Where Are Your Children Now?

[Guest]

I'd be really grateful if you would be kind enough to share your overall points score for one of your top, middle and lower ability children. I know things vary from area-to-area and cohort-to-cohort but I'd still be interested so that I can either rejoice in that I'm doing an okay job or sink into despair because my children are obviously woefully behind! Thanks!

[Guest]

Don't have a class so sorry can't provide data! Have you seen the QCA advice? "A scale score of 6 or more in all scales indicates a good level of achievement within the ELGs". The attachment gives you the national data for last year if this is any help. I wouldn't go too mad with it - it's not that reliable yet - only been scoring for a few years or until the whole nation is scoring consistently. I use the FSP handbook criteria to death - make sure children are meeting what the criteria says under each point - far more important.

national_data_final_05.pdf

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Sorry I use Durham's own scheme which isnt translated into profile points until after half term.

[Guest tinkerbell]

I use the e-profile moose but have a small cohort of 16. My youngest is on the Gifted and talented list and can write in sentences with correct spelling (knows the KS1 list as well as Reception list) so she is 9's all the way a lovely well rounded child.My middle ability are around 6.. and my weaker ones 5. I also have 2 statemented children who are around 2/3 as its the language and understanding they come a cropper in.

Hope this is of use I work in a 'middle class' village school the children come in quite well ajusted but from 8 different settings so its the PSHCE bit where they score low on sharing etc.

Tinkerbellx

[Guest]

Thanks for the replies so far. It's the overall score I'm interested in really. I do religiously hang on to the '6 = a good score' from the Standards Site although there has been some recent debate on this site about what 'good' actually means when you compare this to the gumph in the Curriculum Guidance which says that MOST children should be reaching all the ELGs. However, I do believe that you cannot possibly expect ALL children to reach all of the points on the FSP and that a 'good' overall score would therefore be 13 x 6 = 78. In my current class one of my 'tops' is on 66, a 'middle' on 46 and a 'lower' on 28.

 

We have been told by our LEA that FSP scores can be used to set predicted scores/targets for Y2 SATs: an end of YR '6' on the FSP in, say, MD is meant to mean a score/target of 2B+ at SATs. I have great problems with this which I won't go into here, but it has made me even more determined to not 'give the benefit of the doubt' when assessing because of the pressures this will put on children and our Y2 teacher if the scores I give are too high.

[Guest tinkerbell]

Moose

I agree with you entirally .I was a yr2 for many years and when the SATs started the average child was a 2C now it's a2B you couldnt get a 3 in english unless you joined up your writing., and if you said the orange floated because it was orange you scored a 3 in Science!!!!!!

How times have changed.

I was always aware that the Class 3 teacher dreaded the 3's because once converted to numbers the numbers were actually for 3B and the children would have just scrapped a 3.©...but having just scrapped the 3 I had to give it to them because they deserved it ..I prefer the new way of collecting work and showing lots of examples of their 3'ness.

But the end of FS and play based yr1 curriculum does need

[Guest]

Harumph (that's meant to be a disgruntled noise but I wasn't sure how to spell it!)! Have just properly read the attachment posted by tea lady about the scoring 6 thing. This kind of goes against the Standards Site thing, doesn't it, which says about 6 being a good score? If they're arguing that 'the majority' of children achieve 6 or more then you can bet your life that they'll move the goalposts because for 'the majority' you could substitute 'average' and then this doesn't equate to 'good'. The fact that 'most' can be 1 more than half won't get a look in will it?!

 

I'm breathing fire now - can you feel it? I blame those people who I meet at local meetings who mark off all of the points on the FSP just because they've delivered all the ELGs and then when my scores came back last year on those spider-web diagram things mine were below the County average. I know I felt smug at my last meeting when they were talking about using profile scores to predict SATs and I sat there looking at people who I knew had delivered scores of 100+ for all their children and thinking of the dreadful burden this placed on the children and the Y2 teachers. When the scores come in it's going to make the value added from Reception to Y2 look really bad, isn't it, when in actual fact there's probably nothing wrong with it - it was just that the initial assessments were off.

 

Does that make any sense and can you feel the rage?!

Edited April 12, 2006 by Guest

[Guest]

Sorry about above rant and if I've scared you all! I'd still like to know your profile scores please! I promise I won't say anything if you've already got them all on 117!

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Sorry about above rant and if I've scared you all! I'd still like to know your profile scores please! I promise I won't say anything if you've already got them all on 117!

53557[/snapback]

 

 

I was sooooooooooo scared I spent the last hour transfering my 'top' and 'bottom' onto the FSP (wouldnt do it for just anyone ) Must say its much easier electronically. Came out with a score of 95 but she is exceptional (and I havent re checked yet to see if I added up right) and 52 (scored high in PSE and Language for communication and thinking) When I get exact figures back from LEA will let you know.

