Emerging secure developing?

[Guest]

Hi, I am a reception teacher and am concerned about the way these levels are being interpreted. I have visited nurseries and had reports about children staring in September and some have been assessed as having reached High 40-60 months. They may be bright children but definitely nowhere near my emerging (ELG) children from this year. I think this could be a problem. At the end of the year when I am sure they will have made a huge amount of progress, it will look as if hardly any has been made. Have other teachers found this?

Edited July 1, 2013 by Guest

[Guest]

this appeared on the Nursery World website today:

Its (Development Matters guidance) disappearance from the DfE's website fuels fears that there could be plans to change the early years framework and move away from a play-based curriculum. Nursery World understands that the Standards and Testing Agency (STA) has been told not to use Development Matters in future EYFS Profile guidance and that local authority moderators have also been told not to use it. The guidance has been removed from the DfE’s website to www.gov.uk. Last month, Ofsted's chief inspector called for a major change to the approach to assessment in the early years. Sir Michael Wilshaw said that the EYFS Profile was ‘too broad an assessment’ and did not link effectively to subsequent Key Stage assessments, with ‘a weak basis for accountability.’ Helen Moylett, co-author of Development Matters, told Nursery World, ‘I’m alarmed by the fact that it has disappeared from the website and quite alarmed as to why.’ She added, ‘What message does this give to practitioners who use this a lot and value it?’ Nursery World has contacted the Department for Education for a comment.

 

does this mean whilst we're still trying to get the assessment and profiles right this time changes are being planned again???

[Guest]

Hi

Yes I had this posted on Facebook today. The mind boggles! What a waste of time and money!

[Melcatfish]

I don't like to get political but I do hope everyone involved with education at all levels takes this sort of thing into consideration when the election comes around. This is by far the harshest and most potentially damaging political climate as far as education goes for a very long time.

 

Mel

x

[WChurchill]

Hi. I have only just read this thread. I am in nursery and just finishing highlighting trackers in order that I can give judgement, secure etc. Still not getting it. if finished (secure) in 40 -60 months do you then go to teach ELGs. I know you have explained it catma but if not got something in ELG then surely you teach/cover it. Or are you saying if secure 40-60 months then it has all been covered. It appears to me that new statements appear in the EL Gs. (All your posts and discussions are so helpful) .

[Guest]

Ok here goes, ( have not read all comments but) we would not keep a child in 30/50 if they are 40/60 so reception teachers are able to show they are making progress. Some of our children reached ELG when they left in July, not in all areas but most in PSED, CL and

PD

[Guest Muggles6]

Hi, I am an NQT starting with my first reception/year 1 class this week. I have the attached tracker, and wondered, do I take the judgements made by my children's nurseries in July as the entry age? I have a entry assessment booklet I found and adapted from TES and wondered whether the information i gather from this should be what is put into the on entry box? I hope that makes sense!EYFS tracker ind child.doc

[Guest]

As an NQT I'd check with school too about what they want you to do, but when I was an NQT last year I took into account the judgements the previous settings had made and observed the children for a few weeks before completing an on entry assessment. It might also depend on how soon you have to file/submit the on entry data according to your school or LA, but most would expect it to be after the first 4-6 weeks I would hope.

[Guest]

Hi all,

I have recently taken on the role of Early Years Leader and has a meeting with our LA early years advisor a few weeks ago. She has advised us not to track children as emerging/secure/exceeding within the month bands as it is best fit and shouldn't be broken down. I know this is hard for schools where senior management want to look at progress.

She has also said that for tracking analysis purposes we should be looking at each individual child and consider whether they are 'below' 'typical' or 'above' in relation to their attainment and their actual age.

Not sure what people think of this??

