parents that schools are interpreting the guidance for administering the tests and the results in different ways, given that it's supposed to be a national system of assessment.

Tbf, the ofsted inspection handbook mentions 2b as the expected level at the end of year 2. You can see where the confusion arises. Especially when some LAs and presumably LA advisors are giving this information as well.

Yet the data dashboard quotes level 2+ percentages and rates schools accordingly! Ah well, we'll all be using standardised scores this time next year so no one will care.

I only looked it up because I'd gone to check I hadn't been mistaken after Odyssey's post. It was on an LA site and attributed to Ofsted, but looked as though the 2b bit could have been added by whoever had created the document. Turned out it was a direct quote. Since it was in a paragraph about measuring progress from the EYFS profile to ks1 whiich is also a bit questionable, I'm not sure how important it is.

Expected National Curriculum levels

The Department for Education (DfE) has a chart which indicates the average level of attainment at the end of each Key Stage (KS):

Most 7 year olds (KS1) are expected to achieve level 2
Most 11 year olds (KS2) are expected to achieve level 4
Most 14 year olds (KS3) are expected to achieve levels 5 or 6
The National Curriculum, GOV.UK- DfE
www.gov.uk/national-curriculum/overview

Ok now I feel better about being confused! Not very helpful to expect 'level 2' and not explain whether that means 2a, b or c? Is there any info anywhere on national distribution of the various scores? Or has that all gone now that SATs are not externally marked at this level?

Useful to know that's how English is marked also, thanks brilliant day, we are working on it, he can write neatly when he puts his mind to it so need to get him into the habit.

There is usually some sort of statistical release, but that won't be released until autumn. You might find last years if you ks1 sfr (only really recomended if you are really interested and a fan of huge spreadsheets). Don't know if they still report individual sublevels for level 2 on it though.

Off the top of my head, I think level 2+ in reading was about 89% and 3+ about 31%. Writing is usually lower than that for both.

Hi Y2 teacher here.

2A/2B is actually expected level for Y2. It USED to be a 2B/2C.

2C is slightly below expected attainment.

3C is slightly above but no 3C actually exists when giving data to the LEA!?!?!?

We have to give either:
level 1
level 2c, 2b or 2a
level 3

Many SLT of primary schools require a level 3 to be a '3b' which means secure. It is damned hard to get a secure 3 from a 7 year old!!

Primary schools will likely have fewer level 3s. This is because it is in their best interest to show good progress from Y2 to Y6 and therefore lots of school 'fiddle data' (they under score Y2 children and level them as 2 rather than 3 so when they get 5/6 at Y6, they show 'outstanding' progress - hence why the government are/wer thinking about external marking for Y2 SATs to stamp out data fixing). Sad, but that is what schools are driven too!!!

Infant schools couldn't give a toss! They get as many level 3s as they can to show how brilliant they are and pass it on to the juniors. Hence why junior staff 'hate' infant staff. It's the same with Y6 going into Y7!!

But obviously this is the last year for levels at Y2 and Y6 so nobody gives a damn now!

In all honesty, levels mean sod all! Y7 teacher usually scrap them, do their own tests and use these as a baseline for potential progress and attainment to Y11.

Should also say that what you recived is actually TEACHER ASSESSMENT data. The SAT task INFORM the teacher assessments. So whereas you received news of a 3C, this is true and accurate (hopefully!) data according to the school's robust assessment procedures and on their system it will be recorded as 3C and projections for the forthcoming year (if levels were continuing) would be made. But 'officially' a 3C will eitherbe recorded as a '3' or a '2A' to the LEA. Our school recorded a level 3C as a '2A' because a 3C is only 'emerging level 3', not secure.
Either way, your child did well. Enjoy your summer break!!!

2A/2B is actually expected level for Y2. It USED to be a 2B/2C.

You're confusing 'exoected' with 'average' there.

Level 2 is the expected level according to the DfE.

3C is slightly above but no 3C actually exists when giving data to the LEA!?!?!?

This is a quirk of some LEAs and is certainly not true across England.

Primary schools will likely have fewer level 3s. This is because it is in their best interest to show good progress from Y2 to Y6 and therefore lots of school 'fiddle data' (they under score Y2 children and level them as 2 rather than 3 so when they get 5/6 at Y6, they show 'outstanding' progress - hence why the government are/wer thinking about external marking for Y2 SATs to stamp out data fixing). Sad, but that is what schools are driven too!!!

Not most schools - I agree it's common in infant schools without moderation with KS2 colleagues. Our level 3s are usually over 50% in reading - and we are far from leafy lane.

Not sure posts on LEAs who have their own arbitrary rules are very helpful to the OP, especially if passed off as standard - I'm referring to the 2A/3C debate here. My own LEA used to do this, but it was never statutory and led to accusations of artificially depressing results. No wonder it's all changing!

This is super useful, thank you. I dug out the 2014 stats in case anyone else is interested. But I take it all now with a pinch of salt...

Table D: Attainment at the end of key stage 1 by subject

Percentage of pupils achieving the stated level: (change in percentage points from 2013 shown in brackets), England, 2014 (all schools)

Reading
L2 + 90%(+1)
L2b + 81% (+1)
L3 + 31% (+2)

Writing
L2 + 86% (+1)
L2b + 70% (+3)
L3 + 16% (+1)

Mathematics
L2 + 92% (+1)
L2b + 80% (+2)
L3 + 24% (+1)

Science
L2 + 91% (+1)
L3 + 22% (0)

Note: Level 2 is not split into sub-levels for science and speaking and listening.

Dug out? They should have been reported to you alongside the whole school results for comparison.

Nope didn't get whole school results, anyway not yet