KS1 'levels'

[marge2]

Hi,

DS1 is in Y2, will be 7 in the summer. We have had 3 really disrupted years, with Reception and Y1 teachers both going 'off sick long term', replaced by supply teachers galore. Y2 has a job share with 2 teachers but other teachers in the school have gone on maternity leave during the year, so the job share has changed, and changed again. TA's teaching instead of teachers the whole time due to staff 'off sick', training, whatever.

Was told that the kids going into Y3 this year were re-assesed by the Y3 teacher and were judged to be at much lower than the Y2 teacher(s) had put them at.

I reckon DS1 is now worse at Maths than he was when he was in Y1, yet told by teacher at parents evening last week that he is at level 2a which is apparently quite good for mid Y2.

Can someone please let me know what these levels actually mean and what he is meant to be able to do in Maths to be at level 2a? Can I get him independantly assessed?

I am not a complainer or a pushy mum, but I am having doubts and want to do what is best. He only gets one chance at education after all.

So confused and have no confidence in the school at the moment.

Ok - Maybe it was too much info.

How about if I just ask KS1 teachers out there, what constitues a level 2a, 2b and 2c for nemeracy and literacy?

Have you see the National Strategies website (think I have that right)? It gives some explanations and examples of work at various levels. It might be helpful.

Level 2 is what an average Year 2 child should get in their KS1 SATs. Level 2a is the higher end of a level 2. The next level is level 3. This is considered above average for Year 2. Progress should be two sub levels per academic year.

here

writing descriptors

Also not sure why you feel you need to have him assesed. He is doing really well if that is the level he is working at.

You are lucky to have been told what level your son is at. I have not been given any indication whereas a friend's son at a nearby school has been given predicted ks1 sats scores at their last parents evening!

I heard today to get a level 3 in SATS a child must show evidence of joined up writing, cursive. I guess this must be for the writing part? Does that mean I would fail if I took the test or certainly not achieve a level 3? My writing is shocking

The more I discover about SATS the more Dickensian and prescriptive they seem - linear progress, neat sub level jumps or something is perhaps 'wrong' etc when spurts and dips in children's performance are the norm. How do they factor in the dips? Dropping a couple of sub levels a term would make parents and teachers uneasy. I could of course be missing something and I do seem the need to ensure minimum standards are reached.

Children don't dip, Cortina. They may not make any progress - and these measures are a way of picking up on this quickly - but they don't go backwards.

Cortina - I too would fail on the handwriting, mine is very neat but not cursive. I have no recollection of ever being taught cursive writing (it maybe my age i.e. old!).

Children don't have join their writing to achieve level 3. A typical level 3 child would show evidence of joining, but it is possible to achieve level 3 without.

there wouldn't be any point to having him assessed independently - what would you do with this information?

consistent and honest levelling is really hard to do, its not as easy at is seems

I would argue that it is perfectly normal to dip as well as spurt. Certainly all I've read had said this, it's possible to go backwards and then jump forwards faster etc. It doesn't all work along a neat, straight line.

It's really interesting that people think children don't 'dip' it ties in to what has been discussed about ability on here. Those performing in the top % at 11 should go on to get 3 A's at A level or we are 'failing' them and so on.

That's good to know Feenie.

Feenie, do you have to get in tick in the box for everything to get a level 3 or just most things? Looking at the link and what I've copied below if you weren't doing joined up writing the with the joining lines correct you wouldn't get a level 3?

Cece's link says level 3 writing is:

Handwriting
I can:
· Produce handwriting that is joined and legible.
(The joining lines between letters are correct.
Ascenders and descenders are in proportion and are
mainly parallel.)

Level 2 A writing is:

·Produce handwriting that is accurate and
consistent.
Make joined handwriting smooth and even.

When I read the expected criteria for various levels it just seems so horribly prescriptive. I couldn't have done most of the things required at the various expected stages and yet I was far from stupid (although thanks to Primary school grew up believing I was). I remember I used the word 'undulating' in a piece of writing at 11 and the teacher just couldn't believe I hadn't had help or cheated in some way! I didn't fit with the prescribed expectations you see. I couldn't spell or do joined up and had only just made the coveted transition from pencil to ink!

My handwriting was 'well below the standard one would now expect' and I always took it to mean I must be rather dim! When I see handwriting drill going on to fit these expectations - and seemingly SO much classroom time devoted to it! I get rather worried. DS thinks he's stupid because he can't form a perfect 'n' or 'f' and it concerns me. When I tell friends who were at school with me the response is 'has nothing changed!?

Surely more emphasis should be placed on growing curiosity, resilience, imagination and reflection - developing thinking skills?

The teacher working with children as guide and model not explainer and judge (I am sure many are but when a teacher is busy erasing incorrect joiners and ascenders maybe you can see where I am coming from)?!

It's great there are clear standards to adhere to & brilliant children's progress is monitored but certain things concern me.

Huge emphasis is placed upon 'growing curiosity, resilience, imagination and reflection - developing thinking skills?' - no idea where you get the idea that it isn't.

