maths teachers - do you predict a grade 9?

[DorothyL]

Or do you think that's not possible?

I'm so interested that this is even a discussion! We were asked to predict for our Year 10s (English) earlier on this year, but I just laughed so uproariously and for so long, that the Deputy Head just sidled away. There is no information! What are people predicting this based on? TheSecond, I'm really surprised that your child has been predicted their results- particularly in some subjects which I don't think have accredited syllabi yet. We don't even have model answers yet for some of our modules....and we certainly don't know what 'grades' our marks correspond to for the others. Predicting a grade for our students would honestly just be conjuring up a random number at this stage.

Curioushorse I imagine it's because many schools are required to operate within a system whereby all progress is seen as quantifiable / measurable. So every student has to have a target grade recorded for every subject. Someone out there has attached a lot of importance to exactly how much quantifiable progress each child makes. I don't mind what DS2's targets are, so long as he is happy at school and enjoying learning.

My DS has been predicted a 9 in maths, as have about 10 or 12 others in his class (top set, 8 sets in total, high ranking state school)

My son's at a grammar school which is very strong in maths, and at a "welcome to y10" evening last year they said that most of their boys got A/A in English, and almost all A/A in Maths, and they'd be expecting 7s and 8s, with a handful of the good mathematicians getting 9s. My older girls both got over 95% ums in their maths GCSE and ds is way better than them, so I'm hoping he gets a 9, but the whole thing seems very very vague atm!

Second I did say it was a reasonable prediction if the child was extraordinary and you know that your child is. I teach a couple of kids who I know would get a 9 no problems.

Predicting a 9 for 10 or more in a class seems a bit overconfident. I'm not saying that they're not going to get it, just that given that we don't know where the grade boundary will be it would be better to predict an 8 and be delighted by a 9.

Looking back at old reports apparently dd was old nc level 7 in year 8. In year 9 with a different teacher she was said to be on course for gcse grade 8.

I was asked what mine would get from 9 - 1. I said we might as well pull them out of a hat. I haven't predicted higher than a 6 and I was completely honest that they were all a guess.

There is a lot of confusion on this thread between target and prediction. They are not the same thing. A target is based on data and national averages. They are deliberately challenging. In our school we set targets as what the top 25% nationally will achieve with your prior data, i.e. 75% of students will get lower. A prediction is a teachers best guess based on their knowledge of your child. To have a target of a 9 is reasonable for some students, to have a prediction of 9 already would be very impressive indeed.

As I said, my dd's report says target grade 9, on course for 9.

See, I wouldn't say that a kid who was a level 7 in Y8 was 'on course' for a grade 9. Loads of kids are on a level 7 in Y8. You'd expect them to get a level 8 in Y9, then an A* in Y11. But that's the top 6-odd percent.

The problem here, I think, is that the school are using FFT computer generated targets for these kids, and that these are being given to the parents (which they shouldn't be, but that's another moan.). The teachers are then being asked to predict grades, which will appear alongside the target. Who wants to give a kid who has a target of a 9 and is working really hard a predicted grade that is less than their target? The teacher may also assume that the FFT know more about the kid than they do and think that if FFT think their kid is capable of a 9, then they should probably get one.

One problem is that FFT targets are usually aspirational, the grade that the top 25% of kids who have a similar profile to that kid will get. So most won't reach it. My school uses the FFT target for the top 10%. These are shared with parents, it really makes me cross.

Another problem is that FFT use average points score at KS2 to generate their targets. A kid who does well in English but badly in maths at KS2 will have a higher GCSE maths target than a kid who does badly in English and in maths, even though ability in maths and English aren't particularly linked. You'd think that they'd just use the KS2 maths score to set targets for GCSE maths grades but they don't.

Agreed, noblegiraffe. The whole of ds's set (non-selective school) were working at nc level 7 within year 8 and level 8 in year 9. That's 40% of the school.

The teacher expects them all to get a 7, hopes they all get an 8 and some "might" get a 9. This is verbal, at parents' evening. On paper they're still quoting old money (A/A*).

I think it's very foolhardy predicting a grade 9 (or any grade) on an unknown scale with unknown assessments. Even predicting an A* would be risky in an exam which has no controlled assessments.

It's not completely unknown though, we know that the same proportion of kids who currently get a C or above will get a 4 or above, and the same proportion who currently get an A or above will get a 7 or above.

So we can say 'this kid would have got a C on the old exam, so should get at least a 4' or 'This is an A/A* kid so we're looking at them getting at least a 7'.

However that does assume that they are being prepared as well for the new exam as they would have been for the old exam, and at least as well as other schools.

So I guess I better tell dd not to get her hopes up.

Tell her that she should be pleased if she gets an 8 or a 9, on what will be a really tough exam.

If you want to see something intimidating, check out these 'Grade 9' question papers www.m4ths.com/grade-9-gcse.html

Way beyond the current GCSE.

Will it make a difference that they are doing add maths?

It is really hard to say. There is some crossover between the two, so her algebra will be strengthened by the add maths, for example, but there are also topics on add maths which quite meaty, which aren't on the new GCSE, like calculus. Any time which is spent learning calculus could be spent practising super-hard set theory questions, which could be the difference between an 8 and a 9.

Some schools are dropping additional maths qualifications to concentrate on the new GCSE, and some are keeping them up and seeing how it goes. It's not clear yet which will be the best course of action, especially as we don't have the full details of the new maths A-level yet.

noble Thanks for the link. I've just had fun attempting them. I can do about half off the top of my head. I reckon there's another 3 I could do if I could be bothered, and the other 6 might need some revision (mainly trig)

There will be a 4 year old along any minge who will be able to do the whole paper in 3 minutes.

Minute not minge...

Iguana probably.

To be fair I feel I ought to be able to do most of the grade 9 questions, as I a) have a degree in maths and b) I helped DD1 with her GCSE maths last year so things like circle theorems are reasonably fresh in my mind.

at the 'minge' typo

DD has had a level nine in a maths test plus one in another subject I can't remember had some Baileys and I never even knew they existed. She is in year eight. DS is older and predicted A and A stars.

DS2 is revising logarithms for a test after half-term. He asked for my help interpreting a question that was set out in a different way from the ones he'd seen before. I had to admit that I'd forgotten how to use them.