Moderation Discussions, evidence!

[AnonyMouse_6593]

Hi all,

 

SLT have moderated our EYFSP data today and are nervous that there isn't enough evidence in the LJ's to support the writing and maths judgements. My argument of teachers professional knowledge didn't come into it, they want hard evidence.

 

How much writing and maths evidence goes into your LJ's? (or separate books if you use them) For example do you have a piece of writing each week for each child?

 

Thanks

:-)

 

 

 

[Guest]

We do a piece of adult-led writing each week and that usually goes into the lj, unless it's a card to go home or a piece of group work - a story map for example. We also collect as much evidence of independent writing as we can this half-term.

 

Less hard evidence of Maths - more dependent on observations, annotated photos and records of adult-led group work.

 

Having said that we were moderated by the local authority recently and they didn't look at our files - they were happy that staff could talk in depth about the children they (the LA) selected on the morning of the visit, giving examples of how children work at different levels with reference to the ELG's and the exemplification materials. They spoke with teachers and teaching assistants to check the depth of practitioner knowledge.

 

Hope that helps.

[AnonyMouse_6593]

Thank you for your reply.

When we had our moderation visit, the same as you, they asked the teachers to talk through the children and were happy that they knew the children inside out.

 

It's hard to evidence in maths for example a child saying one more one less than a number etc but to me if the evidence is there in observations, planning, photos, annotations that's enough?

[Guest]

the advisors who moderated us would agree with you, and so would I - can you refer back to comments the moderators made to support your case?