[sunnyday]

Hi Tinky - our LA advise us to use 'entering, developing, secure' - actually I think it's helpful and I don't see it as 'breaking it down' - their definitions are:

Entering (e) the child is just beginning to acquire the skills and knowledge in this age band and will need lots of opportunities to rehearse and consolidate these

Developing (d) the child is practising and consolidating the skills and knowledge in this age band in lots of situations and growing in confidence but will need further opportunities before the learning is fully embedded

Secure (s) the child is fully confident in applying the skills and knowledge in this age band independently and consistently in a range of situations - the learning is now fully embedded.

I have been working with these for some time now and find it all very useful :1b There's a 'world of difference' between a child who is (for example) 'entering' Maths: Numbers 40-60 months and a child who is 'secure' in the same band.....

[Guest]

I know The school previously did emerging etc within the month bands but now we have been told not to, I am very confused as to what we should do now :blink:

[sunnyday]

I know The school previously did emerging etc within the month bands but now we have been told not to, I am very confused as to what we should do now :blink:

Sadly - I think most of us are 'confused' :blink:

I find that system works for me and more importantly for 'my' children and staff - so I'm sticking to it (whatever!) but then I'm just a teensy bit bolshy!!! :rolleyes:

[finleysmaid]

i agree with sunnyday find a system tht works for you and your setting and stick to it for a while...then you can really identify the bits that work and those that don't. If you write this in your action plan ofsted will be very impressed!

i don't split into smaller sections but all the children's assessments are in their learning stories...their keycarers would be able to tell you whether they were emerging/expected or exceeding using their best fit judgements and using the evidence they have gathered

[Helen]

Tinky,

I don't really understand what your advisor said in terms of 'below' 'typical' or 'above' in relation to their attainment and their actual age. Wouldn't a typical child aged 52 months be in the 40-60 months age band? Isn't that what they were designed to demonstrate, ie typical behaviour/development for that age of child? Sorry if I'm being dense :huh:

[mundia]

Helen, not dense at all. I wonder if Tinky has been advised to consider if children are working within an age band that fits their chronological age so in the example you gave, the child of 52 months would by typically in the 40-60+ band but if they were in the 22-36 month band, they would be below, and this would alert the setting that they would need to be looking at how they support that child. At least that is my understanding. Of course what methods people use to record this is up to them, but Im sure many LAs, have some sort of 'system' that settings can use if they wish. I had a conversation recently with a setting about a large group of their children who were 'below' in one particular area and it enabled them to think about aspects of their provision that werent working quite so well for those children. Over time, they would be able to demonstrate how they changed aspects of their provision to meet the needs of their children.

Im not sure if that helps or hinders! (or I have misunderstood!). Perhaps Tinky can come back and let us know.

Tinky, regarding the emerging developing secure approach, this does seem to be down to personal preference, and I know we debated long and hard about this in our LA, and most ways have their strengths and flaws. My concern with the EDS approach is that Im not really convinced that the 'gap' between secure in one band and 'emerging' in the next is really there. Children being children, I think in many cases children who are genuinely secure in one band, would already be emerging into the next, and so is moving from secure to emerging really progress, and what does that difference actually look like for a child?

Hmm I shall think on some more...

It is a very interesting debate!

[catma]

It's all just professional judgement in the end. Just as long as the evidence (in whatever form, recorded or not) you can offer to back up your judgement is reliable (ie actual things seen and heard, not just what you think the child is capable of) and the judgement is moderated so it is in line with all other judgements then all will be well.

Cx

[Helen]

Thanks Mundia and Catma,

I think I was over complicating it

[catma]

Can you tell I'm in EYFSP Moderation Planning mode!!

[Guest]

catma,

Where in the Ofsted subsidiary guidance can I find the definitions of entering 40-60 months on entry to reception being 'expected'? It makes sense to me but I need to convince colleagues with hard facts. Have downloaded both Ofsted documents, is there another with these specific recommendations?

 

Many thanks for your helpful guidance. Can I ask what your role is? Are you an inspector by chance?

[catma]

They have removed it again - in the recent subsidiary guidance it's been taken out. In May when I put that comment it was still in there!

