Confused by the replacement of Levels

[keepsmiling101]

What are different schools doing in the absence of levels? Ours marks each learning objective with expected, exceeded or emerging. Do I now know how my kids are doing? Not really... in fact can feel slightly pale looking at the sheer number of emerging ticks one child got... so figure perhaps not on track... but not sure how badly ... last year's levels had seemed fine. Obv. will go & talk to the no doubt exhausted class teacher but suspect will be given all sorts of reassurances -- they always seem loathe to point out that actually your child really isn't doing that well. Anyway mebs am just being uncharacteristically gloomy... how do other folk feel?

it all sounds a bit Hogwarts...

O - outstanding
E - exceeds expectations
A - acceptable
P - poor
D - dreadful
T - troll

There aren't any replacements for levels

Oh, but there will be. The government loves data. Where there is data, there eventually has to be an agreed way of recording it. That's why they do love their tests and secretly want to grade every child in the country from 1 to however many million...

They just don't like teachers doing the levelling.

We've had a replacement and I really like it.

1-9 with 1-3 being different levels of emerging

4-6 being different levels of expected

7-9 being different levels of exceeding
They are all automatically moved down 4 points at the start of each academic year (so if they were at a 7 for maths in yr4, they'd start yr 5 at a 3).

They are all automatically moved down 4 points at the start of each academic year (so if they were at a 7 for maths in yr4, they'd start yr 5 at a 3).

Why?

(Not a teacher so just repeating here...)

That moves them back in line with the curriculum for the following year. It made sense when they were telling us.

Does that not make sense? It did at the time!

Sorry, none whatsoever! Sounds very artificial.

What if they were a 3 - would they go down to -1?

They ought to go down to -1, as it would imply they aren't even emerging into the current year, but are still stuck in the year below... It doesn't really give much scope for assessing children working several years below or above expectations, as it seems to assume that at best you will be meeting the expectations of the year above you and at worst, emerging from the year below. Or that's the way it seems to work!

Either that, or the levels are exceptionally fluid, meaning something entirely different for each child.

What if they end yr4 on a 3?

I am assuming that a couple of years of no-national-levels confusion will enable govt to ride in on a white horse with an entirely new levels system (and curriculum naturally) that will demonstrate ridiculous amounts of raised standards for all. And historic comparisons will be impossible as we will be comparing apples and oranges. Each of my three children appear to have gone through entirely different reception-year schemes which cannot be compared. This will be the new game.

Rabbitstew we still have to provide data

Oh yes, after a couple of years, parents will be delighted to hear that their children will from now on be put into percentile groups, measured against the entire country and based on the results of annual external tests, which the long suffering government had to introduce because teachers couldn't do it properly for them. The Isle of Wight or somewhere similar will then get a slap on the wrist because all the children in its schools are in the lowest percentile of achievement and Kingston Upon Thames (or somewhere similar) house prices will go through the roof when it is revealed that children there are all in the top percentile. And the obsession with tests will continue ad nauseam, as will the obsession with house prices and parents will become ever more tiresome about their brilliant offspring in the 99.9th centile of achievement in the whole country.

mrz - I know you still have to provide data. It's just that even fewer people will pretend to understand it.

I find this thread ironic given that one of the arguments I have heard given by Government for removing levels is that parents found them confusing.

here is a speech given explaining the reasons for getting rid of them

As a teacher at secondary school I have found removing the levels I have used for the last 23 year to be disconcerting. But I also do agree with some of what is said here. It's an interesting time to reassess how we measure and report progress.

lupus i thought it was very Hogwarts too! But at least with Hogwarts you have some idea with where help is needed! I have absolutely no idea in which areas dd needs help over the summer. I just wish reports could be Black and white instead of 'alternatively worded' eg apparently dd is 'full of life' which i actually interpret as a pita with zero attention and listening skills (this is where i will be focusing her learning over the holidays!)

The government did belatedly realise that they have ballsed this up, and have set up a commission into how best to replace levels.

www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=11006654

It does utterly baffle me how they thought 'levels are a bit crap, let's scrap them' without any thought into the consequences of that. 'Yeah, let's just let schools figure out how to assess kids from now on, make it their problem....oh shit, turns out they're too busy teaching and maybe we should have got some experts in'

As a parent, an age-related expectation concept would make sense. Just describing a child as emerging, meeting or exceeding doesn't make it clear what they are emerging into, meeting or exceeding and what effect their birthday has on any of it. Mind you, being told your child is emerging into meeting the expectations of a 3 year old when they are 6 would be enough to send most parents into a massive panic.

I'm a teacher and we're confused too. Next years report levels will be a great work of fiction.

Actually, expectations of a 3-year old is maybe alright - they could just be a bit childish in their behaviour and expectations. Expectations for a 3-year old is a bit more concerning.

And I'm sure psychologists would have something to say about teachers setting age-related expectations based on the national curriculum...

How was data collected before national curriculum levels, or was the pig just weighed less often?