KS3 - KS4 Flight Paths

[lookatmeimsandradee]

Hi
Ive just had dd first progress report (year 8)
It's all changed and I think Ive got my head round most of it.

The flightpaths that the children are assigned (Mastery, Secure, Developing, Foundation, Entry) are supposed to give an indication of what the GCSE levels they should achieve.
When I asked my dd what "flightpath" she is on for each subject, she didn't know.
It's not written in the progress report either. All I have is Needs to improve, good progress, excellent progress.

For those with better understanding

Should the school be telling me what flight path she's on
Am I allowed to know (I want to know)
Is the information going to appear at a later date in the year (after year end exams maybe)
Any help gratefully received before I email the school.

Really loony we didn't get that in y7 (y8 report due in new year just before choosing options).

All I got was eg: Maths: secure, French: emerging, Geography: developing. I get that.

It says pupils should aim for securing by end of academic year but they don't say when they produce their report mid year how far away they are from achieving that or give any indication of predicted GCSE level. So for picking GCSE subjects, we may as well put them in a hat and pull them out

I'm a teacher of Y7 and have had to write reports saying whether kids are working above or below the level on their flight path towards their GCSE targets.

It's bollocksy bollocks. The targets are bullshit and my ability to say with any precision whether they will achieve those grades in 5 years time is based at looking what set they're in and thinking 'yeah, a set 3 kid in Y7 would probably be in set X or Y in Y11 and those sets normally gets Cs and Bs so I'll say that this kid is 'on target' for a 6, because it would be shitty to say they're below target already and besides no one knows what a 6 will look like yet.'

I've complained to my HOD about what nonsense it is.

Flight paths at DDs school are top secret and even the DC don't know which one they are on

I get they have to make up new ways to report progress but cant they pick better jargon than 'Flight Paths, Mastery, Secure, Developing, Foundation, Entry. It just seems to turn it into some sort of Harry Potter computer game that has no meaning. Why not use English like good, average, below average etc. Are they deliberately trying to obfuscate because they are hiding something?

Feel for the teachers noble I really do. It is one big pile of 💩

I'm not ranting at DC school, I understand they don't know either. It's just hard to make an informed choice with our DC when you don't have a lot to go on. 😁😁 my DSs hate writing so we really need to pick wisely

Why is it top secret beaching? I know when mine were at primary they were streamed for maths and English but the sets weren't allowed to be called top, middle, bottom. For maths they were circles, triangles, squares, English , commas, full stops and exclamation marks and so on.. Maybe a similar thing at your DC secondary school. Kids aren't stupid they know if they are in top set whatever it is called.

Totally agree mummy, just use simple easy to use language.

I hate that they have predicted gcse grades on all their reports from year 7 at our school.

I agree snorkel, y7 is probably too early but my DC are y8 and choosing options after Christmas. - Father Christmas himself might have a better idea what my DC should choose, not like it is anything important, just their GCSEs!!!!!

I can't easily understand what the report says, anyway.

It can't tell if it means DS is working towards or expected to get or has already got. There is a colour code for whether he's achieving target, as long as the colour coding for achievement is ok, I am going to ignore the other number stuff. And behaviour, I like to think I can influence behaviour & attitude anyway if not aptitude.

I know what you mean trout - all we want is some easy to understand language

Is this flight path language what we're meant to use as I haven't heard about it at all until seeing it on here. Nor are we reporting predicted grades to year 7 (unless completely computer generated and I have no idea about them).

Flight paths are the new band wagon to jump on since the government scrapped levels, didn't replace them but still expect us to show progress. Not sure where it has come from, google turns up some blogs, the DfE gave a grant for their development apparently.

The GCSE predicted grades are FFT targets. The utter insanity of using these as a benchmark for Y7 just proves how desperate schools are for a data-based system at the moment.

I don't know, I just got called in as a parent and was told about the new GCSE structure and that they give them a predicted level based on their SATs results and how they'd been working in class and another few factors. It is a computer generated system and seems to have given individual targets as (my daughter is very very bright) amd was predicted 8s and 9s but from her friends 7s and 8s

What a load of shit. Why not actually wait until the child is in Y 11 to do a predicted grade? You cannot possibly say how well they will do in four years time. When will we give up all this crap? How about setting an exam at the end of each year based on what has been covered and giving kids a percentage score? Why do we persist in dreaming up more and more complex meaningless assessnent systems? If we look at the countries that are doing well educationally they probably have v simple things like exams and termly tests whivh show whether child is doing well or struggling.

The worry here, in English, is not about grammar schools showing progress but more about how the new GCSE exam blatantly discriminates against SEN/less able pupils. No tiers means that our weak students who would once have got D/E/F will now get Ungraded and I work in one of the top 5% performing schools in the country. Marking Mock papers was heartbreaking. These children have been well taught, are essentially literate yet will fail because they cannot analyse a literary extract. How does that equate to the needs of modern life? Yes, maybe for higher grades, going on to university, but to allow people access to being a plumber/ hairdresser/train driver? All essential jobs but you cannot get on the course unless you can comment on the structure of Daphne du Maurier's writing. The impact of these changes will cause untold misery.

The 1 is being pegged to a G isn't it? So only the same proportion of kids who failed last year can fail this year?

How that's actually going to work when our weakest kids can't answer the easiest questions because the papers (even maths foundation) start harder than the old papers, is beyond me.

Why not actually wait until the child is in Y 11 to do a predicted grade?

