Difference between KS2 level 6 and KS3 level 6

[Idratherbemuckingout]

Hi, I saw on another post that if your child has got a level 6 in the KS2 age group, he may well not get a level 6 when he goes up to secondary.

I wasn't aware there was a huge difference and had assumed that level 6 meant level 6 all across the board. So, if my son, who is HE, is a very good level 6 at KS 3 level, that would mean he is PROPER level 6? He is Year 6 by the way.
I ask this, because for his entrance exams the maths teacher (on open day) said they expected Level 6 from the children for the entrance exam.
But this must mean KS2 level 6, mustn't it? I think.
So if your child is level 6 KS3, he must be higher than level 6 KS2?
Am I right?
To be honest, he's level 7 really, but I only need him to be level 6.

In primary there is a daily maths lesson - does it make a difference to go from 10 to 7?

We would teach long multiplication/bus stop division explicitly once a term and use it to solve problems several times in a term. In addition I would set one or two questions to solve as a starter to keep them ticking over if there were longer periods when we didn't use those methods.

I don't know about an impromptu sheet of arithmetic - I would expect all children to be able to easily perform the methods we have practised, and regularly assess if they can do this via their individual whiteboards, where I can see instantly. I may try an impromptu sheet though, you have got me thinking.

So teacher assessment is usually higher than test results - that's ridiculous. If anything, ours are occasionally be the other way around, when a child scrapes/flukes a level which they are not secure in. We work hard to ensure that teacher assessment is both rigorous and accurate.

Sadly, there are teachers out there that wouldn't score much more than a level 4 in a SATs test, and some of these are recently qualified. Ok, it may be that they ALL teach at my DCs school, but some of the teaching, even in core subjects is woeful - eg. atrocious spelling, bad grammar, bad handwriting etc. I even had to sit in on a lesson once, as a volunteer, where the teacher proceded to teach that there are 100 metres in a kilometre (because the 'bright' kid said so) until I tactfully intervened through the TA! Oh, and these are very recent experiences!

These teachers will have had to have GCSE English and Maths, but TBH, I'm not sure what you have to do to scrape a C these days?

These teachers will have had to have GCSE English and Maths, but TBH, I'm not sure what you have to do to scrape a C these days?

ok, so now I'm getting sadly depressed.

That is a most negative and sad thing to write about education and teachers who, in the main, work so dam hard to do their best by the children they teach within the polictical turmoil that surrounds us.

and yes. I spelt political wrongly. Shoot me.

Hmm, tend to agree with KS2L6 about the standards of teaching. If you want a good example go on TES website forum and see the awful english and spelling the teachers are using! Eye opening! And they are TEACHING our children!
Well, not mine, thankfully.
Feenie - my son can do his maths standing on his head too, and it sounds like you are a teacher after my own heart. Count yourself not included in the TES jibe. You sound good.
SATS
If you download old maths sats papers, (full sets of them on emaths) you will see that there is one set of questions for each level. So, whatever level paper you do, you get the same set of questions for the actual level. ie for 3-5 you get the same level 5 questions as a 5-7 paper would get.
That is fine. BUT, when you look at the number of questions at each level, then work them out marks wise, and use the grade finder, you will discover that if your child knows all the lower level work inside out (like my son does) then he can get a level one higher than he actually merits.
ie my son did a level 6-8 paper. He is NOT level 8, but he scored so well on the level 6 and 7 questions, he achieved a level 8, quite undeservedly. So those of you saying the grades are over inflated are correct. In fact, I would say he was only a high level 6.
This also applies to maths GCSE papers.
It takes a bit of finding, but the grade boundaries do not match the exam questions the children have to do, as HALF of the questions for a higher tier maths GCSE are "low demand". So, if your child is a grafter but not particularly gifted, they can get the lower level questions done correctly and get an A. Probably not an A*, but certainly an A. Without doing any level A questions. So long as they get the lower level stuff right.
I tried my DS on a lower tier maths GCSE one day for fun (and do remember he was ten at the time, just starting Year 6) and he scored so highly he was above the upper grade limit, so got the highest grade. I then tried him on a Higher Tier and on the work he already knew, he got a C. Already.
So, teachers out there with a grade C maths gcse, capable of teaching our children, are indeed hardly any higher in achievement than a bright eleven year old.
Makes you think, doesn't it?

Disclaimer: There are some truly brilliant teachers out there, including in our school, it's just we seem to have more than our fair share of the weaker ones.

Oh, and I've found the teachers on here who helped when I've had queries re L6 to be a Godsend, and i'm sure you are fantastic teachers and I sometimes wish my DC were at your schools!

However, there are very definitely two worlds out there. Recently we tried to employ a fixed term teacher. Shortlisted to 5 candidates, but ended up not appointing any as none of them could teach a maths lesson without glaring mistakes in their knowledge. All were NQTs so products of current teacher training regimes.

