SATs Expectations and Progress

[drsimonlee]

My bright daughter (IQ 140-50) received a 3a for reading, 3b for Maths and a 3C for Science at the end of Year 2. That was a little disappointing, especially the Reading side of things, given she can already cope well with the Lord of the Rings etc. However, I've been told the SATs test involves reading aloud, so she's working on that this year. Nevermind.

She improved from an assessment of 1b in Maths to 3c (5 sub-levels) from Year 1 to Year 2. This was good news. Her Science improved by a similar extent.

I have a meeting with the Head/class teacher next week to discuss expectations and progress (a meeting I initiated) and I wonder what I will ask them to achieve with my daughter this year? If the average child is improving two sub-levels a year on average (from what others say on this site) then is a whole level of progress a reasonable expectation? Obviously more would be desirable and I'm already thinking that 4 sub-levels would be great. It's pretty obvious that children will improve more in the early years so academic progress isn't linear (I understand this a former Uni. lecturer) but I'd still like to see progress commensurate with her general intelligence level.

..... And the introduction of a new national curriculum is the Government's reaction to this crisis. For those of us who sat the last of the O levels, this change hasn't come a day too soon.

Teachers coming and going do mean that the only thing you can be certain of is who your child has this year. And even then, you could be unlucky, and find that this year's teacher never comes back to the classroom again after just six weeks (as happened last year to a class of children whose parents I know).

The first headteacher that my DC had refused point blank to reveal which teacher would be teaching which class next September until the last day before the summer holidays. That way, you really couldn't find a new school to move to over the summer, no matter how depressing the answer was.

Still, the fact that the good teacher is there now in year 4, is a positive sign.

I don't care how I'm coming across. I've started a fact supported by research.

I'm not on about that post particularly, I mean in general.

I have come accross many pushy parents in my time, but you take it you a whole new level.

You may find that the teacher with the brilliant maths credentials doesn't get to each your DD, or that they don't turn out to be the holy grail that you think they are.

Don't you mean 'stated' BTW

drsimonlee we suspect this would bore her mind and switch it off; she excels given a challenge.

Why is she simply waiting for you to hand her challenges? Why is she not finding some of her own? Does she not have her own academic interests and passions? Is she just working through your academic aspirations for her?

Quite frankly you come across as having a Kumon or Abacus approach to your DCs education (adding numbers up to 500) and I don't think that is going to pay dividends in the long run.

Have to considered moving to an 11 plus area (you evidently have money to spare if you are paying for things like IQ tests)? It would help if you could see where your DC ranked in relation to a more academic peer group.

It is much easier to be top of the class in a single form primary school than being top of the class in a three form primary school in an 11 plus area, believe me.

Btw my DCs school never gave above a flat level 3 at the end of year 2 SATs. No one cared as it gave no indication as to whether they would get a place at one of the selective schools anyway.

You don't seem to be able to see past the need to label your DC in academic terms. You claim that you are pursuing this in the interest of gaining a place at an academically selective secondary school doesn't ring true given that you don't seem to have any knowledge as to what is required to gain a place as such a school.

drsimonlee For those of us who sat the last of the O levels which would be me :-)

You claim that you are pursuing this in the interest of gaining a place at an academically selective secondary school doesn't ring true given that you don't seem to have any knowledge as to what is required to gain a place as such a school.

Completely agree

They've got this new measurement system called progress 8. I had a look at it, and its possibly less flawed than the old performance tables which had the effect of focusing minds on how many pupils could cross a (low) threshold.

However, its a little "ropey". Its the sort of thing I'd have come up with when I used to work in a job that used my maths skills. I wouldn't have been very proud of it, but it would just about have done the job, as long as I did a decent data mining job too. However, I'd have expected something better from the department of education's experts.

I'll believe that the state system itself is doing anything to reasonably provide for the most able when the figures for rg unis, powerful positions and top earners are proportionate compared to the top selective state schools and independents.
At the moment good able provision relies solely on good teachers and a school that wants to provide, and they aren't always what you get.

Lurkedforever - that will never happen. Connections combined with competence are the thing that gets you the really good jobs. The state sector only gets you over the competence threshold, if you are lucky.

Can you imagine someone from Eton or Harrow or Winchester etc calling up their friends and saying I fancy an internship at x type business, does anyone know anyone who can help? They'd get loads of replies and introductions.

Now, imagine the same conversation between students who went to a bog-standard modern comprehensive in the backend of nowhere?

IME, British business is partly a meritocracy and partly its about connections. If you don't have the connections, then you really need to shine academically and have a fully rounded, universally-appealing personality that shows on a CV and interviews well.

"I'll believe that the state system..."

