Nice people thread part 3- Nice as pie

vivatifosi

Davesnave wrote: »

It means he's better than many of us.

I suspect we knew that bit all along;). Honestly though, I have no idea what any of these new-fangled grades mean. Excuse me while I get back to working out my finances on the abacus.

SingleSue

It took me ages to suss out how it all works, have only just a sort of understanding of it despite having to endure it since the boys were small.

This link may help to understand better...it certainly helped me! http://www.satsguide.co.uk/what_are_sats.htm

vivatifosi

SingleSue wrote: »

http://www.satsguide.co.uk/what_are_sats.htm

Wow! Now I've read that I'm even more impressed with your son's achievements!

silvercar

SingleSue wrote: »

Proud mummy time again....middle son did an assessment in maths yesterday and got an 8C! So from October ish time, he has improved by one whole level, from a 7C to an 8C.

He is also in the 7's for music and science and high 6's for history and art.

I didn't know the numbers went that high.


Testing (when it was done) at the end of infants = year 2 = age 7, the target is to reach level 2.

I know that by the end of year 6 = primary school = aged 11, the government target is for everyone to reach level 4 in english, maths and science. So the clever kids at that age reach level 5 and if I remember you had to sit an extension paper to get a level 6 (though I think they phased that out).

You're then meant to go up a whole grade roughly every two years. So the next testing stage was SATS at the end of year 9 (age 14, 3rd year of secondary school) you should be nearly at level 6. Allowing for the levelling that occurs when you start secondary (polite word for "they don't learn that much when they are changing schools & being pubescent") the view is often that level 5 in main subjects is decent enough.

After that they do GCSEs and I thought these levels went out the window.

A, B & C are just dividers on the grade. So 4A is better than 4B that is better than 4C but they are all level 4s.

SingleSue

It only goes into the 8's in maths, for the rest, 7A is the highest.
Middle son is in year 9, so these are still in place for him....next school year, they will measure it in predicted GCSE grades.

Davesnave

silvercar wrote: »

I know that by the end of year 6 = primary school = aged 11, the government target is for everyone to reach level 4 in english, maths and science. So the clever kids at that age reach level 5 and if I remember you had to sit an extension paper to get a level 6 (though I think they phased that out).

Extension papers were a nightmare for those teachers who thought the universe ended at level 5. That was most of us!

I had a few kids who did extensions, but often there would be an imbalance, so I'd be more interested in improving their score in weaker areas. I think you're right that they were phased out.

SingleSue

Handily, I have his figures for his year 6 SATS (thanks to a link up with his school which has them all of the same page as his current grades).

Maths was a 4a
English was a 4b
Science was a 5c

At that point, he had only just returned to formal schooling after being out of it and labelled unteachable for over 2 years. He had been finding it difficult however, as he had been allowed to go at his own speed at the unit and found himself restricted in the more formal setting and 'dumbed down' to everyone elses level which caused immense frustration for him....mind you, he must have got something right, he was awarded student of the year!

Maths he had always been quiet on, science seemed his forte but in the last 12 months, he has really moved forward at a very fast rate of knots.

silvercar

All this testing.:(

The analogy is to fattening pigs for market. You can weigh them every day, but unless you feed them up in the mean time it won't make much difference. If you concentrated on the food and less on the weighing apparatus you would get better results.

Editted to add, that is not a dig at Sue's kid, who is clearly doing very well, but at the system in general.

Davesnave

silvercar wrote: »

All this testing.:(

The analogy is to fattening pigs for market. You can weigh them every day, but unless you feed them up in the mean time it won't make much difference. If you concentrated on the food and less on the weighing apparatus you would get better results.

Editted to add, that is not a dig at Sue's kid, who is clearly doing very well, but at the system in general.

Funnily enough, "You don't fatten pigs by weighing them" was a favourite saying of the Head I enjoyed working for, until illness forced his replacement with someone less resistant to pressure from outside influences.

His other favourite was, "You can't make an omlette without cracking a few eggs." This was a reference to the fact that whatever changes a school initiates, it won't make all the parents happy. He was a guy who took bold decisions and then accepted the flak.

My favourite moment of his reign was when he caught a pupil doing something very antisocial during a fancy dress disco we'd put on. He summoned the parents by phone, gave their kid a thorough dressing down in their presence and then sent them all home. Nothing very remarkable about that you might think, unless I add that, all that time, he remained dressed as a nun! :rotfl:

michaels

Except that in Wales where they dropped the SATS soonest educational standards have fallen compared to England which does not just seem to be a coincidence.

silvercar wrote: »

All this testing.:(

The analogy is to fattening pigs for market. You can weigh them every day, but unless you feed them up in the mean time it won't make much difference. If you concentrated on the food and less on the weighing apparatus you would get better results.

Editted to add, that is not a dig at Sue's kid, who is clearly doing very well, but at the system in general.