Progress 8 - less focus on C/D borderline and consequences for grade 4 students

[noblegiraffe]

So we are now all about progress 8, it's progress that counts and getting a B to an A is as valuable as getting a D to a C (except for slight quibbles about numeric values). This is seen as a good thing, all pupils will get support to reach their targets.

What I'm seeing: There is a limited amount of maths intervention available to help students - 1-1 and small group tuition at tutor times and so on. Previously this was focused on C/D borderline kids to help them get the magic C grade and boost the school headline figures. Now it is given to students who are falling well short of their target grade, who need the double weighted boost of an increase in a maths grade to improve their overall score.
I teach several students who are sitting on a 3, and with extra support could reach a 4 - the key grade where they won't have to resit in sixth form, and which will ensure access to certain college courses. Getting a 4 would be extremely important to them. They are not on the intervention lists, and not getting the help that they would have got in previous years, instead it's going to other, higher (and lower) achieving students. The grade that is important to them is no longer important to the school.

In practice 'more support for all' seems to mean 'less support for those to whom it really matters'.

cantkeep I suspect you are right.

I was very grateful for the small amounts of 1-1 time my DD received for her English, possibly funded from her PPP money (she's adopted). We also backed it up by her going to every revision session going, and work at home with me. Passing that exam made a big difference to her options the following year.

Intervention can be accessed wherever the teacher feels that improvements can be made or where knowledge need some consolidation.

In my school intervention is being decided by a big progress 8 spreadsheet. Kids that need intervention in maths to pass are not getting it because the support is being given to kids who will make the most impact on progress 8.

noble That's so sad.
That is statistics driving decisions, not teacher expertise.

You get what you measure I suppose.

I'm assuming (although I don't know) that the same kids who are being given the extra support in maths will also be getting the extra support available in other subjects that other students could do with.

I've got a feeling that a small number of pupils with a large negative progress 8 score can have a disproportionate effect on a school's overall score.

Why do you take so personally the statement (which is born out by studies and data) that some high ability children in some state schools do not achieve as high grades as they could?

Because there are similar children in private schools that do exactly the same but these schools are not accountable to government statistics and do not constantly have the finger pointed at them for failing the children.

It is MY fact that a lot of children could do a lot better if the value of education was instilled in them at home. That parents didn't allow them to bring phones in to school. That pupils were told not to argue about how unfair it is that they have an exam paper to complete 'cos they just did one in maths ...
This is every lesson with my Year 11s. They are set 2/7. Predicted Grade 6/7. I bust my guts everyday - marking the work of the 33 in the class to get it returned the next day, planning purposeful lessons, running revision classes, doing intervention ... target setting/personal targets per part of the exam/writing essays of all grades for comparison etc etc
Yet I will be judged on the 5 or 6 kids who underachieve because, quite frankly, they can't be arsed. Then will blame the teachers and parents complain. I then get a bollocking and a mark down on my performance management.
Intervention should be available to those who need it - sadly progress 8 now means that the wrong people will get it.

Bold fail sorry

Why do you take so personally the statement (which is born out by studies and data) that some high ability children in some state schools do not achieve as high grades as they could?

I don't take it personally at all.
I also accept that there is a gap betwen state vs independent
The difference is I don't think excessive intervention in y11 is the way to solve it and often the people I encounter who shout about wanting lots of extras are actually the people who've got kids who've not pulled their weight through school.

The literacy gap exists before children get into school, the cultuaral capital available yo children varies by background, there's a massive difference between parents who allow their child to coast y7-10 & panic in y11 snd the parents who promote learning and hard work for the 5 years. Independent schools do iGCSE English (speaming & listening counts as does coursework) but my students have none of that and have to do 100% closed book linear exams. There are lots of things that can be done in schools to close the gap but hammering kids in their last year to game exams isnt the answer as far as I'm concerned.

Should probably stress I have no issue with high quality intervention for students who are working well and need a bit of extra support. I do a lot of that. I also offer lots of stuff to stretch students who want to go above and beyond.

I disagree with pulling out all the stops for kids who havent been bothered and i disagree with home suggesting extta intervention should be given regardless of student behaviour and attitude in class.

I don't get why pulling out all the stops( tutoring) to get kids onto college courses they would consequently struggle on is ok but doing the same for the 11+ isn't.

Maisy you were answering user not me?
I teach English (like you I think) and it is geared just for the high ability yet private schools can do iGCSE and have a much easier route to the higher grades!

GreenGinger2
You can pull out all the stops in your lessons. Y6 teachers do the same for SATS. Most teachers want tbeir kids to do well. I know I have lots in place, that doesn't mean lots of extra classes.
There's a lot I see on MN of people expecting all sorts for their child but have no regard for the fact that there are other children
I just dont think it's reasonable to expect teachers (say someone who has 2 groups like me) to do 1-1 or small group intervention for 60 students on top of the school day. What about the other 150 kids I teach?

If people want to get tutoring outside school its their call.
But I tell my students if they are working well over y10-11, do their homework and classwork to the best of their ability and revise they'll do well. There's a weekly revision club which a group come to and I'm more than happy to check any mock questions they do.
Going to some extra class isnt a replacement for old fashioned revision.