I'll settle for the outcomes for similar ability children at state comps being improved so they are much closer to outcomes at state grammars in terms grades, Oxbridge/RG places etc.

What happens after that is a different problem.

"progress 8"

Look here (might be best to start with Tom's blog linked from that):

www.educationdatalab.org.uk/Blog/May-2015/The-hocus-pocus-of-Progress-8.aspx

I don't dispute the connections aspect. But rg unis aren't about connections and from what I hear are more allowing for none selective state school candidates. Even taking independent schools out of it, and comparing state grammars to top sets in fully comprehensive areas, I bet there is still a massive bias towards the selectives, that can't all be explained by other factors like parental wealth.
I'd like to be wrong, especially as I know an extremely bright kid who's just gone to a shithole school that persistently fails anyone above average, let alone able. Parents are badly off but well educated and hugely involved. So far in the first week her claim to have finished the work, and getting it all correct as she could do it years ago has earned her being informed by some new form mates she is a cunt, and that sucking up to teachers, along with her possessions, is gay. It's a world away from my dds experience of y7.

I keep waiting for

A)The OP to come back and say "Hello, it's me , it was a wind-up and you all fell for it! or

B)The OP to come back and say "Actually I am the head teacher in this scenario and a parent came with the demands I've just typed out, bwahahaha!"

Lurkedforever there isn't a prescribed max at the end of KS1 or KS2 ... Children coukd be awarded the level they are capable of attaining ...fact not theory.

Var it's called continuous assessment and teaching ...quite simple really

Utterly depressing

Var if you measure potential in terms of National Curriculum levels then aspirations are pretty low as for Prigress/Attainment 8 that is a value added measure for secondary schools which may or may not be around in 9 years time when it could possibly be relevant to the OPs child.

It doesn't always work like that though mrsz. Regardless of what any documentation says, the usual consensus in practice if you talk to most teachers and parents is level 3 at ks1 and level 6 at ks2. I'm sure you know far more about correct policies than me, and I'm sure you'd do what's right without them. But if you look at y6 sats procedure, it's usually sit the 3-5 paper and if you score high enough they'll mark the level 6 paper. It's not the case that as standard y6's sit the 5-7 paper. And yet its not only rare genius kids that coast level 6. I know the system isn't sat levels now but I'm just using it to make a point. I don't dispute that good schools and teachers go above that in terms of teaching, I know they do. But a parent doesn't have a leg to stand on if the school doesn't want to.

No Lurkedforever the expectation was level 2 at the end of KS1 and level 4 at the end of KS2 yet many children have been achieving level 3 or higher in KS1 and level 5 or 6 (the expected level for 14 year olds) at the end of KS2.
What often limits children from attaining higher is not ability but the simple fact the child hasn't had the life experiences or developed the maturity required to work at the level of a child who has been alive for four years longer.

The fact that less than one percent of pupils achieved level 6 in reading suggests kids don't coast it

The tests for year 6 may have assessed 3-5 and level 6 but teacher assessment can be given at any level. Not sure about everywhere but, in my authority, secondary schools receive the teacher assessed level well before the test results are published

Var123: Having your child reach their potential is the holy grail for parents of G&T children, but I've no idea how you can obtain help
Var123: ?? you'll be treated to a (highly effective) combined strategy of kicking the can down the road and talking in double speak when good does not mean good and progress does not mean progress.
Mrz (writing as : It may come as a shock but the aim for schools is for every child to reach their potential.
var123: Really, Mrz?? You may be theoretically correct (I don't know), but I'd be grateful if you would show me how the system offers practical help for the most able reach their potential and how this help is accessed?
mrz: Var it's called continuous assessment and teaching ...quite simple really

Var: What!!! There was nothing ??continuous?? about continuous assessments! They were perfunctory checks of short duration which were infrequent at best, often doled out to an overworked TA, and which happened less and less frequently the higher a child??s attainment is. Has it changed? No of course not ?? now I realise that I have fallen into the trap again!

This is a perfect example of the double speak that I described this morning.

Ignoring the SATs that we know stopped at L6, there is no end-KS2 teacher assessment above L6 in the national data so I'd like to know how a child can be "awarded" more than an L6?

Just to be clear, the metadata for those very wide spreadsheets does entertain things like "Pupils Achieving Level 5 or above" but for L6 there is no "or above". To make it even clearer there is no column for teacher-assessed L7.

Var teachers are assessing every lesson not just when they set tests. Every piece of work marked contributes to the continual assessment process, every interaction, every question asked or answered ....continual assessment is how teachers plan each lesson.

The spreadsheets don't show GCSE results either but we are all aware of primary school children who have these! If a child is working above the reporting levels then this is reported to the secondary school directly ( at least, this is the situation in my authority, I can't say the same for everywhere!)