15 replies to this topic

[buttonmoon]

Hi Guys,

Having had our school improvement advisor visit us this morning our head dragged me and the nursery nurse into her office to discuss the 2005 profile results.

Most were fine and in line with the lea average except PSED which had jumped from 16% working at the ELG to 90%. (my results) and CLL - writing which had jumped from 40% working at the ELG to 90%.

How can only 16% of a class achieve the ELG? Isn't this quite low?

Anyway... I am now being questioned why our results this year are so different and do i realise the pressure i've put on KS1 to achieve excellent SATs results. The boss now wants to see evidence of why these results are so high. I did have a high ability class with no special needs. I feel dreadful and that i have scored my children wrong in some way.

I filled out the profile (as an nqt) with no help, advice or aid from a co-ordinator. The head checked the results and okayed them.

Please help. I'm seriously questioning myself.

x

[ASPK]

What do you mean by "working at the ELG"? What profile score? 4 to 8 are the ELGs and 9 is working beyond the ELGs

[buttonmoon]

All she said was that 90% were achieving the ELG so i assumed 90% were getting 4-7, which if memory serves sounds about right.

No actual scores were mentioned.

It was almost implied that too many were achieving...

[gill]

Went on a course for early years co-ordinators last week and the profile scores were clarified because there seems to be so much variation in how FS settings are scoring their children . Was told that a lot of moderation is needed on judgements that lead to the final score. It is best to realistic and not over generous. Points are only given if children are sound and consistently showing evidence of achieving a profile statement. These are the guidelines we were given

9 is exceptional achievement
8 is completion of ELG
4-7 is working within ELG
6 is a good level of achievement
1-3 working towards ELG

Recently I had to analyse scores that compared our last years results to those of the County averages and they actually showed that we were below county averages in ALL SIX areas of learning but only because we had only a few children scoring 9. When I explained this to Early Years Adviser she said taht 9 is exceptional achievement and that until moderation is carried out across the county the data is probably very misleading and not to be relied on!!!!

[Susan]

hi Buttonmoon, dont beat yourself up about this too much. You should have had some sort of moderation within your LEA and as you say you did show the results to your head! I'm actually surprised that the LEA results were so low re PSE. Writing is more difficult but if as you say your class were high achievers then this may be right!
However, for future reference keep your own copy of scores such as these, you never know when you will need them!

[buttonmoon]

gill, on Nov 10 2005, 18:35, said:

Went on a course for early years co-ordinators last week and the profile scores were clarified because there seems to be so much variation in how FS settings are scoring their children .  Was told that a lot of moderation is needed on judgements that lead to the final score.  It is best to realistic and not over generous.  Points are only given if children are sound and consistently showing evidence of achieving a profile statement.  These are the guidelines we were given

9  is exceptional achievement
8 is completion of ELG
4-7 is working within ELG
6 is a good level of achievement
1-3 working towards ELG

Recently I had to analyse scores that compared our last years results to those of the County averages and they actually showed that we were below county averages in ALL SIX areas of learning but only because we had only a few children scoring 9.  When I explained this to Early Years Adviser she said taht 9 is exceptional achievement and that until moderation is carried out across the county the data is probably very misleading and not to be relied on!!!!

Most of my children were getting within 4-7, high ability getting 7's, i had already been told not to be too generous, so i wasn't. Looking at the cohort as achieved and not achieved seems unfair, surely it's a good thing 90% were working within the ELG. Going to need to do some more investigating tomorrow to see exactly what i'm supposed to have done wrong!

[buttonmoon]

Some of my first post is misleading...
16% and 40% was what the previous class got not the LEA, sorry!

We have been doing Ruth Miskin Literacy in school and mine was the first class to begin it in nursery, out of 20, 4 children came to me being able to write sentences. The others made really good progress. AHHhhh! Keep questioning myself!

[Susan]

Buttonmoon, dont!!!

