Jump to content
Home
Forum
Join Us
Articles
About Us
Tapestry

Good levels of development in 2014


 Share

Recommended Posts

So, calling all reception teachers. What's your GLD looking like this year?

National last year was 52% but I'm expecting it will increase this year so trying to gauge what it might be.

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mine is 67% which is a little down on last year (76%) but I'm really pleased as it's better than I was expecting when I did my mid year check. It's nice to feel that interventions I put in place made a difference! My ATPS is 36 the same as last year - I know that's not really relevant but I'd worked it out so thought I'd share!

 

I have to say that one of the really good things that has come out of the EYFSP documentation is the phrase 'sense check'. I can't remember whether it's in the handbook or the ARA but my HT heard it when he came on moderation training with me last year. It's giving him a useful phrase for a conversation he'll be having with our Y2 teacher over the data she has put together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mine is 67% which is a little down on last year (76%) but I'm really pleased as it's better than I was expecting when I did my mid year check. It's nice to feel that interventions I put in place made a difference! My ATPS is 36 the same as last year - I know that's not really relevant but I'd worked it out so thought I'd share!

 

I have to say that one of the really good things that has come out of the EYFSP documentation is the phrase 'sense check'. I can't remember whether it's in the handbook or the ARA but my HT heard it when he came on moderation training with me last year. It's giving him a useful phrase for a conversation he'll be having with our Y2 teacher over the data she has put together.

I have to admit I do bang on about "sense checks" in all my trainings...because it's so important!! When I moderate I use the sense check idea to identify the children I will discuss, so someone with lots of 2 and 3ss for C+L but 1s for EAD or UW will always catch my eye!!

67% sounds really positive. My LA was just above that last year so I'm hoping we can sustain (or I might not have a job!!) We've done a lot of work on data checking and internal moderation as themes for our LA focus this year so I'm hoping it pays off.

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit I do bang on about "sense checks" in all my trainings...because it's so important!! When I moderate I use the sense check idea to identify the children I will discuss, so someone with lots of 2 and 3ss for C+L but 1s for EAD or UW will always catch my eye!!

67% sounds really positive. My LA was just above that last year so I'm hoping we can sustain (or I might not have a job!!) We've done a lot of work on data checking and internal moderation as themes for our LA focus this year so I'm hoping it pays off.

Cx

Can I ask, if you find children whose data doesn't make sense is that always an indicator that it might be wrong? I have already flagged up on the data I handed in to my HT the children I want to talk about further. There are a couple that seem to have data that might not make sense but which I think I can justify. One child has 3s for most things except Literacy and Maths where they have 2s. Another has a mixture of 2s and 3s but 1s for managing feelings, making relationships and being imaginative.

My LA was just below the national figures last year so I suspect they're all desperately hoping that we do better this year.

It made me smile when we were doing internal moderation of our Y2 writing (it was interesting!) and the Head came in at the end and asked the teacher to give him a list of the levels she wanted to submit and he would then do a sense check. She looked completely blank, I just giggled and said "I should never have taken you on that training!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A "sense check" is essentially linking the skills across the ELGs and then looking to see how they support the judgements or not...so a child who was not doing well in the Prime areas but was judged doing better than expected in the specific areas for example wouldn't make sense if you look holistically. A profile is exactly that - a profile of the child's strengths and weaknesses but its got to tally in terms of skills, knowledge and understanding.

Can I ask, if you find children whose data doesn't make sense is that always an indicator that it might be wrong? I have already flagged up on the data I handed in to my HT the children I want to talk about further. There are a couple that seem to have data that might not make sense but which I think I can justify. One child has 3s for most things except Literacy and Maths where they have 2s. Another has a mixture of 2s and 3s but 1s for managing feelings, making relationships and being imaginative.

 

I have had many conversations which have completely justified what can appear to be anomalies, so it doesn't automatically mean that data will be "wrong". However it is something I stress should be considered as part of the school's QA processes. The section in the EYFSP handbook gives good starting points.

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are looking at about 60% which will be a big improvement on last year :)

National last year was 52% but I'm expecting it will increase this year so trying to gauge what it might be.

Cx

I agree Catma. There was such a range nationally last year it will be very interesting to see what the % is this year.

Bev

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I found it much easier to do 'best fit' this year - just generally much more familiar with things. I was worried last year that I'd been over generous - I am usually accused of being the opposite but have been reassured by end of Y1 assessment which has 25% of them getting 2B+ and often 2a with a couple of 3s - They were just a scarily able bunch! I won't be getting that again!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of my children have made good progress but for me to put it int percentages is useless. It works out at 25%. However, I have only 4 children in reception, 3 of whom started below average. This has been confirmed through external moderation.

 

In a small school percentages never work well, they never look good. That's why we look at each child, each cohort and record enough evidence to show the progress they have made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of my children have made good progress but for me to put it int percentages is useless. It works out at 25%. However, I have only 4 children in reception, 3 of whom started below average. This has been confirmed through external moderation.

 

In a small school percentages never work well, they never look good. That's why we look at each child, each cohort and record enough evidence to show the progress they have made.

Yes - you have to keep reminding people it's an attainment NOT a progress measure!

That's where we need to be ensuring we are closing gaps so they don't remain disadvantaged all the way along I suppose.

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi all,

 

I work in a very economically deprived area and our GLD is 51%. We fight tooth and nail with constant analysis and interventions throughout the year but a lot of our problems fall under behaviour and it's so hard to get them to expected for MFB and MR in a year (although they do make amazing progress which we make sure we have a lot of evidence for.)

 

I was just wondering what starting point you all have? We have a few of our highers starting at 40-60 low but majority are well and truly in the 30-50 band. Not making excuses....just curious.

 

Thanks very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well indicative national is 60% everyone.

 

Hi all,

 

I work in a very economically deprived area and our GLD is 51%. We fight tooth and nail with constant analysis and interventions throughout the year but a lot of our problems fall under behaviour and it's so hard to get them to expected for MFB and MR in a year (although they do make amazing progress which we make sure we have a lot of evidence for.)

 

I was just wondering what starting point you all have? We have a few of our highers starting at 40-60 low but majority are well and truly in the 30-50 band. Not making excuses....just curious.

 

Thanks very much.

I think starting points would vary a lot - even in my LA the socio economic range is from millionaire housing to really really poor families so the difference in experiences children come in with can be vast, even in the same school.

But you are right to focus on the progress as the attainment is only half the story for any cohort.

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

No - you won't have seen anything published, this is based on the info LAs can access through the systems we use to submit. Until we get the statistical first release in October this is just indicative and not to be stated as a "fact". However my statistics team afre pretty good at accessing this kind of info!!

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. (Privacy Policy)