2 sublevels per child per year gives a target of 8 sublevels across the keystage! 

If you look at the latest 'Improving Schools Programme' handbook, it shows an expectation of 6 sublevels progress from KS1 to 2, and indicates expected progress in  Y3 of 1 sublevel. 

If you can show that your children are making progress (in your assessment, not a test, a snapshot on a given day), and can identify what you are doing to help those who are not, it will not be your Y3 test results which result in 'a fail from Ofsted'. They want to see that schools are aware of what they have in terms of children and potential, and what they are doing in terms of addressing their own issues.No two schools are the same and it is more than just test results which determine the overall grading. 

You are more than aware of what your children can do. Have the confidence not to be browbeaten. 

 If you achieve 6 sublevels progress from KS1 to KS2 then you will have made the expected progress, but what people are looking at is the "value added" score, so if your school wants to have a good value added score then you need to make more than expected progress, hence the 2 sub levels target. You also need to keep an eye on kids who have only made 1 sub level progress in the long term, as if they do this every year then that is only 4 sub levels altogether. 

There is also a big difference between the KS1 tests and the Y3 tests, as in Y2 the children have as long as it takes to complete the tasks whereas in Y3 they are timed for the first time.  In addition, if the children have moved schools to start junior school that also has an effect on their progress. 

My school has a good set-up where children who have not made the expected amount of progress are identified and details are passed up to the next teacher so that they can focus on those children in particular right from the start. It has really helped me this year, and those children who had plataeued in Y3 have now in some cases made 3 sublevels progress this year.  Children's progress is not linear and should not be expected to be.

Very interesting Smithy.

My first 2 schools were juniors and I always assumed this was a problem particular to junior schools.

I am now working in a primary school and guess what?  It still happens!

The only problem being, because we are one school, it is very much frowned upon to do baseline assessment at the beginning of year 3.

Totally agree with smithy - your head/SMT are plonkers. 

The whole notion that children make smooth, linear progress through sub levels is complete and utter nonsense. So expecting a child to make a specific number of sub levels progress a year (whether it be 1, 1.5 or 2) tells me a lot about the complete ignorance that your head has about children's learning.

It also angers me when heads, in the quest to be "above average", demand 2 sub levels progress a year. Levelling isn't about averages, it's about expectations. We "expect" our students to be at level 2 at the end of year 2 and we "expect" them to be at level 4 by the end of Year 6. Of course, it would be nice if they did more, and high expectations are important, but to "expect" it for all?

Twisting this like your head has done again displays his/her complete ignorance of teaching and learning.

Of course, you can twist the system too, and get your head off your back by up-levelling your teacher assessments. If Heads want to play the numbers game instead of the learning game, that's what teachers will resort to. Doesn't help the children, but your head's focus seems to be more on spreadsheets and Ofsted than them.

It was only a matter of time....used to be 2 levels a key stage was good enough, then they broke it down into sublevels, then they demanded 1.5 a year, but so did every other school so that wasn't good enough, then it was 2, but then every school demanded that too, so now that's not good enough and 2.5 sublevels doesn't fit into a spreadsheet, so soon every pratt who managed to get a headship will be demanding 3 sublevels.

How long will this nonsense go on for?

Sorry, but all the teachers in your school need to say no to your Head. And then say no again. Not just for your benefit, but also for the benefit of the children in your school and for the profession as a whole. Threaten resignations en masse if you have to. Stand up to this pratt who told you to do this.