Go to school tomorrow as you have already said you will and ask for greater clarification!

Sounds like a good recommendation for Ruth Miskin's Literacy to me! :D

[buttonmoon]

The kids love the rml, they sit there for ages singing maisie, mountain, mountain... (the story to write m)

[Steve]

Hi Buttonmoon -

The only piece of advice I can offer is not to do with the results themselves but with the reaction you should have if they seem anomalous and are being challenged:

All these measurement systems are fairly newly introduced, and results and statistics are bound to show big variations. You are part of a learning process as is everyone else (your head, the LEA, the supposed experts). If your returns seem to show something unexpected you don't need to feel defensive, neither should you expect any hostile questioning. Instead you should find it equally interesting, and work with the others involved to work out why the results have come out as they have. There are a number of possible causes, including:

1 You did have an above average class (obvious anomaly).
2 You scored them more highly than they should have been (well, its your first time and you had little or no guidance!).
3 The criteria for scoring was not well defined - well let's fix it for next time.

And I'm sure there are a number of others. In any event, you should not be put on the spot, but should be part of a team who will work out whether any changes are needed. So don't feel defensive! :)

Someone once said to me: "Don't be frustrated by a problem - be fascinated by it".

Take part in it in that spirit and others will treat you with the respect you deserve!

(if the above is totally meaningless, just ignore it... :) )

[buttonmoon]

Thanks for the help and advice guys. Just want reassurance i suppose that i've not gone mad! I'm going to find out whats going on tomorrow. x

[Bungalow]

Buttonmoon - what fantastic words of wisdom and advice from Steve.

What I can't understand is why you didn't have any form of moderation - my understanding (obviously wrong) is that everyone has some form of moderation - whether it be invitation to a moderation meeting or and advisor coming into to school to moderate you.

Our LEA (Kent) are, I think, having an early moderation meeting in Jan as a way to just make sure we are all on the same wave length. My understanding, as many above, is that 9 is really an exceptional score.

[androyd]

Buttonmoon,
Last year I attended training on the FS at advisor level from the Dfes. Leslie Staggs was at that meeting and she said it would take around three more years to get any sense of what a reasonable national and local average should be but it was looking like a score of 6/7 was likely.
At a moderation meeting in TOwer Hamlets they also suggested that getting a sense of accurate scoring would take between three and five years. THey were finding big discrepancies between classes in the same school never mind between schools!!

MAny schools are finding high scores from the FS profile puts pressure on SATs achievement - but since we know that often the transition to year one also represents a huge shift in teaching style which impacts on children's achievements.

All you can do is score your class fairly and accurately take samples to back up your judgement and discuss your results with a moderator if one is provided by the LEA. Talk to other practitioners in your area who have similar intakes.

At our school we have tended to have very high scores, but there are particular factors at work. A head teacher who puts pressure on any teacher to score low is missing the point of education completely.
If your results are accurate and evidenced then no-one can argue with the results. THey may not like the implication of those results but that is a different issue altogether.

[buttonmoon]

Hi. Thanks for all the help.

I was moderated for CLL and CD back in may (sorry to make you question yourself Bungalow), and now having been back into school i have evidence saying that she believed one of my low ability children was working around 4. This means he was working within the ELG, i marked the rest of my class according to my moderators information and mine and my LA views.

I think it goes back to what androyd said about schools feeling the pressure of high profile scores being converted into SAT results. I feel better about how i scored the children, we did our best and marked the to the best of our knowledge.

x

[Purplecat]

I find the profiles very frustrating. My scores were compared with other schools in the LEA and found that they were mostly the same apart from CLL where the boys were lower. I think assessment is important but feel the profiles are just a way of reporting back to the county that you're doing your job. There isn't enough space to put anything in and the parents don't really understand them. Last year our parents opted for reports over the profiles. I also feel that some children are deemed to be 'struggling' when that's where they are in their stage of development.