[Guest]

Thanks Marion you lovely person you! I hope you don't have nightmares tonight thinking of scary old me . My low is really low isn't he and my high isn't doing that great either compared to yours, even allowing for the fact that yours is exceptional. GULP!

[Guest]

Hi,

Moose I think you worry too much, I try and let these things 'wash over me' as best I can!

 

Having said that I am worried this year because I think my class are going to score quite highly (and I want to score really carefully and thoughtfully - cautiously) BUT they are a capable class?!?!

 

I don't have my profiles with me, but I think my lowest score would probably only be about 30/40, middle 60 ish and top 80 ish (no-one is yet to get a 9) and I am of the understanding that a 9 is an exceptional score - so even my two children who can read and write fluently don't have a 9 - may be they will by the end of the year.

 

My class is a lovely, diverse mix.

 

I would like to make the following points/observations about the profile:

 

1. At the moderation meeting last year, I thought it was ironic that if you scored your children very low, you, therefore, had little to prove (ie no evidence was needed to back up your judgements) Whereas if you ticked off 7 or 8 (which the child rightly deserved) you needed to back this up with loads of evidence - I came alway thinking I could make life very easy for myself by not bothering much with the profiles (which is a totally WRONG thing to think)

 

By the way, there were lots of complaints about our moderation meeting last year so hopefully our own professional judgement will be enough for some points this year.

 

2. Also I think the Profile already dictates the scoring before the child gets any where near it - what I mean is the Physcial ones are quite 'easy' really aren't they, whereas the linking sounds and letters and writing are quite hard. Reading the attachment from Tea Lady proves this I think.

 

3. Also how many of us (me included I am sorry to say) start looking at the Profile points as a starting point for teaching? Particularly when you notice gaps and feel the pressure of moderation? I think there is such a danger in this, closing down the learning etc but for simple time saving measures and making the profile managable with 30 in your class, it is sometimes easy to teach/assess straight from the profile.

 

Sorry to go on.

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Thanks Marion you lovely person you! I hope you don't have nightmares tonight thinking of scary old me  . My low is really low isn't he and my high isn't doing that great either compared to yours, even allowing for the fact that yours is exceptional. GULP!

53563[/snapback]

 

My children are scoring much higher this year on PSE and Speaking and Listening (afraid my low got over half his points in these 4 areas) so not much for the other bits . Not sure how this will all compute to predict SAT results if they are using overall scores as he got 2s and 3s in linking sounds to letters / reading/ writing/ number/shape/calculations .So I guess when number crunching it needs to be treated with a little caution.

Edited April 12, 2006 by Marion

[AnonyMouse_4544]

2. Also I think the Profile already dictates the scoring before the child gets any where near it - what I mean is the Physcial ones are quite 'easy' really aren't they, whereas the linking sounds and letters and writing are quite hard. Reading the attachment from Tea Lady proves this I think.

Quote Bungalow

 

 

 

Children in my class come in with very poor physical skills and I have some children still scoring 3-4 in this area...........this is reflected in their writing score. Think this shows we can all have similar totals but our children have lots of different strengths and weaknesses

[Guest]

I'd be really grateful if you would be kind enough to share your overall points score for one of your top, middle and lower ability children. I know things vary from area-to-area and cohort-to-cohort but I'd still be interested so that I can either rejoice in that I'm doing an okay job or sink into despair because my children are obviously woefully behind! Thanks!

53525[/snapback]

hi I am new to the site so bear with me

I am Year R leader of an infants school with 3 classess per uear group

Last year was my 1st year as year leader( previously in the Nursery)

I was keen to keep to all the guidance given in moderation meetings as a result our scores for the first time came lower than county average - either everyone else was giving away points like sweets or we were hard, or maybe it was just that group of children.

as a result we have done a lot of soul searching about our teaching, internal moderating etc however year 1 teachers say they are about usual so draw your own conclusions!

this year we are at the moment with this cohort each class is as follows for total points

 

below average 33

average 70

above 82

 

the main thing is don't worry about totals. think about the children, what they need. it may be interesting to see how children progress as they get older but at times people try to get me to put children on the register because they have a 'low' score but I know that they will get there

[Guest]

I think everyone nationally has been getting mixed messages about the FSP since its introduction - completing the ELGs, but now a score of 6 is "good", how much evidence to keep etc etc. The Standards site attachment does categorically say that it would be "spurious" (great word) to map scores into KS1 SATs predictions - we need to shout this from the roof tops!!!

Don't know if I have said this before but it is far more important to baseline children on entry and then look at their progress - after all they are individual children and isn't that what is important??? The e profile is great for this - use scores to consider provision improvements. When are we going to get away from this data-tastic culture we live in???

