Emerging secure developing?

[sunnyday]

Just to further 'muddy the waters' Kent use - Entering, Developing, Secure - wouldn't it be great if we could all use the same terminology and have the same interpretation too! :1b

[Steve]

We had the differing terminology issue with PRAMS a few years back, and resolved it by allowing individual settings to apply the labels that they wanted. We'll also be introducing this for Tapestry soon - it seems to me that they all mean essentially the same thing, so calling it the names that make the most sense to you isn't really a problem (at least technically - semantically it might cause wars!).

[Guest]

Thank you all for the lively discussion all very useful : )

[Guest]

I will second that - it's been very useful indeed! Thank you

[Mouseketeer]

So if a child is tracked as secure in an age band do you also track them as emerging on the next age band at the same time ? ...if 'secure' having nowhere to go in one band then they must be emerging into the next anyway ....mustn't they ?

[Steve]

So if a child is tracked as secure in an age band do you also track them as emerging on the next age band at the same time ? ...if 'secure' having nowhere to go in one band then they must be emerging into the next anyway ....mustn't they ?

 

I think in practical terms it's probably not a good idea, Mouse. The fact is that all of these metrics will become crude at a certain level of detail anyway. If you regard them simply as devices to show that your children are progressing well (and this is essentially what they are) then you deprive yourself of the next measurement by saying that they are automatically sitting in both areas (secure in one age band equals emerging in the next). It might very well be that in reality both stages could be viewed as the same, but if you enable them to overlap you're reducing the number of stages - a problem you can only overcome by introducing 4 stages to each age band!

 

Remember, one of the problems practitioners have encountered is that not only are the age bands very broad (hence the difficulty of showing progress in shorter timescales to those who demand it) but they overlap. The refinements enable a practitioner assessing a child of 33 months, who is in the grey transitional area between the 22-36 months age band and the 30-50 months age band, to assert that a child is nevertheless progressing over a much shorter timescale.

 

When you're negotiating the difference between messy reality (who can genuinely say any child is at a specific and precise level of development using a form of any description on any particular day) and the necessity to have some form of system to monitor these things, you have to use a mixture of your own professional judgement, and something to augment your own memory (a recording method).

[Mouseketeer]

noooooooo more stages/ages....having enough trouble with preparing transitions now....seriously thinking of breaking 'moving/handling' back into fine/gross as it really isnt giving a true picture of many children, especially younger boys as they are not forming letters etc....but very physical/co-ordinated in other ways, and also finding the general picture for maths has significantly changed from previous eyfs, now calculating is included they dont appear anywhere close to previously would have in numbers and with the dm statements for 30-50m in S.S.M so easy to meet it shows many ahead in this now rather than the other way around.

[Guest]

So if a child is tracked as secure in an age band do you also track them as emerging on the next age band at the same time ? ...if 'secure' having nowhere to go in one band then they must be emerging into the next anyway ....mustn't they ?

My LA has done this effectively for maintained nurseries and reception classes. They seemed to want to have a 10 point scale for data collection and so have made secure in one and the same as emerging in the next. I don't like it for planning and assessment purposes as I have had children who were actively doing everything on one age band and doing it confidently, so I would say secure at that level. However they were not showing any signs of doing anything in the next age band, so in my mind not yet emerging in that one. (sorry I can't remember off hand which aspect of development most easily explained this). But the LA obviously couldn't fit all the stages of development into a ten point scale unless they did it this way!

[green hippo]

So if a child is tracked as secure in an age band do you also track them as emerging on the next age band at the same time ? ...if 'secure' having nowhere to go in one band then they must be emerging into the next anyway ....mustn't they ?

This is why I use the word 'securing' not 'secure' because it does give a definite difference between emerging in the next age and stage band. But like Steve says any crude measurement like these are best used to show progression as in terms of formative assessment we have our day to day observations and our knowledge of our children in which to inform our planning. I track my observations in age and stage bands and this is the most formative bit of recording I do but I still use a lot of our own knowledge to inform the planning. E.g. I never have much evidence for health and self-care as I know which children can or can't do these skills! I'll only really record where they have shown awareness of healthy foods and healthy ways of life etc.