In general maths competence in the great wide world is pretty low. I watched something on the tv about maths teaching and apparently most people have trouble working out the relative merits of a three for two offer compared with say a set amount off one item. My DS can do that easily.
I find english competence pretty low too, when it comes to that - spelling, grammar, punctuation.

I could go on. But I do think maths and english are so basic the national standard should be much higher, including that of our children's teachers, some of whom, undoubtedly, are fine, but a great number of whom are the pits.

and a great number of whom are frankly amazing.

The trouble will arise when your child has one of the ones who is the pits.

when if

and then I'll agree with your post.

Well, you can change 'when' to 'if', if you like, but bearing in mind the number of teachers your child will get between reception and the sixth form, I think you'll be amazingly lucky if you manage to get all good ones. I had some hum dingers in my time, although I also had some brilliant ones.

"I find english competence pretty low too"
"But I do think maths and english are so basic the national standard should be much higher, including that of our children's teachers, some of whom, undoubtedly, are fine, but a great number of whom are the pits."

"but bearing in mind the number of teachers your child will get between reception and the sixth form, I think you'll be amazingly lucky if you manage to get all good ones"

Did your family have a particularly bad experience of school teachers? Home education isn't everyone's cup of tea, muckingout. I'm sure my grammar is a little too rusty these days. I see things that make me wince but I'm not sure why! I'm certainly not a subject expert across the breadth that my children need, and I'd hate to limit my children's interests and prospects by my failings.

just wondering why a thread about the differences between KS2 and 3 level 6s has turned into 'teacher bashing'

Hmmm, me too.

me too!!!!

And I agree with Banter about muckingout having really bad luck with teachers to be so negative!

Indeed, cricketballs!

Exactly what I was wondering Cricketballs.

unless it is Gove posting in disguise - he hasn't blamed teachers for anything yet this week

Yes a lot of unnecessary unpleasantness here.
In general I think primary school teachers do their best with a very prescriptive, very young child unfriendly curriculum.
It's very easy for subject specialists to jump on mistakes, but they don't have the kids parents breathing down their necks like the primary teachers do.
I'm certain the primaries would be delighted to stop at the level 4/5 boundary and do fun extension work instead.
The secondaries would be delighted if their pupils arrived really understanding the basics and DD2 wouldn't be revising for L6 maths.
The system they have been given by the Government does not allow any of this. Valueadd in-particular seems to be a real pressure.

Also secondary teachers do not help themselves by using cut and past comments and randomly pulling levels out of the air for reports. Ok these aren't utterly random, but the last Mark in their books, but they are not averages over the year, are often out of date and have been for stupidly good and bad efforts.

"primary school teachers do their best with a very prescriptive, very child unfriendly curriculum" - its the same in secondary

"they don't have the kids parents breathing down their necks like the primary teachers do." - yes we do!

"Also secondary teachers do not help themselves by using cut and past comments and randomly pulling levels out of the air for reports. Ok these aren't utterly random, but the last Mark in their books, but they are not averages over the year, are often out of date and have been for stupidly good and bad efforts" - where is your evidence that all secondary levels have been 'plucked from the air'?

I'm all for giving credit where credit is due. I'm happy to report that:

1. I have found pretty high levels of English and maths competence amongst the teachers that I have met."

2. I agree that maths and English are basic requirements and so our expectations for the national standard should be set high. I applaud the fact that GCSE grade C in both these subjects is the minimum standard that is acceptable for teachers in state schools. I wonder why those minimum standards are not made mandatory for those teaching in other sectors, including the Home Education sector.

3. Considering the range of teachers that our children have encountered from reception to the sixth form, we've been delighted by their high quality, dedication and caring nature. We have nothing but compliments for teachers who have helped our children to make sustained progress throughout their schooling and achieve very high standards.

And I applaud our current Y6 teacher who is working incredibly hard to 'plug the gaps' left in previous years. I'm sure weak teaching infuriates those in the profession, as much, if not more than it infuriates parents.

phew...some signs of sanity returning.

And thank you startail for trying to re-address the teacher bashing by having a go at us secondary teachers

Actually, I'm a secondary teacher and I will freely admit to 'pulling levels out of the air' for reports. And do you know why?

Because decimal sub-levels are utter bollocks. And in maths, the expectation to level an individual piece of work (and comment as to how you can progress to the next level other than 'learn some new maths') is utter bollocks.

Yet I am required to give these utterly bollocks sub-levels 3 times a year so I add a bit on from the level they got last year if they've worked well and leave it the same if they haven't.

Don't blame secondary teachers for the shitty system they have to work with. Same for cutting and pasting comments on reports - it is entirely possible that the school forces them to use comment banks and they have no choice in the matter.