[Guest]

Whoops!!! Had a moment of madness. Have attached another Standards Site page which I was whittering on about above by mistake insted of the original one. See Q9 about "spurious" things.

 

www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/primary/faqs/foundation_stage/1145599/#1145603

[AnonyMouse_379]

The children in my class are scoring as follows

 

Top- 86

Middle- 64

Bottom- 33 (Hardly ever at school- so hard to assess)

 

The lastest push from our LEA is that these observations are done on child initiate activity and not on adult led activities. Hard to assess some areas that way- children don't always do what you want them to and many of the skills need to be taught... they may not be interested enough to do it in their own play.

 

We can only do our best and as ling as the children we teach are well rounded individuals, who can get along with others and have a passion for learning, finding out and exploring. Surely thats whats important?

 

L

[Guest]

I really, really agree with your last comment Lorna! And I think the 'total' scores can be very misleading - especially the CLL ones.

 

Marion - thanks for making such an interesting reply on my comment about the PD scale being easy! This will make me think more carefully in future - however we have been focussing quite heavily on this area (as it is being 'looked' at this year) and my class seem to be doing quite well. I also really agree with you about the writing and PD. However, the one child (boy) in my class who really can't write (not even hold a pencil) is (amazingly I think) VERY physcially confident and agile outside and on large equipment and with bats, ball, ribbons etc. They are all different aren't they?

 

Can I ask you kind people out there a quesiton? When you 'take' your 3 children along to moderation do you have evidence for all or nearly all of their profile points? (I know it is frequently pointed out that we are not expected to gather evidence for every child) but what about the 3 for moderation?

 

Thanks

[AnonyMouse_4544]

I really, really agree with your last comment Lorna!  And I think the 'total' scores can be very misleading  - especially the CLL ones.

 

Marion - thanks for making such an interesting reply on my comment about the PD scale being easy!  This will make me think more carefully in future  - however we have been focussing quite heavily on this area (as it is being 'looked' at this year) and my class seem to be doing quite well.  I also really agree with you about the writing and PD.  However, the one child (boy) in my class who really can't write (not even hold a pencil) is (amazingly I think)  VERY physcially confident and agile outside and on large equipment and with bats, ball, ribbons etc.  They are all different aren't they?

 

Can I ask you kind people out there a quesiton?  When you 'take' your 3 children along to moderation do you have evidence for all or nearly all of their profile points?  (I know it is frequently pointed out that we are not expected to gather evidence for every child) but what about the 3 for moderation?

 

Thanks

53726[/snapback]

 

 

I have already been moderated but it seems we work a very different moderating system.

We were asked to produce 3 pieces of evidence from 1 child for 6 statements chosen by the moderating team (could be the same or different children for each statement)

Our LEA seems to check our judgements rather than the children.

[AnonyMouse_79]

I trained as my school moderator before changing route to supply teaching so not sure what goes on now but in my then LEA we as moderators chose the children! Then we would observe the children and talk with the staff about that observation and the evidence they had provided.

When on supply last year, the school put forward the children and the moderator looked at the evidence to substantiate the profile scores.

So all different intrepretations?

[Guest]

Thanks so far. I'm still interested in your scores. Anyone got any lower than mine! Go on - make me feel better!

 

I do agree that it's about children being happy, well-rounded etc but don't think that that will help me much when we're Ofsted-ed/my scores are really low against the county average.

 

Would someone please clarify for me, in words of one syllable, the current thinking on the 6=good thing. Does that now mean that the average child should be achieving 6 or what? Feeling very stupid and confused but also rebellious and defiant: why should I mark children off when I don't think they're 100% just to meet some pencil-pusher's target who probably wouldn't recognise a child if they saw one!

Edited April 13, 2006 by Guest

[AnonyMouse_4544]

I trained as my school moderator before changing route to supply teaching so not sure what goes on now but in my then LEA we as moderators chose the children! Then we would observe the children and talk with the staff about that observation and the evidence they had provided.

When on supply last year, the school put forward the children and the moderator looked at the evidence to substantiate the profile scores.

So all different intrepretations?

53759[/snapback]

 

I have posted our county's moderation arrangements before. Looks like even the moderators cant deciide what they are looking for. I know our moderation process was moderated this year. So the moderators were moderated

http://www.foundation-stage.info/forums/in...indpost&p=49837

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Any consolation Moose I had a child at the end of last year who only managed 30 total

[AnonyMouse_79]

Tea lady-just read your data tastic post and completely agree. I am sure the profile wasnt designed to be used in the way it seems to be. I met someone who had been part of the pilot and she could only sing its praises, not an experience I have had!!

Can you elaborate on how you baseline please and use the eprofile, something I am not familar with but would like to be!

 

Welcome to you and to megchar!

