how easy/hard is it to get level 4 and level 5 at primary school?

[hotHELL]

Iam not British, so not very clear how the system works. I was under the impression that the average hard-working child who has supportive parents will get level 4 and level 5. Is that true?

My PGCE tutor was a part time ofstead inspector and she wouldn't have lasted 30 seconds in a classroom. All she know how to to was be critical.

My brother, who was nominated for teacher of the year was given a 'satisfactory' for a lesson, and told that it was boarderline unacceptable. He gets a phenominal pass rate from the kids he work with.

Ofstead my fat arse!

roisin
Dc's primary school is as you describe, hardly any pressure. My Ds actually enjoyed doing them! He did really well and the school usually gets above average. Local school gets really high SATS but by keeping children in lunch and break if they think they won't get the right level, this is in KS1 as well.

martian bish -Love it! Ofsted my fat arse. My daughter's school got outstanding and the teachers are not a patch on where I work (merely satisfactory)
christy- how dare a school take away a child's play time for extra lessons especially in key stage 1! If they have misbehaved that's different but for the sake of the league tables it's outrageous!

Christy - in KS1
My boys didn't even know they were doing SATs, and had never heard the term 'SATs' in yr2.

MB - my dd got a level 5 for science in year 6, but she "hated" science and thought it was "boring". She alsoe appeared to me to know practically nothing about science! How can an intelligent, inquisitive child think science is "boring"?! After one half term in Secondary school, she has learned SO much - she is fizzing with excitement about her science lessons, they do stuff that goes bang and produces clouds of smoke "It's just like Potions, mum!" I weep for the thousands of children for whom science remains "boring" becaue they are taught to the test.

Roisin they get 100% level 4 in their KS2 sats, and a fantastic ofsted so highly oversubscribed and the HT's attitude is if you don't like it you can lump it. The parent I know is quite disenchanted with the school.

Re Science My Ds loved science at primary. He got 96% in his SATS for it, but they did have science workshops with outside companies coming in to do them. DH went in to help and really enjoyed himself.

You are quite right to raise is issue cat......a level 4 was supposed to be an average child at the end of year 6.

Now, I'm not a maths teacher, but I do know that this means that half of the kids would be at 4 or lower, and half would be at 4 or above! That is what an average means.

Now the government would have us be like the residents of Lake Wobegone, where all the children are above average!

As a secondary teach I cannot say that the children I teach now are brighter, more able, or understanding more of science than those children with lower KS2 results in the past. And more than the children I'm churning out the other end understanding more about science. I'm teaching them to ger a GCSE in science. And that breaks my heart.

I don't have time to get them to think.

and the primary teachers don't have that time either.

and that is what science should be all about. Not the mindless aquisition of 'factoids'

I would far rather recieve a child at 11 who's teachers have had the time and resources to get them to read, write, do basic maths, and be enthusiastic about learning and who's parents have taught him /her how to function in soceity (take turns, share, have basic manners) than have a class full of level 5 children who have no idea of why they passed the test!

And this isn't having a pop at primary educators, god knows I do the same pointless thing at ks3 and 4!

I'm not a mathematician, or a statistitian (or in fact anyone who knows my a* fom my elbow actually!)

But I don't thing that the level 4 as an average CAN mean that 50% are above and 50% below. The band of marks that gets you a level 4 is SO huge - 48% to 70% or something like that. I think that 4B is the average mark they are talking about. That means that the vast majority of children can be level 4. Does that make sense?

Yes , you are right. I'm thinging really of the level 5 at the end of ks3, In secondary school they don't break the grades into a, b, and c bands. They do sometimes give parents the decimailsed result ie 5.5, or 5.1. The schools always get the decimalised result.

In fact that is how we are given the ks 2 results, hence my slight confusion

But my basic point still stands if a 4 (whatever) is average, you cant have more than 50% being above it, if you did, it wouldn't be the average!

Averages aren't wuite that simple thougha re they, I mean that suggests a normal distribution and all that.... (Peachy runs realising she is morphng into her Psychology lecturer who was obsessed with statistics..... )

• if you have a wildly unusual clas (eg no G&T and a high proportion of Sn kids or the otehr way around) then the average will vary will it ot- there wouldnt be the 50 thing.

But if 4 is the average can't you have 50% at 4B , 10% at 4a and 10% at 5, 20% at 4c and 10% at 3 and 4 still be the average? Seems bizarre - that makes 80% of children average!

Lies, damned lies and statistics!

Our school is outstanding btw but thats because they largely refuse kids diagnosed with SN before they are old enough to enter (thats changing but still for only selcet catchment area), and they use their teachers discretion to bump kids up by a grade- they bumped ds1 up to level 2 when he actually cant read or write and that caused quite a few headaches at Junior level, getting support in etc

But the govenment isn't looking at individual schools and taking into account that the distribultions around the mean. It is telling schools that they must all get more children above the 4 level.

In the same way we, in secondary school are to get all children to make two levels of progress within KS3, instead of the 1.1 levels that we were supposed to attain last year.

So, if we have a child enetering with a level 3 (significanly behind the average for that age) we are to make sure that he/she reaches a level 5 at the end of year 9. when a 5 at the end of year 9 used to be an average child.

all with no extra resources. all with no allowance made for the reasons why the child is behind the average in the first place.