Green Hippo x

[Mouseketeer]

Have recently attended a 'moderating' training session 'what does 30-50m look like' in readiness for transition, as this is where they should be and not 40-60m .....we have a high % of ours emerging 40/60 in some areas if not all, and a few developing, especially some of those that only missed entering reception by weeks or even a couple days the previous year, wouldn't you expect them to be in the 40-60 band ? Where are others finding their leavers ?

[Panders]

Quite so mouse - we have many developing in 40-60 at the moment.

[finleysmaid]

Have recently attended a 'moderating' training session 'what does 30-50m look like' in readiness for transition, as this is where they should be and not 40-60m .....we have a high % of ours emerging 40/60 in some areas if not all, and a few developing, especially some of those that only missed entering reception by weeks or even a couple days the previous year, wouldn't you expect them to be in the 40-60 band ? Where are others finding their leavers ?

Mouse how did you feel when you were told that? do you believe your children are at 40-60

surely children should be where they should be! I'm not going to 'downgrade' mine just because someone wants me to. Surely it is my prerogative that if i assess correctly and the standard coming out of my pre-school is high then the schools will have to deal with this. It would be like a school downgrading their sats results!

I have a real mixed bag but 12 of my 26 leavers are late summer born's. I have 3 children however who are definitley on 40-60 months...one is 5 two days after he starts school

[catma]

Have recently attended a 'moderating' training session 'what does 30-50m look like' in readiness for transition, as this is where they should be and not 40-60m .....we have a high % of ours emerging 40/60 in some areas if not all, and a few developing, especially some of those that only missed entering reception by weeks or even a couple days the previous year, wouldn't you expect them to be in the 40-60 band ? Where are others finding their leavers ?

 

This is the guidance schools will follow, from Ofsted.

Attainment on entry to nursery at age three

1. Most[1] children are likely to be working within the ‘Development Matters’ band for 30–50 months, having shown competence in the preceding band for 22–36 months. This may be referred to as the age-related expectation at the beginning of nursery. Attainment on entry is likely to be below age-related expectations where a substantial proportion[2] of children in a school do not demonstrate competence in the 22–36 month band.

Attainment on entry to reception at age four

1. Most children are likely to demonstrate some of the skills, knowledge and understanding described by the development statements in the ‘Development Matters’ band for 40–60+ months, in addition to those in the preceding band for 30–50 months. This may be referred to as the age-related expectation at the beginning of reception. Attainment on entry is likely to be below age-related expectations where a substantial proportion of children in a school do not demonstrate competence in the 30–50 month band. The statutory early learning goals establish national expectations for most children to reach by the end of Reception Year.

[1] ‘Most’ means the majority of or nearly all children. Ofsted’s definition of ‘most’ is 80–96%.

[2] ‘Substantial proportion’ means more than the 20% that might be outside the definition of ‘most’.

 

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/subsidiary-guidance-supporting-inspection-of-maintained-schools-and-academies

 

 

Cx

Edited May 25, 2013 by catma

[skippy]

As a setting we have had many discussions with our two local feeder primary schools. They score low on entry. I understand during a six week break and a new school things change but it kind of feels that the work we have done is not trusted or valued. Assessments are made very early and I understand that this needs to be done to enable teaching to happen but I feel deflated.

 

Maybe more moderation between schools and their feeder settings should be done to ensure validity and consistency. Sorry to be negative but it does feel that head teachers understandably just want the results but the child has to fit?

 

This discussion has enabled me to see reasoning behind elements of school assessments that I have not considered so will continue to read with interest.

[Panders]

Thank you Catma

[Mouseketeer]

Thanks for comments relating to my post...I think the intention is to have a moderation meeting where ey settings and reception both attend....teachers seem to be asking for DM overview sheets with transition sheets so they can see which statements haven't been met and continue from their, I'd like to think this would actually happen .... it seems a bit late in the year to me to be telling us who wants what and how it should be presented.

[catma]

That's the sort of thing we do. Our CC teachers arrange area meetings. We've done that for a couple of years now and whilst the framework changed the processes for transitions didn't need to.