Handwriting in KS2 SATs, or example, is worth just 3 marks out of 50. Adventurous vocabulary, used correctly, is highly praised and marked/valued accordingly.

Letter formation is extremely important in early years - if children form habits in wrong letter formation, they are much harder to undo later on.

The 'dips' you describe may be a child standing still, seemingly making little progress. Children do not go backwards, Cortina - they don't lose skills/knowledge.

"Handwriting in KS2 SATs, or example, is worth just 3 marks out of 50"

This is SOOO important! There are lota and lots of thinks they are looking for - no child will be able to do all of them.

For example my ds got a level 3 in writing and he had his writing arm in a cast at the time!

The KS1 assessments are designed to find out hat a child can do, not what he or she can't.

Hi Feenie I enjoy 'chatting' with you and I think this is a subject we both feel passionately about. You know more than I do and have the experience which I respect.

Huge emphasis is placed upon 'growing curiosity, resilience, imagination and reflection - developing thinking skills?' - no idea where you get the idea that it isn't.

I honestly don't see this in the primary school classroom, I don't know enough about how it works, what I do see is 'drill' and competition between the children, pressure to move to the next level and be brought on etc. What would be useful is seminars/talks etc going on even in primary schools so I can understand how these things work. I know of an IB school where they do this, invite the parents in, get speakers etc, talk in some detail about the curriculum, it's helpful. I do get the idea it isn't but I'd love to hear about how its present!

I would say that everything I read suggests that children's academic progress goes in fits and spurts, Dweck, Prof Lauren Resnick, Guy and Bill Claxton, various educational pyscologists etc.

What I and I think they mean by 'dip' is that learning does not proceed in a smooth upward path. It moves in a jerky, unpredictable sequence of insights, plateaus, Regressions, and frustrations (Claxton) - doesn't the NC assume otherwise or something is 'wrong'. Learning is not lego like, It isn't snap on.

Regressions and dips and mistakes are very normal Claxton et al say. It's ok to regress and dip to a degree, 'if you aren't confused you aren't thinking clearly' sometimes you need to go backwards to go forwards.

My kids are so scared of making mistakes because they fear to dip is shameful. This means they can cling to what they know, they are scared to label diagrams incorrectly or even write at times and sacrifice any depth of inquiry as a result. I tell them it's ok to be confused and not get the joined up writing or the sums etc, but this isn't how it works in the real world, in the NC world? To inhabit confusion is how you learn.

I've been reading about the old beliefs and new science around the 'intelligent child'. If not dips then how come less than half of the children who came in the top 5% on the national tests at 11 go on to remain in the top 5% at GCSE? It might not be because they are being failed by schools but because of dips and spurts in the performance of students generally.

The Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (SSAT) has a Chairman who is convinced 'bright 11 year olds' should achieve 3 A's at A level and if not they have been 'let down' by schools? I certainly know of plenty who 'dipped' after 11 and others who 'spurted'!

To believe primary school children 'don't' dip is perhaps to believe in the fixed traits of 'bright' and 'dim' children?

Do others see the growing of 'curiosity, resilience, imagination and reflection - developing thinking skills?' in the primary school classroom?

The KS1 assessments are designed to find out hat a child can do, not what he or she can't

That's great.

Many thanks for all the info. Will check the links out. My issue is not that I want to push him to attain high SATS scores or want him to be a higher level than he is or anything. My issue is that I am not sure the teacher is being honest or giving true levels, in order to cover up the fact that the inconsistent teahing is NOT working as we all feared it wouldn't. Many Mums in the class are not happy with this 'who the hell is it today, lucky if it's if even a qualified teacher' job share. I wanted to get his assessed to see if what she says is a fair assessment or is she pulling the wool over our eyes for an easy life.

Just got back from 'drop off' and once again she is NOT there. They have the TA again.
As I say I am sure he was able to do more difficult Maths when he was in Y1 than he seems to be struggling with now, yet she says he is a 2a. The Y3 teacher did not take time out to assess the Y2s, but she does get the scores on the doors from the Y2 teachers when they move up. I have reliably heard that last Sept the Y3 teacher thought the levels Y2 lady were a total joke and they were nowhere near what she had said.

DS2 is happy and thriving doing really well in Rec with a totally FAB NQT. No issues with him whatsoever, but he will move up and be in the same leaky boat as DS1 next year.

What to do ..what to do??

But surely the whole point of assessment should be to find out what a child can't do and then support that child to plug the gaps in their learning?

cortina you said 'I honestly don't see this in the primary school classroom, I don't know enough about how it works, what I do see is 'drill' and competition between the children, pressure to move to the next level and be brought on etc.' just thought I'd say that's not how it is in DS's school. His is more like Feenie describes tbh. The children are very much encouraged to think, question and use their imagination. Be interested to know how others find it.

Indeed, MrsMatey - assessment should inform future teaching.

Cortina, I've said several times that I don't think your ds's class is representative of the norm, and what smee says would seem to indicate the same.

I would also be interested in other parents' views.