Effectivly we are being told that all children are to be average or above. Which is an educational impossibility and a mathematical nonsense

'Effectivly we are being told that all children are to be average or above. Which is an educational impossibility and a mathematical nonsense '

lol MB - yes I think they need some education of their own with regard to the definition of average.

well, quite!

and the kids at the end of year 9 are not cleverer, or even, dare I admit to this, better educated.

They are just better at doing a frigging test!

The automatic response of these poor bloody kids when you ask them a question is to ask me ' what is the answer miss?'. They know there is a right answer., and after years of expensive education, they know that they need to learn the answer. As quicly as possible, so they can get on to memorising the next farking factoid.

they don't undertand it, they can apply it in a different context. But they can use their factoid to pass the bloody test. Poor little bastrads. And it isn't their fault! It is the bloody system!

have to say I loathe the SAT's system completely- some of the kids in ds1's class alst eyar (just gone into yr3) were heaviliy coached by aprents who could discuss nothing else. whereas ds1 didnt know what a SAT was . As soona s I found he had to write and wouldnt be allowed tot ranscribe etc (huge differentiation between verbal and writing ability related to his SN) I refused to acknowledge the tests- or get worried about them at all. Whereas other parents complained about their 6 year olds being tired and in tears during SAT's term- I mean, why do that to a small child?

why on earth wasn't he allowed to have a scribe and a reader?

We use them all the time if children have SEN that require them! Children even have them for their English SATs if needed

He has one now but they 'dont allow it' at that school (SO pleased he has moved up!!!!), we've just ordered him a little computer thing to use for school as well, as there wasnt one specified in his Statement but school agreeed he would benefit from one.

Hopefully wehn it arrives we will see real progress.

At elast we're 'lucky' enough to receive DLA for these things; so many don't (DS3 was refused it at first) and can't get the help they need.

FFs!Why on earth don't they allow a scribe????? my mind is boggling over that one.

I've had kids at A level who still use scribes and readers, and they have gone on to university!

Ds1's IQ is 130 but he won't go to uni, too far behind now I think- this school is putting in lots of remedial work though so i shouldn't be so unbelieving. It's aprtly just abd luck- in Somerset they started reading / phonics in yr 1 whilst here they started in reception, so moving at the rend of reception year meant he missed a lot and with his SN catching up was going to be a battle for any kid.

he ahs some real islets of talent apeparing though- he's doing well at the violin, and seems to be rather gifted in electronics (notice DH is planning to do a digital electronics busness and know by lots as the amd scientist because of his electronics stuff for carnival)- and he has a real gift with little children which is a joy to see.

best to 'say you don't know' as my old mother would have said. the lad I'm thinking about was way behind at the start. Like your kids he was lucky enough to have a diamond for a mother.....rock hard and brillant with it!

Hes gone to read Chemistry

Actually I was written off pretty young so maybe he can- I'm about to apply for a MA (Dh has said he will up his seconnd job [boush] to fund a part tiem MA in autism with me starting next year, though I'll have to work alongside it afterwards as its his turn to do his degree). whethr I end up in teaching or librarianship (school ibrary) MA in ASD has to be a good thing!

Diamond? Guffaw! Still ahve my jammies on and house is a mess, dh did the swimming run this morning - lazy cow more like! (but thank you)

It really does just come back to letting the teachers teach doesn't it.
My son is at a SN school and the things they have to do to try and comply with literacy hour is ridiculous.
the teachers are fantastic but end up getting the least academic kids to colour in phonic symbols just so thatthey can tick the literacy box.
I am dreading an insistence on phonic teaching for all schools as, whilst t5his seems to be much better for your avaerage kid, for kids with ASD including obsessions they attach to the symbol and the sound and then can't move on.
My poor DS is pretty able in some areas but then came home with pictures made from Egyptian symbols because he had to access the history part of the syllabus for his key stage. God only knows what he made of that - he has barely moved on from makaton !
I am sure that eldest son is doing so much better now because his school steer kids to GCSE's but play with the lessons and make it all about learning and understanding rather than parroting.
In his first year his geography master threw the lesson plans in the bin after Hurricane Katrina and they did half a dozen lessons on that. that was then spilt into other classes - science,history and english - to make a coherent examination of the impact of huge global events. He LOVED it.
When we went in for parents evening the goeg teacher was just so enthusiastic DH and i were just wishing we could go in and join in ( sad huh).
We are gradually squeezing all the joy of learning out of the system - and then we wonder why our teachers are demoralized.
Dh's parents were both teachers and retired at the earliest possible moment - I think too many good teachers will increasingly follow them.
After reading this thread and i am less ashamed that i have ignored all this sats stuff.

pagwatch why would you be ashamed? it's like the vast majority of aprenting issues; you make your decisiosn based on what you feel is best for YOUR kids. Most famillies are atypical in some way, and so this has to be a very individual decision. There's no point feeling sad about that! We should feel empowered that we are able to make these choices really, we sit ehre (and I am so much the worst) abut X and Y and yet we have an eduation system and a NHS- so we are lucky (NB last bit of rant firmly directed at MYSELF not anyone else LOL)