Year 6 Sat grades - what class would you expect?

[Neverenoughhoursintheday]

Ds worked hard to get sat results 5 in all 3 subjects, being told by his primary teacher he would be in the top set at high school. His high school seem to have streamed form classes and then further streamed english and maths. In his form class he is in the middle set and is disappointed after working so hard.

Is gaining 5's just average and the norm in year 6 then?

Depends on the school, and who is there.

depends on the schools but at my DDs secondary the top set of 6 for maths seems to be pretty much those who achieved level 6

Thanks he is in the top set for maths, not for English - however that is his weaker subject he only scraped a 5 so thats expected. Its the other subjects he's in the middle set for, ie french, history etc. I believed these were also streamed, I need to check at parents eve how it works :/

In many schools the streaming for other subjects 'runs with ' the maths/english streaming for timetabling ease

It depends - DD2 got a solid 5 for maths but is in set 2 of 4 - top set is all level 6. She's in top for everything else though, and isn't confident in maths (though she is good at it) so I feel this is the right place for her - the work is challenging for her but not unachievable IYSWIM.

However, at DDs' school subjects like History, French, Geography etc. are based on the English level as a lot of the work is about effective communication, so that is why she is in top set there. I wonder if that's the reasoning? It's worth asking.

DD2's school resets after half term, when CATs results are in and the teachers have had some time with the kids. Things may change quite a lot.

Thanks pointy, good point about being based around English - that would make sense

Many secondary schools do a primitive iq test called CATS. This means a middle ability child who worked like a Trojan gets no benefit from high SATS results. The lazy bright child with level 4s may well be put in the top set. I avoided a school with a similar policy as I feel middle ability child who work really hard deserve their place in the top set.

At my son's school your daughter would be in the middle set as all the top set children have level 6s. Getting level 5s is very common these days.

Level 5 in maths resulted in middle set ( set 2 out of 3) for my DD. And it was the right set for her.

Set 2 did Level 4 - 6 work. And set 1 did level 5 - 7 work.

Look at where they're pitching the work, and if it's the right level, rather than what set it is.

My DD got level 5 for all subjects. Her school assessed her previously at level 5.75 English, 5.5 Science and 5.25 Maths. She went into the top sets, but within a year, she had dropped to set 2 for English (what was originally her strongest subject), is still in top set for Science although she feels she should be in the set below, but is thriving in Maths. Most schools will re-assess them and as said before, there may be others who are just a little better or who have been taught extra things.

I know he's disappointed, but I'd say to be patient and see if he gets moved. If they are bright and happy to work really hard, then fine but as they get older the top sets in my daughter's school have a lot more homework - in years 7 and 8 they have to do an optional task from extension work, in Year 9 they have to do all three tasks on top of normal homework. She is being fast tracked for French and has to do a second language on top of the usual options they will take. She is in Year 9 and is getting an awful lot of homework (she was even doing it on Saturday when we were watching the XFactor) - to be honest this is fine if they want it, but personally I feel she needs a bit more personal time.

yes, my dd's school did CATs recently too.

I didn't mind as my dd missed out on level 6 but was widely felt (by teachers etc) to be having a bad day that day, so if she did well in CATS she may be put up a set, but if not, she had nothing to lose as her level 5s are more likely to put her in the second set.

ime the top set children all got level 6 (at least in my daughters' secondary school).

I think level 5 is average around here, my dcs scored level 5 and they would never consider themselves top set students.
They worked hard to get level 5, they didn't think it was possible and tbh the thing they took from the experience was that with hard work they can achieve. Ds struggled to get a level 2 in maths at infant school, at one stage I thought he was suffering from dyscalculia, his numeracy skill were incredibly weak.
We talk a lot to the dcs about hard work rather than cleverness being the essence of success. Dh started secondary in middle sets and with a good dose of hard work he left with the best results in the school, his experience inspires my dcs to work hard and apply themselves to do the very best with the talent they've been given.

Fascinating discussion.

Dd got level 5s for everything after doing very little work towards SATs - mixture of school's approach not being pro-sats, lack of expectation and having a poor teacher in year 6. She was poorly in the couple of terms leading up to SATs so although we considered tutoring, we decided her health was more important. We were absolutely thrilled with her results and relieved, but it does worry me that she is now at secondary with children from high pressure primary schools and has to compete with dc who were tutored...

So far she seems to be in set 3 out of 7 Maths. Languages are set based on English results and she seems to be in a similar set to maths. We were given to understand that there would be a move around after half term, but dd's form tutor said it's usually only a couple of dc who are moved... I guess I have to wait and see how she is progressing, she seems to be finding maths pretty easy...

