Can I request GCSE targets for my Y10?

[christinarossetti19]

Just that really.

Dd's 'flight path' in secondary was set with no SATs data (whole year group results were annulled through no fault of their own) so was targeted to achieve bare minimum.

I thought that this had been adjusted (after many conversations and emails) but a conversation I had with her HoY yesterday made me realise that it doesn't seem to have been.

If I ask for her GCSE targets, will they be obliged to give them to me?

TIA

Do they not give you the "if your child continues to work at current standard they are likely to achieve x level at GCSE" information?

That's way more useful than targets (think yourself lucky you didn't have any autogenerated from SATS!)

No, no 'predictions' at all.

Actually, it hasn't been at all lucky to not have Progress 8 targets generated from SATs.

It's meant that her 'flight path' has been set to the bare minimum, rather than 'above expectations' which it should have been.

Is the school obliged to let me know what she is predicted/targeted for GCSEs?

Surely you can ask what they think she will achieve - ask individual teachers if need be.

I agree with @UserAtLargeAgain that that would be a lot more useful than meaningless (by and large) targets. I recall DS2 being disappointed that his PE target was only a 7 when he thought he could do better (as if he thought it was a prediciton). I said, well great, do better than. No one is stopping you.

But why is her flight path an issue? If the school are insisting she can't achieve higher than her flight path then the school are being ridiculous and you should take it up with them.

Having stupidly high targets from SATS such that you are constantly working "below expectations" despite getting nearly full marks in every piece of work isn't that great either.

Most sensible parents ignore targets.

My dc has been told every year she is under achieving and her target grades are written on the front of her books all due to a good day when she did her sats. It's soul destroying for her.

I would have much preferred her either not to have known or not to have done SATs than see target grade 9 on everything which is a very unlikely grade for her.

It's really not necessarily a bad thing.

Yes, I thought that not having ridiculously high targets to 'not meet' would be a plus more than anything.

But it turns out that having ridiculously low targets, the lowest in your class, that you far exceed and no-one adjusts is also damaging to a child's self-esteem.

Her flight path is an issue because, having achieved 6+ in the autumn/spring term of Y9, she performed poorly in the summer term assessments. This was due to her refusing to go to school due to bullying and not being in a good place mentally.

She has been moved down sets, which has further damaged her self-esteem and I suspect this is because the disparity between what she is predicted/targetted and what she got didn't show up on spreadsheets, so the school are quite happy for her to under-perform as she'll meet the 'not much progress' targets that they've set.

I've been very patient with the school, not least because of the effects of the pandemic, but I do need to know now whether they're happy to let her under-achieve or whether she will be supported to reach her academic potential.

Asking them explicitly for what she is predicted to get for GCSE seems the best way to bring this issue into the light (despite my many attempts to do so in Y7 and Y8).

My question was - are the school obliged to give me her targets/predictions for GCSE?

but I do need to know now whether they're happy to let her under-achieve or whether she will be supported to reach her academic potential.

If you think the lack of support from the school means your daughter is underachieving, then you need to have that conversation with them.
Knowing targets (which are statistically generated numbers based on some algorithm) is not going to help you. Pointing out that she was achieving 6+ and underperformed in assessments due to understandable reasons is a much better argument. Schools don't normally set on targets (certainly not by Year 10). If she's really working at the level of her current set then that's the correct place for her. If her work is at the top end of the set, then she'll get moved up. It's only an actual issue if she's being limited by what she can achieve by the set she's in.

Btw, I'm not defending GCSE targets being based on SATs results at all, especially if the children are informed of this.

My point is that ridiculously low targets which have no bearing on her academic potential are equally unhelpful, and mean that the school has no 'Progress 8' incentive to support her to do well.

All artificially generated targets are unhelpful.

The best thing you can do is to tell your child they are computer generated for school statistics, and they should focus on working to the best of their abilities.

My experience is that schools don't have massive amounts of resources to spend on intervention work with children who are underachieving (even based on targets) and what resources they do have are primarily focussed on DC who are 3/4 borderline, particularly in English and maths. Then, they will take a view on what type of children get the rest of the resources. If your DC needs help in history and they've decided to prioritise geography, then it's just tough.

@UserAtLargeAgain

but I do need to know now whether they're happy to let her under-achieve or whether she will be supported to reach her academic potential.