[Susan]

As a setting we have had many discussions with our two local feeder primary schools. They score low on entry. I understand during a six week break and a new school things change but it kind of feels that the work we have done is not trusted or valued. Assessments are made very early and I understand that this needs to be done to enable teaching to happen but I feel deflated.

Skippy, dont feel deflated. The trouble with baseline assessment in school is that it needs to be done to enable teaching to take place, the assessment period is also quite a big chunk of the school year although it can feel very short when making the judgements/ assessments and I would only score if I felt that the child was consistent.

 

Having moved up with a group of children from Reception to Year1 one year and seeing how the children responded with a different TA with tasks I knew they were competent at was a big eye opener.

 

It was also quite demoralising to know how hard the children had worked and how far they had come, in Reception, and yet be unable to score profile points. I hope the new profile will be less like this.

[skippy]

Thanks Susan Do all teachers make their baseline within the first few weeks?

[catma]

A couple of my schools have been criticised by Ofsted for NOT doing it within the first few weeks, which in a school term and with a staggered start can take you to half term anyway. We recommend within the first 4 weeks after starting, but using any previous information to support you where it exists and definitely by half term.

Cx

[Guest]

Just to further 'muddy the waters' Kent use - Entering, Developing, Secure - wouldn't it be great if we could all use the same terminology and have the same interpretation too! :1b

Sunnyday, our SIP said we werent (in Kent) using secure anymore just E and D. please tell me she hasnt given us the wrong info?! :angry: HELP!!

[sunnyday]

Sunnyday, our SIP said we werent (in Kent) using secure anymore just E and D. please tell me she hasnt given us the wrong info?! :angry: HELP!!

 

Oh - my SIP hasn't told me that :blink:

[Guest]

OH terrific, thats Kent for you. On our last progress matters documentation it only had E and D. when we queried it our SIP said the powers that be had decided that secure was now unnecessary :blink: . It means we have started our transition documents with no secure element.

As we use the online progress matters material it is not possible to enter 'S' as the system doesnt now have the feature, just E and D.

Something else to worry about!!

[sunnyday]

Sorry........

 

But if it's not 'on offer' then I suppose that it is correct advice..........oh dear - no idea really.......

[Guest]

I've just been moderated by my LA and had the same info as catma is giving. If children are exceeding the ELG they will be working within N C but only if you are teaching them these things for example in maths the ELG is using numbers to 20 doubling halving and sharing but to get exceeding they have to know a lot more including counting in 2's 5's and 10's and more! My advice is as soon as you can see a child hasn't got far to go before reaching ELG get the year 1 goals and teach them.higher attainers will need as much support as those we support who are at a much lower level. We also need to provide opportunities for children to exceed in all areas eg music art d and t by making it available at all times. I was told I needed to keep all child initiated work that showed learning as I normally let them take it home so remember to look at it and copy it before they take it home for evidence. Lots to think about!

[finleysmaid]

has anyone got the link to the NC1 curriculum...having trouble finding it!

[Froglet]

QCA-99-457-1.pdf

 

Hopefully this will work! I suspect it's been buried with the new one being on its way.

[Guest LornaW]

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20040117042231/ncaction.org.uk/

 

Click on the subject under the people headed Find out about assessment in each subject

 

And here...

 

http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/primary

 

LornaW

[Guest]

So now i am getting ready to do my end of year judgements for the profile. After reading the profile handbook again it has brought another thought into my head. If you give any child who has not reached expected in the ELG 'emerging' it shows no differentiation between say a child with SEN who is working at 22-36 months to a child who is working at 40-60months but is not quite there to give 'Expected'.

 

The mind boggles!

 

Thoughts?

[catma]

This is because the child is not yet at the expected level, wherever they are. The EYFSP is not a measure of progress but of attainment measured against a national expectation that is the ELG. However the handbook does discuss the use of Development Matters as a possible way of differentiating for parents and Yr 1, although this cannot be made statutory because dev matters isn't! The only statutory parts of the EYFSP assessment are the ELGs (in the learning and development requirements and assessment requirements) which is why the assessment hinges around solely being at the ELG or not.

 

Cx