I suppose that's life glee - some people succeed by working hard, the lucky few can fly by the seat of their very clever pants, lots of people are clever and only have to work moderately hard, secondary school is no different, my dcs are not particularly clever so they will have to graft for their successes. Children who struggle at our Secondary are very much encouraged to use a tutor, it's considered pretty normal.

I think maybe its worth suggesting to children who are disaoppointed not to be in top sets that sometimes its better to be near the top of set 2 than struggling at the bottom of the top set-my DD is a lot happier than when she was feeling depressed about her ability at primary school when she was 'only' getting 90 overall in past papers rather than 98 to 100 like the high flyers!

This is exactly why my dc are going to the grammar school.

Our primary just let them coast and there are Outstanding comps also in catchment to the secondary.

Them being handicapped before they've even started it something I wish to avoid.

You can also ask what grades come from each set if they stay there until GCSE. At my DCs school set 3 out of 5 or 6 can achieve A/A* and B is to be expected.
They don't stream.

None of the secondaries round here use SATs for streaming or setting. Most only set, very few here stream.

IME of the local schools I know children at: mixed ability for everything for first half term, CATs or equivalent in Autumn 1 term. Set for English and Maths based on those during Autumn 2 half term. Few seem to set for the other subjects and most stay mixed ability, or just in form groups, for the other subjects.

There should also be flexibility in sets to allow children to move sets if they have a boost or find themselves struggling.

How many sets overall, do you know?

DS was in 'set 4', but further enquiry showed that there were 10 maths classes (big school!) and effectively he was in set 2 of 5.

He stayed there throughout -- his preference, as he said the top set went too fast for him and never got a chance to go back over things. We did have a bit of a battle against lower expectations than for the top set, but he came out with A* at GCSE.

DD is in 'top set maths' at a different school and finds it a bit daunting, but her school only subdivides into three maths sets -- top 20%, next 20%, and then several mixed ability groups, so far as I can work it out.

Bird - from what I can gather there are only 3 sets but each set has 3 classes of the same ability. So he's in the middle set.

Ds in year 7, big international school.
They have 9 sets 123=top, 456=middle, 789=bottom, though I hate that phrase!
Ds is in set 5, so middle of the middle set.
He was on 2nd table in primary, got 4/4/5 in sats so average.
It also depends on the current cohort.

"That is not to say that I agree with this. I understand exactly what you mean reallytired when you say that you think hard working children should deserve a place in top set. However, moving a lazy bright child into set 2 does not make them 'up their game', they just shrug, turn off even more from education, and can end up becoming really problematic by the time they hit Y9/Y10 and puberty, as the level of challenge is simply not high enough for them."

I am confused by your post. You are right in saying that children are grouped by attainment rather than effort.

Imagine you have two children child A has a score of 96 in CATS and scores 7C in a science test in year 8. Child B has a score of 133 in CATs and scores 4C in the same science test. Would you honestly put child B in the top science set in place of child A? Would you honestly deny a clearly capable child the opporuntity to do triple science because they messed up their CATS test?

Doing well at school is about far more than raw intelligence. A lot of subjects like Science or Maths build on prior knowledge. Putting a child who is 4C in the top set would be setting them up for failure as they do not have the prior knowledge to progress. If raw intelligence was enough then there would be no need to send children to school or for anyone to do any work.

Personally I think "learning pathways" are vile. Its grammar school selection with a new fancy name. I rejected a school that had "learning pathways" set on the first day of year 7. Children were put in path ways on the basis of one test. If my son had gone to that particular school he would have been the denied the opportunity to do triple science.

Recently he has been congratulated as he got the second highest score in his year of 180 inspite of a medicore CATs result. The same science teacher complains about ds' total lack of home work yet praises him for effor. Bizare.

I am glad that my son's school does not introduce learning pathways until year 9 when they have actually got to know the children and decisions are made in consulation with the parents. This school also has the highest results in the area.

I can see the point in having a modified curriculum for a child with very low SATs results. If a child is not level 4 standard in Maths and English then they simply will not be able to access the work. However I am against shutting off opportunity to a child who has level 4 SATs results.

I feel the chances of a child who has level 4s achieving the EBac should be pretty high. It would be shocking to rule out such a child sitting GCSE Geography/ History in year 7.

Coolas At what point does your school put children into path ways. What do you do if a bright child can't cope with the work due to lack of application. Surely a middle ablity child with high marks would have a ceiling on their learning if they are not put up a set.