However if children are 4+ when entering reception they would typically be in the 40 - 60 plus band, ,progressing through the year to the ELG. So the guidance still makes sense.

Cx

[Guest]

I have children who are secure 40-60 months in Spring 1. What do I do next? What do I assess them against. L.A say ELGs are only for final assessments.

[Guest]

If they are secure in 40-60+ at this point in the year then these are the children who may well be capable of exceeding the ELG by the end of YR. I'd be looking to introduce some of the Y1 content into my teaching so that these children had the opportunities to demonstrate that they were exceeding ELGs in their CI learning. What does the LA say you should be doing for these children in terms of assessment?

[twistedficus1]

I'd love an adviser to tell us what they say about this?

I'm confident that 5 of my top writers are secure 40-50 and 8 readers. However a colleague suggested not levelling at this level as it would look like lack of progress in T4. Begs question of who do we track for?

My old school is using national curriculum small steps to plan next steps and I see this as progressive but would love advice on what others are doing please and what official advice says.

Thanks loads x

[catma]

Hi all,

I have recently taken on the role of Early Years Leader and has a meeting with our LA early years advisor a few weeks ago. She has advised us not to track children as emerging/secure/exceeding within the month bands as it is best fit and shouldn't be broken down. I know this is hard for schools where senior management want to look at progress.

She has also said that for tracking analysis purposes we should be looking at each individual child and consider whether they are 'below' 'typical' or 'above' in relation to their attainment and their actual age.

Not sure what people think of this??

This would be the language Ofsted are using in schools inspections now.

[catma]

If they reach the goal before the end of the year then you would start teaching the NC programmes of study/your schools curriculum for KS1. Their assessment would be Exceeding in June, because they have demonstrated the skills of the ELG and gone beyond. you assess against the goal in the summer, but your teaching would go beyond it. The 2 things are not intrinsically the same.

Cx

[KST]

I know tracking progress across EYFS is not the intended purpose for the assessment but as we all know Ofsted are demanding such information...

So as EYFS leader I am presenting my data as the % of children working at, below and above age expected levels at each half term in a bid to show that we are making good progress, i.e. if the number working at expected levels increaases and the number working below expected levels decreases that would show good progress.

My question is what is the expected level for each half term?

We use 30-50 months embedded/ 40-60 months being on entry to Reception...

Would you then expect the level to be 40-60 months developing by christmas?

What you expect by feb half term? it would seem reasonable that 40-60 developing is appropriate for this stage in the year but then it shows no progress for that half term if they were developing 40-60 at christmas?? If children came into reception at 40-60 months beginning, they are likely to be developing by christmas but then by feb to say they are 40-60 embedded seems early in the year to be achieveing this?

Would you expect children to be 40-60 embedded by easter? Then beginning ELG by may half term and embedded ELG by end of the year for expected progress? This of course would then only be deemed satisfactory progress?

Hope I'm making sense and someone can help me. How else are people tracking progress for a cohort?

Thanks in advance,KST

[Guest]

We use a numbered system to show progress. We say how many dm they have met out of the total and colour show which age they are working within. Was time consuming to set up and get your head around but easy now and great to see what progress they have made especially in nursery.

[Guest]

Hi Green Hippo

 

Can I just check when you say about exceeding being 10 points - does that relate to the National Curriculum measure were 10 points would equate to a low 1B?

I have been taking it that if they are working at level 1 then they have exceeded the ELG- most of my exceeding are working at about 1C+ approx. 8 points and a few beyond.

thanks

[Guest]

Sorry I just wanted to ask if a child age 30 months was secure in development 22-36 months would you say the child is working within or exceeding? I would say working within due to the next steps being working within 30-50 months. But some members of staff think exceeding......just want to see what others say ?

[Helen]

I don't think there can be such a thing as 'exceeding' when you're talking about the Dev Matters age-bands, as they overlap. If you believe the child is secure in 22-36, then that's what they are! They could also be emerging 30-50. :1b