If you think the lack of support from the school means your daughter is underachieving, then you need to have that conversation with them.
Knowing targets (which are statistically generated numbers based on some algorithm) is not going to help you. Pointing out that she was achieving 6+ and underperformed in assessments due to understandable reasons is a much better argument. Schools don't normally set on targets (certainly not by Year 10). If she's really working at the level of her current set then that's the correct place for her. If her work is at the top end of the set, then she'll get moved up. It's only an actual issue if she's being limited by what she can achieve by the set she's in.

Yes, I'm having that conversation with the school and trying to work out how to get the information that I need most efficiently, when there's an on-going bullying situation also happening.

I did point out why she'd under-performed to the HoY yesterday. It was him that brought up the 'missing data' issue which made me think that she's still being expected to under-achieve as her lower marks don't show up as 'not meeting expectations' or whatever.

My primary concern is dd's mental health. She already feels persecuted by the bullying and being the only child in her year group affected by having targets which have nothing to do with her.

Having been 'moved down' and away from all her friends has been another kick in the teeth for her self-esteem.

Esp if the reasons she has been moved down is the consequence of being bullied and expected to under-achieve by the school, neither of which are her fault.

Again - is the school actually obliged to share the data they have on dd's progress/targets?

And again - what will you do with the information if they give it to you?

If they, for example, tell you that DD's target in English is a 9, then they won't suddenly decide to move her to Set 1. They will tell you she is in the set that's appropriate for the level she is working at.

My DS did well in English SATs and was targeted at 7 at GCSE. He got a 4. The "extra support" provided by the school amounted to 3 25 minute fortnightly sessions in a group of 8. Working below target is not a magic bullet for something to happen. You would be better to have a more general discussion about how to support your daughter rather then becoming over focussed on a "target".

Requesting pupil data - legal guidelines

ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/schools/pupils-info/

Dd didn't have any interventions even though she was 'showing' as well below target. (5s in maths and science although target showing as 9 and 8+) I think she had lost all confidence and hope but we have been working with her at home and using Seneca and past papers to improve the grades which has helped.

It seems strange that she has no current grades or anything like that (unless I have read this wrong) DD started getting predicted grades in year 10 but before that she did have grades showing where she was. How does her reports show her progress?

Thanks for the info about requesting pupil data UserAtLargeAgain.

In regard to your question, I would be highly relieved if dd is targeted/predicted to get good GCSE results. Based on her 10 years at school, that would be about right.

She achieved 6+s in the spring, so I would hope that they were expecting her to make some progress over the next two years.

It would also be a much needed confidence boost for her.

She's not 'below target' that's the point. The last targets I saw were way below what she was actually achieving.

Today her grades in the summer term were much lower than previously due to circumstances explained above.

and mean that the school has no 'Progress 8' incentive to support her to do well.

She won’t be included in the school progress 8 calculation as she doesn’t have any SATs data.

She will still appear in headline figures like % passes or % 7+

You need to be clear whether you want predicted grades (what her teachers think she will get, which may not have been decided yet) or target grades - the flight path ones. Did you ever ask for her target grades to be amended to something higher?

Thanks noblegiraffe. I have asked many, many times.

The issue of her target grades being so low became apparent during Y7 parent evening when I had to explain to every single teacher why dd's target grades were so low and out of synch with her performance.

I spoke with the HoY and ask that they be amended and only realised that this hadn't happened when I started to have the same conversation with every single teacher in Y8.

I tried to get to the bottom of it and was told by the data person that if they didn't have SATs they could use either the teacher assessment from her primary or her assessed Y7 reading age.

As long as it was relevant to her, either would have been fine.

It when the Y10 HoY mentioned 'missing data' that I realised that this may not have happened.

Tbh, I don't care whether they give me targeted or predicted grades. I asked for target grades, but mainly I just want to understand why a child who has always done very well academically has been put in low sets based on her summer assessments which were poorer than usual because she had been refusing to go to school due to bullying and was highly distressed when she was there.

It feels like she's being penalised for having been bullied.

Schools generally set based on current attainment rather than target grade or perceived ability as this is concrete data, if you see what I mean. A teacher could ask to keep a child in a particular group if they knew that they had had a bad day but if a child has missed a lot of school then it would be more difficult to argue. There has been lots of movement in my school because some kids need more support after doing no work in lockdown, for example.

It would probably be a more productive approach if you said ‘we know DD underperformed in the summer due to the bullying and missing school but hope she is now back on track. What do you need to see to move her back to her previous groups as quickly as possible and how can we support her in this so that she achieves her potential in Y11?’

