Help With A Previous Query

[Guest]

This post is a copy of something I've already entered on paulparkie's 'We have Ofsted in at the moment...'. Because I joined in the discussion so late (story of my life!) I think maybe my post hasn't been read and I would really like help. I know, from past experience, how helpful you all are.

 

My query is regarding the discussion about the typical level of achievement on the FSP: perhaps it's just me being dense but, like Susan, I was under the impression that points 4 - 8 for each area weren't dependent upon each other i.e. that each 'stood alone' (it seems to indicate this in the front of 'Curriculum guidance...). If this is true, what are the implications for Catma's breakdown? Does it mean that if children score ANY 4/5 points in one area that they are about average or does it mean specifically points 4 and 5? Am I making any sense or rambling incoherently? If it's ANY 4/5 points then I found Catma's breakdown really informative and think that it provides a fab picture of a 'typical' class. If it's only points 4 and 5 because the profile points are progressive then I'm really in trouble because I can't see, for example, how Writing 6 'Attempts writing for a variety of purposes, using features of diff forms' is simpler than Writing 8 'Begins to form captions and simple sentences, sometimes using punctuation'.

 

Am I being really dense? Can someone explain it really simply please?! Also, how do you all get to find out all this really knowledgeable stuff?

[Susan]

hi Moose, sorry I saw your reply and was hoping that someone with some more info would come along along and help.

 

I think you have raised some interesting and valid points(!) but not being involved on the front line at the moment cant comment further.

 

Lets hope someone else will know something more.

[Guest]

Hey Moose - you're not dense - it's the system that's dense!!!

 

Here is my understanding of the scale points. They are not hierarchical in that the children don't progress from one to the other in any particular order. Children, as you know, are not as easily defined as that! Bless them! Anyway, by 4/5 scales points, it refers to the TOTAL of them. So basically, if you've ticked off four or five, then they are working within the national average.

 

Don't get yourself worked up about it - everyone is in the same boat. I'm trying to get my lot to not tick things off simply because they think the children deserve 'more ticks'. It doesn't work like that. Basically, I hope that someday soon the points are re-evaluated - would make our jobs easier. Anyway, until then, tick off whatever you know what your kids can do, and if they are getting within four-six ticked off in total, you know that they are within national espectations. If more - then wahey!!!

 

Hope this helps,

 

D xxx

[Guest]

Yep, I'm with you on this one, Gater. Very well put

[Guest]

Thanks very much Gater - I feel better about how I'm scoring now. The only thing is that now I have another query! When the children go up into Y1 are they meant to still keep working against the profile or should they go onto the levels in the National Curriculum? If the 'average child' (I've yet to meet one!) is only expected to score 4-6 points then why have so many points? I think that lots of people, parents and teachers, would look at a profile, see about half of it filled in and panic because 1. their child doesn't seem to have achieved much and/or 2. think that the teaching can't be up to much if more hasn't been scored off. I wonder how many people have been labouring under the impression that the FSP relates directly to the ELGs and that as children are meant to be working at the ELGs level by the end of the Reception year then all the points in FSP should be marked off. Aargh!

 

Again, I ask the question why don't I seem to know any of this stuff? Hopefully I'm not the only one although that has worrying implications...