If your school awards grades 1-9 in ks3 is it a good indicator of what a dc will achieve in year 11?

[moond]

Some schools give grades 1-9 in ks3 and I'm wondering if the grades dc get during years 7/8/9 are a good indicator of what they will achieve in real GCSE's in year 11? I guess the reason why I'm asking is because the curriculum is of course much different and easier in KS3 than KS4 so getting an 8 or 9 in year 7/8/9 doesn't necessarily mean they will actually achieve that in year 11 or am I wrong?
Is it common for students to drop grades when they actually start year 10/11 (compared to ks3)?

It totally depends on the school. You need to read the rubric.

Some will say that they are currently working at, say, GCSE 5 in Year 8, so can expect an 8 or 9. Other schools will just grade current work in an age-dependent way.

Either way, the best it is is a vague guide, often mainly based on SATS and CATs, especially in Year 7.

Pupils can both drop and gain grades depending on a whole host of factors.

TLDR: Take it with a massive grain of salt!

Ours did a daft system with three phrases basically meaning 'below expectations,' 'at expectations' and 'above expectations' for the year group. Except at a 'how to read your child's report' meeting it became clear that a lot of parents did not realise what the phrases meant and once the school switched to number grades in Year 10 I'm sure a lot of them got a shock. And a 'below expectations' blanket phrase tells you nothing of just how badly your child is doing. Are they just behind and likely to catch up soon or are they still working at a 6 year old level?

My child was told in a vague way 'you're on target to achieve grade 4s' in Year 7 and all the way to the end of Year 9 teachers were still saying that. I was quite aware of his difficulties and knew it would be pretty much a miracle if he got 4s in multiple subjects. Fast forward to nearing the end of Year 11 and his predicted grades are mostly 2s which is more realistic. I'm not sure how I could see that when he entered Year 7 (having failed SATs which the secondary would have been informed) but the teachers that worked with him every day didn't see how poor he was for 4+ years?

It varies. Ex-teacher here.

One school literally just gave 9s for 90%, 8s for 80% down to 1s for less than 19% until we covered enough content for GCSE grade boundaries to be used.

Another school gives them based on expected progress: the average pupil working at this level, eg in Year 9, achieves this grade at GCSE. This is easier in the bigger subjects eg English with years of data.

Best to talk to someone like Head of Year or head of a key subject (e.g Maths) you are concerned about to explain how their school works.

Personal experience only here - our school gave predicted grades from year nine. They seem to be ballpark right, as in my daughters mocks she either got as predicted or a grade above.

But they can only ever a be a guide - if your kid does a shed ton of work or has a late breakthrough in understanding they can exceed them. If they just really struggle (whether academically or with timekeeping or other issues with exam conditions) or dont revise they could drop a bit.

Equally if the bits they haven’t revised well come up in their paper they may not do as well as expected. If all their favourite units come up, they’ll do better.

I also agree with others, ask the school in detail about the grading system it uses @moond

I will say this tho – as a teacher it was clear what kind of grade a student was likely to get in my subject (MFL) in KS3. Yes, we hadn’t studied the topics but the linear nature of language learning means it is possible to assess possible GCSE grades in year 8.

I don’t think it’s especially helpful to say a specific grade, a 7 or 5 or whatever tho. I would err on the side of caution. But I think I could say in KS3 who might get (if they continued working as they were) a grade 7+ and whose best effort was likely to be a 4/5, and who was likely to gain < grade 4. It’s not set in stone of course – anyone can suddenly (or even gradually) start working harder or less hard. But it is a reasonable guide.

Same for English, maths, science, and to some extent subjects like PE, music, art, drama - where the evidence of years of learning, or alternatively keenness and commitment, are there in KS3; perhaps less so for hums subjects like history and geography that are so topic-based. But even there, skills or lack of will be evident.

I thought it was funny that my son’s school gave a range for each subject, I think it was 1-3, 4-6 or 7-9. They put my son as all 7-9, including art which he is awful at! They’d based it on SATS and CATS results but doing well in those does not measure your artistic talent! Needless to say my son will be dropping art as soon as he can.

Ours get adjusted each term but dd (in year 11 so should be more acetate) went from a 9 for English lit in July to a 4 in November! 🤷🏻‍♀️ It’s a new teacher but getting any kind of understanding where the difference came from has been impossible, just “tips” for revision. I’ve decided to just go with what will be will be and hope her hard work pays off.

A range makes sense tho. I agree the art thing can be a long way out as it is not really based on academic ability; but for most subjects in general many DC have a fairly even profile. DD ranged from 6-9, as did DS2, and Ds1 ranged from 3-5.

Our school seems to vary subject to subject to subject now we're in KS4, some subjects only test on topics they've covered, others make the kids sit full GCSEs so their results go up as they cover more topics. In KS3 it was all based on pathways and if they were exceeding expectations, on track or below expectations.