AnonyMouse_3307 Posted September 26, 2009 Share Posted September 26, 2009 This is a big deal for all LAs and is measured by the EYFSP outcomes. Our gap reduced this year so we must be doing something right - however we have some key groups who are consistently underachieving and we know from research that this starts well before the end of the EYFS. Clearly OFSTED are now very involved in monitoring how outcomes for vulnerable groups are being supported so it is becoming a much wider issue. Can I ask how much people analyse on entry assessments/summative assessments to identify whether particular groups are doing less well ? e.g. SEN/ boys vs girls / EAL vs non EAL/different minority ethinic groupings in the setting etc etc.... and what the gaps are between/within the groups. Do you evaluate the impact of your provision in terms of progress made in narrowing of gaps? Do you match to national/LA outcomes for similar groups to compare? I'm interested as this is a piece of work we are planning to be doing with our school nursery class teachers re narrowing the gaps in underachievement. My perception is that this sometimes goes on in reception and maybe less in nursery classes but I'm lacking in info re general expected practice out there in PVI settings. Would be interested in how you are using your data to tackle underachievement and raise outcomes for vulnerable groups in any type of setting. Cx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted September 27, 2009 Author Share Posted September 27, 2009 Anyone?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 27, 2009 Share Posted September 27, 2009 I analysed the entry and end of EYFSP data last year in terms of boys/girls and autumn/summer birthdays. The reason for doing so was to see where there are areas for further development (such as boys' writing), so that I can then focus on that either during the year, or in the case of end of EYFSP, the next year. We did this a year ago too and found boys' CD to be quite low compared to that of the girls, so last year I focused on CD experiences that would appeal to the boys - and, yes, boys' results were improved this year (2008-2009), BUT the boys in the cohort were naturally more creative right from the start (the year before, they boys would do something if asked to, but would rarely choose to do something creative!) - so I can't say it was the data analysis that imporved the scores! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted September 27, 2009 Author Share Posted September 27, 2009 Thanks - have you looked at any gaps that exist now between the current children's on entry judgments in relation to gender or other groupings? Cx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 27, 2009 Share Posted September 27, 2009 Not yet - but when I have put the info onto the eProfile (or whatever it is now called!) I will do some different groupings - should be in the next couple of weeks if that's any use?! x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted September 29, 2009 Author Share Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) Oh I'm not after your data - I'm just curious about what people are doing with their data to inform on under/achievement of vulnerable groups. Thanks though. (beginning to think noone else is!!!) Cx Edited September 29, 2009 by catma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Share Posted September 29, 2009 Hiya, long time no speak on here. Hope all is well. From another perspective within all our children's centres we are trying to link up with the schools and monitor what is happening on entry levels and looking at FPS profile points with a view to ensuring the servivces we are putting on link to this. In particular we are probably aware of which groups of children may need help in one or more areas - question is how to get them in to sessions? For instance, Physical development is an issue for a lot of the children, so we are trying to put on more physical activities for children and will monitor their progress through to the end of EYFS. As for identifing the groups, we probably know by looking at the vulnerability factors of children entering the CC, we would try and build something around what the parent wants around want the child may need, if that makes sense. We also look at the %obesity figures as well and some groups are more prone to obesity than others. Doesn't answer your question but this is what we are tyring to do at the earlier stages. I am sure I have asked Catma what LA do you work for. Nikki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Share Posted September 29, 2009 Analysising the data for the end of last year (and very soon the on entry data for this year) is on my list of things to do during PPA this week. This years data will be interesting as only have 13 girls to 26 boys in year group. It'll be the same areas- CLLD and CD that are lower. PD higher! Will let you know exactly what I do when I get around to sitting down with it all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Share Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) We work very similarly to purplemagic. We always use the LA analysis to do an in depth comparison for different areas of learning. Due to our catchment, gender is the only real dividing criteria. We use this to inform our practice for the following year. We had low boys PD and CD in 2008 and these really improved last year, again though cohort also made a big difference. We also have 3 point of entry, so results vary depending on how many summer term entrants we have. We would look at the on-entry data in a similar way if our LA used the eye-profile. For me it would be about having an easy tool to carry out the analysis as it is a long job otherwise. Do you have a plan how this analysis is done in PVIs? Edited September 29, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_6324 Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I look at the chilldren on entry and over the first half term. As well as looking at gender and birthday etc. I track children who listen less well. I always seem to need a listening group - and they will have extra help to master this important skill. I track their progress over the year as I have noted that these children seem to do less well at the end of the fsp - overall - not just in CLLD - so need to target help to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted October 3, 2009 Author Share Posted October 3, 2009 Thanks for comments. I note that another post is emphasizing the need to look at vulnerable groups progress for Ofsted! Cx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted October 3, 2009 Author Share Posted October 3, 2009 We work very similarly to purplemagic. We always use the LA analysis to do an in depth comparison for different areas of learning. Due to our catchment, gender is the only real dividing criteria. We use this to inform our practice for the following year. We had low boys PD and CD in 2008 and these really improved last year, again though cohort also made a big difference. We also have 3 point of entry, so results vary depending on how many summer term entrants we have. We would look at the on-entry data in a similar way if our LA used the eye-profile. For me it would be about having an easy tool to carry out the analysis as it is a long job otherwise. Do you have a plan how this analysis is done in PVIs? You can download the eprofile yourself - there is a national helpdesk now for support. One of our schools has been using it without us having it as our tool of choice (it will be soon as I can make it happen!!) for ages. Cx Cx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts