C.v.a What Are Your Experiences And Opinions?

[Guest]

Our school has just been through an Ofsted. and I am pleased to have received a '2' in our F.U after just two years. However, I do wonder on what evidence this is based as she observed us but saw no paperwork, no evidence of children's work only what was around the room, and asked me no questions whatsoever. As a school she questioned our C.V.A (contextual value added for those new to these abbreviations) We are a small school with errratic intake and some movement of children so it simply is not always possible to show this in the statistics. The maximum our year 6's can get is a Level5 and therefore it is not rocket science to work backwards to see what kind of scores you need to give at certain points to be able to demonstrate C.V.A.!!!!! I know of a school where they have been criticised for a similar point and it has been said that they will no longer award a child a high level at the end of K.S 1 as it means that they can not demonstrate good progress through K.S2. There is a similar problem with end of F.S stage. If they leave the F.S with high scores then K.S 1 have to demonstrate progress through the tracking systems r. There is enormous pressure on me to give low scores on entry because of this. It strikes me that the system is a nonsense because the finite end of a maximum level 5 means schools with a good socio economic catchment area cannot demonstrate C.V.A the same.

 

How do others perceive this and what are your experiences?

thanks folks

Lynda

[Guest]

I know that our Y2 teacher has said that is getting much harder to give a Level 3 for writing now. We have decided that there is no point forcing the children onto the next level by scraping through as it will make the next teacher's job much harder. We try to make realistic asessments- if I think a child deserves a 9 on the profile I will give it. 2 years ago I gave 2 children 9's for various areas and they are on track for very good Level 3's this year. However, I don't like to score them higher than I am sure that they are. If I am dubious, or think the child is hovering between achieving a certain point or not, I err on the side of caution and don't give the score. It doesn't make a lot of difference to the experiences/teaching they will have if I give a higher or lower score anyway. Similarly, if I am sure that they have achieved a certain level, I will give it even if it means their score is 'too high' for entry to the next class. I think you need to make sure that you can back up any decisions that you make by evidence (recorded or stored in your head from observations/discussions with others).

If children come into school with high levels, shouldn't the school be able to teach and assess them at Level 6 to show C.V.A. if they are capable of achieving it?

[Guest]

Its absolutely ridiculous if you ask me but then so are all these wretched testings - I applaud anyone working within primary and secondary education who have to deal with all these additonal pressures and as you say the whole system is nosense. I cannot even remember what my children acheived with their sats - in fact, I did not even open the lresults as they meant nothing to me or my child. It was not going to change my mind as to which school my child went to and to be honest I have never needed to know. Does anyone ask what did you get in your sats when you get to 16. I feel they might be a useful tool in some instances but clearly they seem to overtake everything else. I know of schools who start sat testing in January - sorry what sort of education is this? Teaching to achieve tests is not what I call teaching! So I am with you 100% but I am a parent and not a teacher.

Nikki

[AnonyMouse_73]

just butting in to say hi nikki, you've been quiet lately, nice to see you.

[Guest]

Thanks Mundia - have missed the FSF forum but have dared not go on it as I have so much to do and no time to do it in and I know that once I get on the menopausal woman with too much to say will spend too much time here putting my twopennyworth in. Still to complete my dissertation second extension - ooops, CWDC research to do, went to Romania to visit the kindergartens out there, what a fantastic experience - working on yet another module and working very hard in after school care and nursery. Still nearly over - got our graudation dates today so the light is at the end of the tunnel.

sorry should have put this in an email

Nikki

[AnonyMouse_79]

no, its interesting to know what people are doing. Good luck with the rest!

 

 

I think you have raised some very valid points, lynda. Not really anything else to add though, except that there used to be financial benefits to having a low attaining cohort on entry but Im not sure if they still remain?

[AnonyMouse_1195]

I agree with all the above. All these meaningless tests just waste valuable learning time because they take over. The knockdown effect on the very youngest children, where SMT try to get predictions for SATs on Nursery entry, is just unbelievable. These children are still developing and their development goes in spurts. I have had children who I was concerned were borderline SEN in Reception, only to see them 'take off' a year or two later. it was nothing to do with my teaching but to do with thier stage of development.

In the past i have been asked to assess (test) in the first week of entry to get the lowest scores. I assess to find out about the children to support where they are. We want formative assesment on entry and SMT want summative.

It worries me that children practice for tests, take other tests to see how they are doing, do optional SATS each year. Some yes but not so many.

I think a lot of these initiatives are not about the children at all but to ensure that teachers performance can be tracked. I do think that some people seem to have lost the plot.