'Clever' DS1's Y7 NC (report) levels were LOWER than 'average' DS2's!!

[Erebus]

Just realised yesterday when I was sorting out the boys' old school reports and I came across DS1's Y7 March school report (he's now Y9), and had DS2's in front of me.

Now, I don't 'make comparisons' between the two of them as a rule as the have different skill-sets, DS1's being more academic, DS2's more crafty. This is genuinely the first time, other than the obvious KS1 & 2 SATS, that I've ever seen like-for-like, side by side direct comparison for them. Never thought to look before!

DS1(nearly 14) got '2's for his KS1 SATS, as did DS2 but they're both May born. DS1 then breezed 5s in his KS2 SATS. He's generally sharper, more 'street-wise, wiley-er, articulate, and 'gets' nuance. He reads age-appropriate teenager books (just finished 'The Hunger Games').

DS2 has struggled a bit academically. He was given ten 1:1 lessons in Literacy in Y5 when he tested at level 3. He was generally praised more for effort than achievement throughout Primary! He also had a year of KipMcGrath in Y6 in English, and got an overall 4 in that SATS which was (obviously!) fine.

In general he's quite WYSIWYG. (What you see is what you get!). He's fairly 'young' for his age, completely disingenuous, bit naive, has a bit of a limited vocabulary, struggles to read 'Diary of a Wimpy Kid', so doesn't - and basically, if you were told he was 9, not 12 tomorrow (he's the smallest boy in his year, too!) you'd believe me.

SO, imagine my surprise to find that he was at least one sub-level higher than DS1 in Y7- in everything, excluding Music (and Art!) where DS1 was a sublevel higher, and MFL in which they both scored the same.

Same school, same HT, same ethos. (Large high-achieving comp so possibly the reports are a bit one-size-fits-all unless there's 'a problem' that needs highlighting?)

Otherwise- I just don't get it!

Please don't tell me I've completely failed to see DS2's budding 'genius' Seriously, all the usually used indicators of 'clever/not that clever' indicate that DS2 isn't smarter than DS1. And bear in mind I am talking school-levels, here, so stuff about emotional intelligence etc isn't what thsi is about! They don't give a grade for that!

Huh. Don't worry about it too much. It's a bit odd but... oh well. My sister was a proper child prodigy, IQ in the 170s (in a test taken by an ed psych, but that was as a child and scaled to an adult score it is in the 150s), American uni students flying over to study her, blah blah blah, whereas I was much lower (not a genius) but in the end we ended up with similar academic scores on a lot of things, and I even outscored her in some GCSEs. When you know both of us, or see us working, it becomes apparent that she is brighter and just lazier. Although, I only found out about us when I found our files in an unlocked cabinet under the stairs. It could be that your DS1 is really coasting, or that he had a bad test, or maybe your DS2 has had a lot of academic help and it really emphasised that importance of education to him so he tried really hard in this test. I find that, as long as the child learns the bare minimum (so, the national curriculum, really), work ethic counts over achievement as a later life skill.

I hope I didn't sound bitter about my sister! Anyway, you probably haven't overlooked your DS2's "genius." Although I do remember one programme where there were two boys and the parents only thought the older one was bright and had him in lots of competitions and in for scholarships for good schools and only tested the younger one much later. It turned out the little one was highly gifted but it was too late for him to be entered for the scholarship. The little boy, I remember this very vividly, said "it won't matter to me if I'm only average" but he almost cried with relief when he got his results I can't remember the documentary but it was interesting.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you're not like that! It's just that this topic as a whole jogged my memory.

Anyway, I'm rambling, so: it's sounds like this is just one of life's funny little things and I'm sure that you haven't overlooked any genius in your second child, just keep supporting both of them and have a good chuckle over it all.

Don't worry Y7 grades are plucked out of the ether, they don't mean a great deal. They depend terribly on what set DCs are in and what level that group are taught to.

Often the ones in reports are simply the last little class test not a representative average.

I don't think DD1 got a sensible grade until Y9, she wont get a sensible science grade until they print her GCSE certificate. (long story, suffice to say never judge a quirky socially inept dyslexic by the cover).

Exactly WYSIWYG conventionally academic DD2's reports are way saner, but I'm still going to wait a year or two before chicken counting.

Also, to be fair, senior schools treat L5 SATs with caution as primaries have to cram Y6 to the test to keep ofsted off their backs.

Yes, I am of the opinion that the reports are not really measuring the DSs' performance/s with forensic precision! And I recall getting a bit huffy in Y8 (DS1) when at parents' eve a science teacher said DS1 would be getting a stated low-ish mark for a complete half term's work because of one unfortunate science practical where everything had gone wrong. She more or less admitted that overall scores were actually just 'the last test result', and yes, I am feeling that here in Y9 we are finally getting meaningful grades!

I was also going to say I'm not sure I view Yr7 grades as overly accurate.

DD in her January report was getting Lvl 5s in most subjects. By parents evening in March all her teachers were saying she's working at Lvl 7. How the heck she can move that much in 8 weeks I have no idea!