KS1 SATS question

[gower4]

Is 108 sacked score considered good or pretty average for Maths?

Scaled even!!

The range is 85-115, and 100 is the 'expected' level, so yes.

Thanks. I know, but 108 is quite hard to interpret, given it's a scaled score. Hence my question as to whether it's good or average.

Y2 teacher here. Yes, it’s good.

Many thanks for your reply. DS has found Maths hard since reception so it's helpful to know he's made progress. He got the expected standard each year with help but that's obviously quite a wide band, hence my interest in his mark.

He got 52/60. See www.gov.uk/government/publications/2018-key-stage-1-scaled-score-conversion-tables

I read somewhere on MN that the SATs don't test 'greater depth' so, in theory, a child could get a scaled score of 115 and still be 'expected' level. Equally, a child could get 100 and be assessed by the teacher as working at greater depth.

What did the teacher day about his progress this year?

Hi - she said he had made good progress and has become more confident but still benefits from some support when learning new concepts.

The average is 100 i thought and standard deviation 15 so it's very much within the average range. As others have said the test isn't a perfect descriptor of a child's level but unless she's been overly prepped for the test it sounds like she is at least at the expected level. Perhaps she can do more but didn't do it on the day.

The average is not 100, 100 is the expected, and whilst we have no idea how many kids score what as the scores are not collected, we do know over 70% reach the expected standard from the teacher evaluation so it is unlikely that any sort of average would end up at just the expected standard.

Ah you're lucky you were given scaled scores OP - we were just given teacher assessments.

Well done to your ds!

Went to see the Head and he gave me my ds's scores. 36/40 for English reading and 55/60 for maths, so scaled scores of 110. Good to know he's comfortably in the greater depth range.

Thanks for the link @LetItGoToRuin

The tests don’t test greater depth - there is no greater depth range.

What Feenie Said ...

Ok, well his teacher has assessed him at greater depth then. And the score of 110 puts him comfortably between the expected score of 100 and the top score of 115.

Better?

But you knew that anyway!

I just like to know actual marks, is that such a bad thing? And other schools have given marks and a Comparative report/table so you can benchmark your child.

Other schools can't give information that doesn't actually exist I'm afraid.

However, the marks have absolutely nothing to do with the teacher assessment you’d already been given. The tests don’t match the teacher assessment framework, which is the statutory bit.

It’s one of the reasons they are being scrapped.

And the comparative report is for teacher assessment only too. So you can’t benchmark the tests to anything.

@Feenie

Here is what another local school has sent out. It looks like they're comparing to last year's results. So, a comparative report...

Am I reading that correctly? The school has no pupils WTS in Reading, writing or maths?

So every single child is at Expected or Greater Depth?

That comparative report is based on teacher assessment not test scores and it’s last year’s not this year’s as the information won’t be out until the autumn.

Yes - every school has to send out that information - it’s comparing the school teacher assessment data with data nationally.

Nothing whatsoever to do with the tests.

Cross-posts, user!

GoingRouge they're not comparing like for like. The school's results from 2018 compared to the national data of 2017. Different tests, different thresholds ...meaningless