I just want to understand why a child who has always done very well academically has been put in low sets based on her summer assessments which were poorer than usual because she had been refusing to go to school due to bullying and was highly distressed when she was there.

This is what you need to ask the school. I think focusing on the Flight Path isn't the magic wand you are looking for here, and that the 'missing data' is probably just the SATs results. You could ask if she would move sets again if her next set of assessments improve. As a PP said, the sets at this stage are not solely based on flight path or predicted grades IME, I have a DD in Yr10 too.

She didn't miss a lot of school, just a few days. It was shocking to see a child like her refusing to go to school though and it was incredibly hard work getting her in the rest of the time, but I persevered.

I'm not sure about the approach you suggest tbh. Her under performance in the summer assessments was due to poorly managed bullying. She's more than aware of how badly the school have managed this. Putting the onus on her to 'work hard and prove herself' seems to be confirming the 'put up and shut up' approach that the school have taken to the bullying (they're initial advice was that she needed to 'ride it through').

She's done nothing wrong, other than been negatively affected by being bullied. Her having to 'prove herself' again seems to be more victimisation.

I appreciate that the school will have no truck with this line and it does look like I'll be moving her once the in-year transfer I've applied for comes through.

@ChicChaos

I just want to understand why a child who has always done very well academically has been put in low sets based on her summer assessments which were poorer than usual because she had been refusing to go to school due to bullying and was highly distressed when she was there.

This is what you need to ask the school. I think focusing on the Flight Path isn't the magic wand you are looking for here, and that the 'missing data' is probably just the SATs results. You could ask if she would move sets again if her next set of assessments improve. As a PP said, the sets at this stage are not solely based on flight path or predicted grades IME, I have a DD in Yr10 too.

This is indeed what I asked the HoY on the phone and received the usual 'leave it with me' line.

My request for concrete data was attempting to bring this matter to a head ie to get some actual tangible actions from another angle.

I don't think I'm okay with asking her to 'work hard and prove herself' in the next lot of assessments. She's lost a lot of confidence, and it's falling by the day. Also, she's done nothing wrong, other than been negatively affected by bullying. Asking her to 'prove herself' again because of the school's inability to join the dots between her poor summer performance and the bullying seems like victim-blaming to me.

If she had been moved down because she hadn't done any work/hadn't revised/wasn't capable, it would be very much a 'it's up to you to pull your finger out/try your best' from me.

But that wasn't the case. It was due to the negative effects of bullying that the school's own anti-bullying policy lists.

I understand that your DD has a terrible time and it sounds like you have completely lost any faith in the school to do the right thing, which is affecting your approach.

As a teacher, who has no idea what your DD has been though, I would say that set changes are not rewards or punishments, they are attempts to get children in classes learning at an appropriate level for them, with that level being decided by performance in tests.

If your DD underperformed because on the day of the test she was struggling to cope with the bullying but up till then had been working well, then that is a different issue than if she had been underperforming all year due to the bullying and the test performance was an accurate reflection of her understanding of the subject at the end of the year. If it’s the first, you could argue that she should have special consideration, if it’s the second, she might need to be in the lower sets to catch up on what she missed.

Either way, it does sound like a move of schools might be best and I hope it comes through quickly.

noblegiraffe it was the former.

She went from 6+ in the autumn and spring term to 3+ in the summer term in English, for example.

Yes, I have lost faith in the school. I now feel foolish for counselling dd to give Y10 a go rather than moving her over the summer. She was worried that she'd get moved down because of her summer assessments, and I was stupidly reassuring her that I'm sure that the school would take the bullying into account.

Assessments have been all over the place due to covid/lockdowns. The person doing the setting for each subject may not even be aware of the extent of the bullying.

Hopefully when it is pointed out they’ll say ‘yep sorry, our balls-up’

That would be a very welcome relief noblegiraffe. Honestly, my preference would be for her not to move schools at the beginning of Y10, but I can't have her in a school that isn't able to respond appropriately to bullying nor respond appropriately to the effects of the bullying.

Reinstating her sets would seem the obvious course of action to me, but IMVHE, schools generally don't like parents suggesting what they should do.

The ONLY tangible thing that has happened in regard to the bullying is my dd being moved down sets. There has been talk of the other girl being moved tutor groups etc, but nothing has actually happened.