Target tracker and assessment periods

[AnonyMouse_4562]

Hi,

In our LA we used to assess just using emerging and securing through Nursery and Reception. So in Nursery, in Sept we would expect them to be emerging 30-50 months, in February securing 30-50 months and June emerging 40-60 and so on through reception. However we are now using Target Tracker and can use the 'working within' judgement so I have suggested that we now have 4 assessment periods: beginning of year, December, March and June. My worry is those children who start on 'working within' - where would we expect them to be in Feb if all the assessment levels are supposed to be equi-distant apart?

What do other's do?

Green Hippo x

[AnonyMouse_73]

Personally I don't think they are equidistant. I have always felt that secure in one band would usually show emerging skills in the next band because of the way children are, and therefore there isn't really much progress between the two. I'm not quite sure of the reason for moving towards 4 assessment periods, perhaps I am missing something?

 

I'm not familiar with target tracker so will leave the way for those using to answer.

[AnonyMouse_4562]

I know what you mean Mundia which is why I prefer to use the term 'securing' to suggest they've a little to go before being completely secure and therefore, emerging in the next age and stage. I see it the same as the old NC levels - like 1c, 1b, 1a etc. Similarly those children who are a 1a are likely to be beginning to show some elements of level 2.

In order for our assessments to 'work' we have to consider them as being equidistant. Target tracker just allows us to input a 'working within' or 'developing' judgement allowing us to refine further than what our LA assessment system previously allowed us with just 'emerging' and 'securing'. This meant that to show a child as being above average we needed to choose 'securing' but now we have this 'working within' judgement which will be more accurate for some of the children.

With the previous system we expected children to make 2 steps or jumps, for example, they come into Nursery at 30-50 Emerging and leave Nursery on 40-60 Emerging. So have 3 assessments periods allowed this to work well. However, if we now expect children to make 3 steps a year (including the working within step) we either need to move the 2nd period later or have 4.

Probably not making any sense, just interested in how other people assess and when.

Green Hippo

[Guest]

We enter assessments at the end of each half-term regardless of its' length, so progress isn't always a nice smooth curve (is it ever anyway?)

We too use target tracker and use the full six steps so b b+ w w+ s s+.

Expected progress is to move a full stage in a year, so 30-50b moves to 40-60b, but our appraisal requires better than that, so at least 7 steps for all children. However lots of our children arrive in Year R within 30-50 so we have to accelerate their learning to achieve ELG's by the end of the year.

Final data is collected mid- May as my LA gives us an opportunity to moderate and check everything before we submit it formally in June

Pro's of half termly data? Means children get picked up quickly if something looks as if it's going awry. We meet for child-by-child discussions looking at each data set and sometimes another eye looking at it picks up something else.

Con's - I'm forever analysing data!

[Guest]

we baseline which takes a month or so, then input to target tracker in feb and july. anyone not making enough progress in feb is flagged up for interventions. sitting with each SEYE takes time away from them putting bits in learning journeys and i do not know where each child is as have 36 children so key workers know them best. we look at evidence together then make a judgement. but it is time consuming. doing it more than three a year would be hard.

[AnonyMouse_4562]

No, I agree it is not always a smooth process but what we have to be clear on is what is expected so that children who are not expected show up in the data. To be honest, I don't wait for summative assessment to pick up children who are not progressing so well - this is something we pick up through our interactions and observations and summative assessments back this up.

We have made a decision to not use the 6 steps in Target Tracker as it is just too difficult to be absolutely sure what we're after at each step. The addition of the 'working within' judgement will help to refine it enough. Indeed, OFSTED were very recently happy with the emerging and securing assessment that we have previously used. They only looked at on-entry and end-of-year data anyway!

Sooty99 - what 'steps' do you use (emerging, developing, securing or something else) and what would you expect at your Feb assessment if a child starts as 'working within/developing'?

Thanks for your advice so far, all food for though!

Green Hippo x

[Guest]

we use 6 steps - B, B+, W, W+, S, S+. expected progress would be 3/4 steps by feb, but, as marywilliam, more is wanted. expected is never enough!! 7 by end of year required. so depends on entry. if they came in at beginning 30-50 then expected would be beginning 40-60 by july. so feb maybe W+/S. so with 3 steps midway between developing and securing i guess!! 6 steps easier to show.

ours come in at 22-36, some 16-26 and a few 8-20. so wouldn't expect them to be at ARE!!!