To be fair, that would be a bit late for most kids, especially to tell them they're going to fail. A ballpark figure in Y9 for options would be a reasonable expectation, except a lot of schools have moved options to Y8 and some students are having to make those choices now.

Parents do need a way of knowing whether their kid is strong, OK or weak in a subject, but this isn't it, because if they're not told the targets then how can they decide whether their kid being on course for the target is acceptable or not? If they knew their kid was on target to fail, then they could buy workbooks, hire a tutor, other interventions.

We had a y7 report earlier this term. No flight paths. The levels are based on the 9-1 system but with a chart showing where the average is for each year up to and including year 9. The target grades are for end of year 9 not GCSE. They are obviously based on SATS and CATS results. This seems more logical but still quite bonkers because in some subjects not enough work had been done to be able to assess it and the targets will get tweaked anyway! DS1 in Y10 said ignore the levels till the end of the year report as it's much more realistic!
We don't choose options until end of Y9 although the maths and science GCSE syllabus begins in Y8.

I might be wrong, but I think the whole flight path idea stems from Michael Wilshaw (Ofsted chief). It's the system he set up at his old much lauded school and it's radiated out from there. I agree that it's daft to announce GCSE grade targets when they've just started in yr7, but it is useful in giving you as a parent a reasonably reliable idea of whether your child is sliding or not. Obviously a good school should tell you that regardless in reports, but lots don't. For DS we get a simple report each term with progress/ effort/ homework marks on for each subject. Each is graded by colour, so blue (above track)/ green (on track)/ orange (below) / red (oh dear!). It's easy to read and just quickly check if they're sort of okay. Not fool proof at all, but still a system everyone can understand and it's blindingly obvious if they're falling behind, so helpful that way.

reasonably reliable

The problem is that it's not reasonably reliable. It's not even slightly reliable. It's giving the illusion of science where it's nothing scientific about it.

noblegiraffe, you're right it's not accurate and it definitely isn't scientific, but getting a sheet with clearly coded flags for progress/ effort and homework each term is helpful to me as a parent. It's an indication as to whether my child's behaving, paying attention, learning, etc in each subject. Unless the teachers just lie.... We ignore the GCSE predictions. Especially now it's all changed, who knows what they'll get.

Unless the teachers just lie.

We don't lie. We just make it up. If I wrote reports just after a crap P5 lesson with a class when there had been a fight at lunchtime and they were bouncing off the walls, they would get a different set of numbers than if I wrote the report after a P1 lesson when they were still sleepy enough to be angelic. Yet the report is supposed to be a reflection of their work since the last report. Some teachers set the default as 'outstanding' and downgrade kids who aren't quite up to scratch. Some teachers set the default as 'good' and only upgrade kids who are really good.

The progress stuff is all made up too. Progress can't be quantified into neat little boxes. If a kid does well in a test, have they made progress or was the test too easy for them?

Homework - does 'good' mean the homework is good or the student is good at handing it in? If a kid hands in homework that is usually perfect, but one or two pieces are late, what grade should they get?

Teachers spend mere seconds deciding this stuff.

I do get all of that, noble but coming from the other side, it's all I have and as a basic guide it's helpful. If my kid's progress or effort marks all come in as shaded red, I'm going to know there's a problem. If he has one subject which shows he's red, but the rest are green, so deemed on track, then I'm going to maybe start to keep a closer eye on helping him for that one subject, or ask why that teacher thinks he's a pita! I actually think it's a bit more useful for the middle range. If you're seeing lots of amber flags, then as a parent you start to realise that your child might be struggling/ slipping. That might help you to help them earlier, etc, rather than wait for them to slip even further.

Yes you're right, of course you are, on variables. Some teachers will be harder in terms of how they grade. Others over generous. Parents will mostly get that and understand that it's an average snapshot for the term. They'd appreciate that one amazing piece of homework wouldn't counter out all the late/ forgotten/ not completed bits.

Also after a term though, you know pretty much in each class who's struggling or has a problem surely? I mean that both academically and behaviourally. So yes you take seconds to tick the relevant boxes to generate the report, but I'd hope that mostly they're relevant to that child and not just about the last test result or one particular lesson or piece of homework.

There is no exact science is there? Would you just not have reports at all? I'm genuinely interested.

If you're seeing lots of amber flags, then as a parent you start to realise that your child might be struggling

That's true, but your child could have a shining report, outstandings all over the place, and the parent be completely oblivious to the fact that their child is doing really badly in a subject.

I found this out at one parents' evening when talking to the parents of the loveliest girl in one of my classes. She was well-behaved, hardworking, homework always in on time. Her parents had no idea she was bottom of the bottom set until I told them, because her effort grades and so on were always outstanding. If we'd graded progress at that time, she'd have been graded as making good progress. Unfortunately, this meant good progress towards a fail. Her parents didn't understand national curriculum levels.

Once her parents knew, they pulled out all the stops with her and she moved up the sets and passed her GCSE 5 years later.

These flight paths are pointless if parents don't know what flight path their child is supposed to be on.

Would you just not have reports at all?

There's a workload issue relating to reports which means that schools have binned written comments. However this means numbered boxes which, as I've said, are relatively meaningless. My school used to have one box for each child, then they realised that wasn't helpful, so they added more boxes.
But we are also supposed to log house points, behaviour points, detentions and so on electronically which parents can see anyway. What does a tick box report add?