 

Megchar, I was very pernickety when scoring the profile for the first time and as a result my school came well below the LEA average, for which the head and deputy took an ear bashing which was duely passed on to me! However, it was later acknowledged that our school actually showed results that were far nearer the expected LEA norms (Or averages?)!

[Guest flutter]

Hi Moose,

 

I'm glad it is not just me! Last year very complex regarding staffing (won't go into this) and I was employed as unqualified teacher. I was possibly overcautious of filling in profile CLL point 9 for more able writers as they were not consistently using punctuation.

 

Spider diagrams came back and NEW Advisor wanted to know why we below county average for writing! There must be loads of people in my county saying that children have achieved this when they can't possibly be writing at a year 1 level. It has taken me time and research to show my Seniour Management Team that this is happening all over the country!!! I have even resorted to printing off forum discussions to support me! Thanks to all out there who are having the same problems.

 

Why did they stop baseline assessment if this data is needed?

[Guest]

Hi Flutter - you're near Lewes aren't you? Do you come under Brighton and Hove (West Sussex) or are you under East Sussex? I'm at the other end, nearer Hastings. Maybe it's just you and me that are marking hard in East Sussex - we could start a club! At least we know we're not alone now - even if it is just the two of us!

 

I would be very interested to see other people's baseline assessments or have an outline of what you do/look for. Why do you do these? - that's not meant to be aggressive although I know it sounds it! Would just marking children off in, say, pink on the profile (indicating that they could do something on entry) be enough to be indicative of a starting point and prove value-added? There is no statutory requirement to produce baseline assessments is there (?) but it's beginning to feel like we need to do one just so that we can justify what we do. Nothing's ever good enough, is it?

 

In case you got sidetracked by my waffle, I would be grateful for anyone who would share what they do as baseline assessments (or if you don't), how you record this information and what you do with it. Thanks!

Edited April 16, 2006 by Guest

[AnonyMouse_79]

Moose, you are right, BAseline assessments are not statutory and were replaced by the profile but it seems that the powers that be have found it difficult to forgo the statistics that baseline produced and I suppose with the emphasis on value added that is understandable.

I am only familiar with the NFER baseline and although it was time consuming the data was useful for some idea of the childrens skills on entry.

Before, my current stint as a supply teacher I used to mark the profile within the first half term (in yellow) so that I could see where the children had come in, after first working with them re baseline.

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Why did they stop baseline assessment if this data is needed?

53917[/snapback]

 

In Durham we still do Baseline assessment. Our LEA modified the baseline material to enable a better match with the FSP and they convert baseline electronically into FSP data. Thats why I cant give accurate 'scores' until later next term.

[Guest]

I have looked at the 'Flying Start' method of assessment and think that it provides a really accurate, in depth, method of assessment - much better - and more useful - than the FSP but don't see how I could use it when this isn't what my County is doing. Is it fair to say that it does really need to be something that is adopted as 'en masse' approach rather than just me doing it on my own? What baseline do you do, Marion? Is it just looking at where your children are when they come in and then marking them off on the 'Flying Start' assessment sheets that you very kindly posted before? I think this is much better for showing progression because it really caters for those children who are working below the ELGs in a way that the FSP doesn't. However, again, I think this would prove difficult because of how our County's data is collected and I can just see it generating even more work for me because I would have to pick out all the FSP statements/scores myself.

 

Susan, would you kind enough to tell me more about the NFER baseline? Being fairly new to teaching (or perhaps it's just my ignorance!) I don't know anything about it. Thanks!

Edited April 16, 2006 by Guest

[AnonyMouse_4544]

I have looked at the 'Flying Start' method of assessment and think that it provides a really accurate, in depth, method of assessment - much better - and more useful - than the FSP but don't see how I could use it when this isn't what my County is doing. Is it fair to say that it does really need to be something that is adopted as 'en masse' approach rather than just me doing it on my own? What baseline do you do, Marion? Is it just looking at where your children are when they come in and then marking them off on the 'Flying Start' assessment sheets that you very kindly posted before? I think this is much better for showing progression because it really caters for those children who are working below the ELGs in a way that the FSP doesn't. However, again, I think this would prove difficult because of how our County's data is collected and I can just see it generating even more work for me because I would have to pick out all the FSP statements/scores myself.

 

Susan, would you kind enough to tell me more about the NFER baseline? Being fairly new to teaching (or perhaps it's just my ignorance!) I don't know anything about it. Thanks!

53931[/snapback]

 

 

The Flying Start assessment is begun on entry to nursery (I know day nurseries in the county use it and also some pre schools with children of FS age) and is an ongoing assessment used throughout the FS so it clearly shows value added The county colects the infomation at various point during the FS and towards the end of the summer term final data is collected and used to generate FSP scores. Although it is the Durham scheme it is used by other counties but they have to pay to have the results converted