Highest grade possible

Tolstoy · Post by **Tolstoy** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:43 pm

Suprised to get that level of ignorance within the profession, Yoyo, but frequently had to curb myself when receiving layman comments along the lines of

' Well so and so is a secondary teacher so has more qualifications ....'

grrrh

yoyo123 · Post by **yoyo123** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 6:03 pm

and being congratulated on a promotion when going from y3 to y6!

Tracy · Post by **Tracy** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:31 pm

When the ks3 children used to do their sats I'm sure the papers were split into levels 3-5,4-6,5-7,5-8. Can't remember if this eng, maths or science though. If 4-6 or 5-7 papers exist why not give them to the few yr6 kids that might be able to achieve a 6?

Looking for help · Post by **Looking for help** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:45 pm

I think because if some children were going to sit these tests than valuable teaching time would have to be spent preparing for level 6.
My son (going back a few years now) did get the opportnity to sit level 6 science - but along with evryone else sitting, failed miserably - simply becuase they had not been taught.
There is far more point spending the valuable time stretching the breadth of knowledge at this stage, in my opinion, as earlier posters have mentioned, and there is plenty of time in the future to heap pressure on the children.
LFH

Guest55 · Post by **Guest55** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:51 pm

Tracy - the KS3 tests are based on the KS3 curriculum and the written style is different as they are aimed at 14 year olds. It would not be sensible to give them to 11 year olds.

Tracy · Post by **Tracy** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:27 am

guest55, I understand what you are saying but there has to be the odd one or two in the class who are capable of achieving a low/mid 6 and understanding a paper written for a 14 year old. If the papers are available surely it wouldn't hurt to give these few exceptional kids a challange?

I know in English that my elder daughter was capable of achieving this and that at 13 (yr8 grammar) she is a high 7 and more than capable of getting a good grade at GSCE . Her understanding of Shakespeare leaves me lost for words and her Latin grades are incredible too.

Back at primary, on the other end of the spectrum there are kids who can't get a level 3, yet they are given extra help. I think both ends of the spectrum have special needs but in a different way. Surely we should be allowing kids to work at the level they are able?

KM · Post by KM » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:10 am

I totally agree with you Tracy. My dd (now Y7 at GS) got 100% in her mock English SAT so was clearly capable of doing more than was requred of her. As I said previously, her school let some of the students do Y7 QCA tests and she got Level 6 for Maths and English in those. They had covered more than the primary curriculum as they had a secondary school Maths teacher( from a partnership school, as someone else has mentioned) come in and teach a G&T maths set of 10 children in both Y5 and Y6.

Tracy · Post by **Tracy** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:30 pm

Although my daugher excels in English, her maths and science were just good level 5s. I don't mean this to sound that we were not content with those grades - with dd2 I'd be grateful if she just paid attention and managed any 5s! - merely that my daughter has a talent for English that was being stifled. Those excelling in Maths would surely say the same.

But the message that I get loud and clear from our primary is that the 'average' is level 4 and there seems a push to get as many to level 5 as poss purely for stats.

Personally, I believe that all kids should be given equal chances to reach their potential and and no reasonable parent would want one group of kids to move on at the expense of others but that does seem to happen at our school. Can you imagine the uproar if the struggling kids were not helped in favour of the brighter ones? It seems to me, at our school at least, that it's acceptable for the reverse to happen - kids are being penalised for being bright and are bored stiff.

katel · Post by **katel** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:22 pm

but in what way does more testing enable a child to reach their full potential? You don't fatten a pig by weighing it!

katel · Post by **katel** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:31 pm

<katel whispers very quietly> I do sometimes wonder if the desire for year 6 children to do level 6 papers is more about parents wanting to preen themselves a little bit about their clever children. I am completely opposed to testing reading ages but I have really had to stop myself dropping into the conversation that my 8 year old ds has a reading age of 12.6. It's only human - but maybe we ought to stop kidding ourselves that it's for the benefit of our children........