1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Year 3 Reading Optional SAT

Discussion in 'Primary' started by redredrobin, May 22, 2008.

  1. I've always thought it was easy to get level 4 in Y3 test. However, a couple of years ago I looked at national results and found our children came out above average (unlike their writing unfortunately!) I'll see if I can find the link.
     
  2. I agree! 5 of my children achieved level 4s! I know they are good readers but feel quite uncomfortable sending them to Y4 with a level 4. I wouldn't say they are all round level 4s. I haven't done the year 3 optional sat before so wasn't sure. Have I been too 'kind' with the marking? I'd like to think not. I try to be more on the harsh side. I don't know. I have given my Head the levels but made a cler note that my teacher assessment would give them a level 3.
     
  3. Thanks for that link we are obviously above national average too but again just for reading. The mark scheme does seem quite lenient with lots of variations that the children can put and still get marks. The 2003 test seemed a lot harder.
     
  4. I think if they get Level 4 in the reading then they are a Level 4. They are either right or wrong. There are not many questions that are open to interpretation on that paper. The first paper is very easy and 2 of my children didnt drop a mark. I think it is quite a easy paper. The writing on the other hand i dislike totally!!! Well done for all the Level 4's.
     
  5. In our class 5 out of 30 dropped only one mark! I know we are a high achieving school, and this is a strong cohort, but I went back and checked them and am sure I followed the guidelines.
    What is interesting is the gap in levels between reading and writing - for gap read chasm! I only hope that with reading securely established writing will follow suite.
    Well done!
     
  6. Had something similar with my class - don't think you can be to lenient if you follow the mark scheme. The 2003 test gave me a similar levels so not sure if it is any easier.

    However the writing is a killer - Persuasive letter writing! Persuasion is a taught writing at year 5... and they have no experience of organisiing a treasure hunt.

    ANd playground games - If I see another description of tig I will go mad... WHo do you play this game with? James and Steve. Arhhhhh
     
  7. I did the 2006 test (it's the first time we'd used it, we've used the 2003 test until this year) and found that the children came out scoring very high, was interested to see how they would compare on the 2003 test and got them to do this too, nearly all the children scored at least 2/3 level lower on this one (but their levels where much more in line with the levels from the book band they read from).
     
  8. I've just tested using the 2006 optional year 3 sat paper and apparently I have 7 children at a level 4 and 13 somewhere in the 3's. The previous year 3 teachers mentioned beforehand that this test was easier than others and their results were very high for it as well. The children didnt score 4's in the year 4 sat paper when tested. It'd be nice to think i've done a miraculous job but.. I probably haven't. My maths and writing scores were dismal :eek:(
     
  9. The children in my class also achieved highly on this test, and I have to agree with the posters who have said that it is too easy. I also agree that, despite getting a Level 4 on this test, the children are not Level 4 overall and would probably struggle to achieve a Level 4 on the Year 4 paper. I compared their results to the 2003 test and the 2006 results were significantly higher even though they did the tests two weeks apart. We have to put the test score on the children's trackers, but we also include the teacher assessment, which is given more weighting.
     
  10. My cohort also scored highly on the reading, i compared to last yrs cohort and found similar results.

    What I don't agree with is that we are told that we have to do these optional sats to gain a level for each child, then when we find the outcome is either to high (like the reading) or too low (the writing) then we don't trust the tests and come up with our own teacher assessment which we believe is more accurate.
    My question is why do we go through the stress of gettting children to sit these assessmnets and then a week of marking them just to ignore the outcome if it suits, wouldn't we be better just doing a teacher assessment in the first place??
    Rant over. lol.
     
  11. You're exactly right. We adjust levels that are inaccurate so we may as well have skipped the tests altogether. Just as well I adjusted the Y3 reading results last year though as I'm now teaching the same children again!
     
  12. I agree Jazzy28!! I also agree that it's too easy to get a high level and doesn't reflect their true ability!
    Vx
     
  13. redx11

    redx11 New commenter

    My class have also achieved good results 9 L4s and at least 6 3As. I also taught most of this class in Y2 and I knew at least 15 were L3 (readers) but only dare give 3 children L3 because of the must be L3B fiasco. I think the test proved I was right last year!

    Writing still to mark - that will be alot lower I'm sure.
     
  14. hootenanny

    hootenanny New commenter

    Do KS2 teachers lack confidence in assessing children without these optional SATs or is it pressure from SMT which dictates that they use them as the only judgement about a child's level? I have had Y2 children who were able to achieve level 4 in KS2 optional SATs. These children were not level 4 at all. It all seems crazy to me, as a kS1 teacher.
     
  15. Reassuring thread so far - I've only used the 2003 test so far (will do the 2006 one after half term) and they didn't do too well at all. I have a lot of only-just-level-2-on-a-good-day children, and they found the 2003 one hard to access. Hopefully they will appear to have made good progress when I do the 2006 one!
    Re the question, "Do KS2 teachers lack confidence in assessing children without these optional SATs or is it pressure from SMT which dictates that they use them as the only judgement about a child's level?" - the latter is probably the main reason (and lack of trust in teachers), though I do think it can be useful to find out exactly what they can do totally independently, using the same questions for the whole class.
     

Share This Page