These are the “reference set” that explains what the bilan is measuring:
Intermediate reports (bilans intermédiaires)
Cycle 2: MENJE page + download
Cycle 3: MENJE page + download
Levels of competence (Cycles 1–4) (what each “level” looks like)
MENJE page + downloads
Plan d’études (École fondamentale) (the competence “targets” by cycle)
MENJE page + download
Formative assessment means assessment to support learning during the cycle (not just to “judge” a child). In practice, it is based on repeated observations and tasks over time.
Intermediate report (bilan intermédiaire) is the termly progress report used in Cycles 2–4. It summarises where the pupil stands at that moment, across development and learning domains.
End-of-cycle report (bilan de fin de cycle) is the certificative step at the end of the cycle: it confirms whether the pupil has reached the socles de compétences (the “skill bases” required to move forward). “Socles” simply means the required minimum bases defined in the Plan d’études.
Dossier d’évaluation (evaluation file) is the set of evidence collected over time (work samples, observation grids, assessment notes, etc.). It exists so the school’s judgement is documented, not impression-based.
A level is a position on a competence progression (not a “grade average”). To understand a level, you should always link it to:
the Plan d’études (what is expected in that cycle), and
the Levels of competence document (what each level looks like in plain descriptors).
A lower level often means “not yet stable across different situations” (for example, your child can do it with support, but not independently and consistently).
When you look at any domain/competence on the report, read it like this:
Claim: “The pupil is at level X for competence Y.”
Reference: “Which descriptor in the competence grid corresponds to level X?” (official grid)
Evidence: “Which work samples or observations in the dossier show this?” (documented evidence)
Next step: “What is the concrete learning step to move toward the next descriptor?”
This keeps the discussion factual and aligned with the system.
Use these keywords, and define them immediately (this makes your request harder to dismiss):
Descriptors (the official “what it looks like” statements for each level):
“Which descriptor(s) were used to assign this level?”
Evidence (examples from classwork/observations that support the judgement):
“Could you share 2–3 concrete examples that support this level?”
Action plan (what the school will do next; timeline to review):
“What teaching adjustments or support will be implemented, and when will we review progress?”
Tip: ask for examples without asking to compare your child to other children (privacy barrier).
This section is not law; it is “how it often plays out”:
Many schools do not automatically show evidence unless you ask. When you ask calmly for “2–3 examples”, discussions usually become more constructive.
Teachers often record a level only when the competence is consistent across contexts (not just once in a test). So “my child did it once” may not translate into a higher level yet.
Meetings can be short. The highest-impact approach is: one domain at a time, “descriptor → evidence → next step”.
Law of 6 February 2009 on organisation of fundamental education (consolidated text):
Legilux link
Grand-ducal regulation of 6 July 2009 (modalities of pupil assessment + content of the evaluation file):
Legilux link
Grand-ducal regulation of 11 August 2011 (Plan d’études for the 4 cycles):
Legilux link