I agree Maisy.

pieceofpurplesky
Not sure now.
Yes. I also do English. Shocking difference between what is expected in iGCSE vs the specs we have to do. And then kids waltz off to college/uni clutching an iGCSE grade A appearing much smarter on paper than some of my grade 6/7 candidates who have worked hard, grappled with challenging texts and have all the resilience to study independently.

Just one example of how the state vs private divide happens.

This is why many parents opt for independent school at 11. It certainly figured in our thinking. One of my teenage boys is bright but lazy. He's easy distracted and lately, prone to underachieving if left to his own devices. He's the sort of child that excelled at primary, easily attaining level 5 but as he's got older he's been lazier and less willing to put in the effort. At a state school, I foresaw him getting Bs or maybe even dropping to Cs. Not because of poor teaching but rather his laziness coupled with their lack of resources. And indeed at the end of Y7 he had dropped down to a B grade. His (independent) school were straight on it, small group catch ups and the odd 1:1 lesson. Regular tracking and interim testing to ensure he was keeping up and using him favourite extra curricular activities as an incentive.

The new system means that children like my DS2 who are very capable of getting A*s and As but are not reaching their potential will get intervention whereas before all hands would have been working on ensuring C/D borderline students made the C.

I also think that if we're saying that the small amount of money/time must be spent on those borderline C/D pupils because it will make a far greater difference to their lives than helping ensure an able pupil gets an A* instead of an A then we need to hold our hands up and say publicly that these are our priorities.

A lot of the 'up in arms' parents are those that feel duped (for want of a better word) by the system. Explain from the outset the limitations of the state system and where resources must be targeted. That way they know what they're getting and they understand what they're getting into. Being upfront may also help fee paying parents, and I am one, to understand that the independent sector does better due to its ratios and resources rather than the quality of teaching. As an x state school teacher myself, I don't need convincing of this but I'm regularly amazed at what fee paying parents think they are paying for.

Dora they are now paying for much easier exams

I do worry about how schools direct their resources. My son had no targeted help in primary for SATs because he wasn't on a borderline level. But he could barely spell, had illegible handwriting and really poor sentence organisation. Before all the data driven planning and SATs I'm sure he would have had more help as his work was so visibly poor. ( we subsequently had him privately tested and he's quite severely dyslexic but with really high other skills which is why his reading was always very good).

His friend was given booster classes galore because he was borderline 5/6. He left primary feeling a bit of a failure as he didn't get a 6 in all subjects At secondary he is obviously on a high target trajectory. He is not anywhere near these targets so has had 3 years of reports saying this. Maybe he was never meant to be up so high, maybe he doesn't work hard, maybe he peaked at 10/11 and has levelled off since. I have no idea. He is still doing well just not as well as predicted by his SATs scores. They do do cats as well but we never find out about them, I can imagine the school putting in place lots of interventions when they start the GCSEs. It just seems all this data assume everyone improves in a smooth linear way.

A rare education thread where I kind of feel I agree with everybody!

Is there a wider question of how far schools should be pushing around any grade boundaries? Good teaching, effective marking, revision sessions, these are fine but aren't GCSE grades supposed to reflect the ability and work ethic of the students? I seem to remember one of the "Educating..." programmes where a teacher actually went round to a student's house to get them out of bed before one of their exams. Isn't there a point where if students haven't bothered to work they should feel the consequences of that choice?

I guess these days schools don't have much choice though.

I'm another who is pleased that we are measuring progress for all. As a PP said, if State schools end up being the place where C/D borderline get all the assistance then those parents that can will start to leave in droves.
People are forever going on about University admissions and how unfair they are - they seem skewed towards middle class, independent pupils. With a State system that puts its resource into C/D pupils to the detriment of A*/A/B pupils it's to be expected.

where C/D borderline get all the assistance

I'm assuming that the A*/A kids get the taught lessons that they are entitled to and aren't just left in a corridor?

Thinking about it, a lot of the money for intervention comes from pupil premium, and there are way more PP kids clustered around the C/D borderline than the A*/A one. I'm not sure where money for intervention for higher attainers would come from in a time of severe budget cuts.

Well in our case, DS got B grades and that was good enough for the school. No-one spotted that he was getting B grades despite an SpLD and should have got A*/A grades.
He did get A*/A once proper provision was in place.

The "slight quibbles about numerical values" that someone mentioned are crucial to many schools. Secondary modern schools are a case in point. Schools get more "points" for lifting a B to an A or an A to an A* than they do for lifting a D to a C. So a school like ours with a tiny % of high ability kids is screwed.

I do find the notion that a child needs 1-1 intervention in order to get an A* a bit bizarre. If this is the case, we have a huge problem on our hands - why are state school teachers not teaching their top set classes to a sufficient level to enable their bright students to get the top grades on the back of that?! What sort of pathetic exam system do we have, where it is impossible for children to get top grades without serious hand-holding and bottom wiping?

I do find the notion that a child needs 1-1 intervention in order to get an A* a bit bizarre.

I'm not asking for 1-1 intervention. I'm asking for a bit of consideration, for a teacher to wonder why a pupil is underperforming. My DS was getting above the magic C so got no further attention. Nobody, even when I flagged it up, was wondering why his score was below his potential. Re-reading his reports I realised that they were loads of comments that he was great in class but nobody was bothered that he wasn't getting the exam grades to match.