Using Eyfs Profile Data To Predict End Of Year 1 And End Of Ks1 Result

[AnonyMouse_15201]

Good morning everyone.

 

PLEASE can some one help me. I feel so frustrated. I am not against working hard - but am beginning to come to the end of my tether.

 

This is my second year in F1 - which I love! However, I am in the process of completing individual tracking and target sheets for the children that left F1 in July and are now in Year 1. Should really have got these done last academic year - but long story.

 

I have read all the links that say we should not be using profile scores to predict Year 1 and end of KS1 results - but it's a waste of time trying to explain this to my head. She wants these sheets completed and I have to do them. I have been told that I must not predict results that are too low - as we have to increase our KS1 writing scores.

 

All this just makes me feel so stressed and cross. BUT - I have to do this. Is there a 'rule' for interpreting the data and predicting year 1 and end of KS1 results?

 

I would be so grateful for help. It's no point trying to discuss with my Head - I have to get this done and it's driving me mad.

 

Thank you in advance for your help. Hope everyone enjoys the rest of the weekend and has a good week.

[Guest]

Good Morning,

I have a document produced by Ofsted that shows the FS Points against age, and NC levels. I do feel as you that we should NOT be doing this, but data is data and....

 

Anyway it shows that a child with 2,3,4 FS points = 1C.

5,6,7 FS points = 1B.

8 FS points = 1A.

and a child with 9 FS points = 2C

Hope it helps....

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Neither is it possible to make predictions about children’s future attainment as there is no correlation between EYFS profile

data and key stage 1 or 2 outcomes or national curriculum levels. http://testsandexams.qcda.gov.uk/libraryAs...SP_QA_v6aWO.pdf

 

The QCDA clearly state there is no correlation between the 2 scores so I'm very sceptical about the "OFSTED" document especially as they predict a child achieving NO ELGS to reach a 1c and a child achieving ALL ELGs plus working within NC levels (point 9) to only be a level above...

[AnonyMouse_3307]

Ok - seeing as the problem can't be discussed with the Head or removed then you will just have to do something and it's no good us all going shouldn't be done etc when you're being directed to do so by your employer. I am in no way condoning this kind of activity! This is a needs must when the devil drives opinion.

 

Also I'm a bit confused - the children haven't really gone from F1(July) to yr1(now) - you do mean F2 don't you?????

 

I'll assume that for the moment.

 

First of all you are NOT solely responsible for whether children 2 years on miss, exceed or hit their target. This is the joint responsibility of everyone who is with the children in the school. Future attainment and progress is not just dependent on previous outcomes. Otherwise all those children with low FSP scores might as well be written off there and then.

 

Secondly you are not predicting what they will get - no one can do that and no one will sack you if they don't meet targets 2 years later. In fact everyone will have forgotten and revised those targets so often based on data/tracking further on down the line.

 

Thirdly consider the point that children with near to national expectations now could reasonably be expected to reach level 2 (nat expectations) if all things are equal. However this approach will not take into account EAL accelerated progress later which is often the case, Summer birth later development etc etc so you still have to exercise some professional judgment!!

 

I suppose I would for the purposes of this mindless activity use the following:

 

Decide where children were in relation to national expectations - accept that they may then be capable of maintaining satisfactory progress and give them national expectations later ie 2+. children with 78+ points for example and those with all PSED/CLLD scales 6 or more etc etc

Children higher than national - possibly high level 2 /level 3?? Depends on PSED.

Lower than national - assume teachers will accelerate their progress through targeted interventions, gap analysis of progress and QFT - who can really say but I might consider how secure in 40 - 60+ they were below the ELGs and use that as a baseline to consider progress they might make?

 

It's an utterly pointless activity but not worth losing sleep over. Ultimately you are not responsible for the children's progress in the school on your own. You will have to do as directed because the HT is telling you. Without clear instructions as to HOW they want this done they will just have to go with what you give them. If they quibble with what you have done ask for guidance in what they want exactly. Make notes of what you have been told to do, time allowed and professional support (or not) to do it. That way you have a documented record if you ever wish to refer to this in the future.

Cx

Edited September 27, 2009 by catma

[AnonyMouse_1195]

Excellent advice from Catma. With the targets I would also attach a brief explanation as to how I had reached my predictions and how these results could be affected by the variables, such as EAL progress, age-related development, prior attainment, absence, late entry, possible SEN etc. etc. and also, and most importantly the lack of correlation between EYFS and NC levels. I would quote the QCDA. I would write it as if I was writing a research summary. You have then done the task you have to do, and provided your HT with the reasoning behind it in a professional manner.

[Guest]

Its really frustrating, I know, girlguide. Everything youve been taught/ are told by the EYFS guidelines has to be ignored because the LEA / school/ whoever - are playing a different game. I'm learning - slowly and reluctantly to play along but not to waste to much time on figures and predictions. How are we supposed to reliably point score children who've just come into reception (with no nursery) for example?

I would much rather spend my valuable time planning and preparing exciting, engaging activities than 'guessing' at numbers and age bands this time of year.

[Guest tinkerbell]

My headteacher came into my room on Friday with a sheet from or LEA she said she knew I didn't 'do' or 'agree' with it but the

LEA had used my foundation levels from 2 years ago and and put them in a chart alongside the end of KS1 children so my LEA are doing what they say they don't do...this is when I see red and I will certainly be saying my piece at the next EYFS twilight meeting!!!! mixed messages again and again...

 

Tinkerbell

[AnonyMouse_13401]

Good Morning,

I have a document produced by Ofsted that shows the FS Points against age, and NC levels. I do feel as you that we should NOT be doing this, but data is data and....

 

Anyway it shows that a child with 2,3,4 FS points = 1C.

5,6,7 FS points = 1B.

8 FS points = 1A.

and a child with 9 FS points = 2C

Hope it helps....

Hi. All very interesting reading. I would be interested in reading the ofsted guidance on this. Could you tell me where you saw it and where you perhaps a ref.

 

Cheers

[AnonyMouse_15201]

Thank you all for your help, advice and support.

 

Hope you all have a good day - and a good week!