Enquiries to: Seona Ford Telephone:

01245 436349

Email: [email protected] or Sue Sapsed Telephone:

0770 601 4327

Email [email protected]

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

1

Moderators’ Training

Page 3

Support for Moderators

Page 3

Moderation Visits

Page 4

Consistency

Page 7

Reliance on Test Results

Page 11

Moderators’ Further Comments

Page 12

The Moderators’ view of Moderating

Page 13

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

2

As for last year moderators valued their training, with a number commenting positively on a variety of aspects: 1.

The fact that they were sent samples of children’s work in advance of their training and were asked to level this and send in their judgements prior to the training   

2.

Discussing levels of the work they had already each levelled:    

3.



As always the chance to network and as a first timer chat with people who had done it before Having experienced moderators share difficult scenarios they had encountered

The session on the statutory requirements for KS1:  

5.

The discussions and agreeing levels during the training meant I felt I was rehearsed before I went into schools. Having the opportunity to level work together and discuss the evidence and what you would expect. Having the opportunity to discuss levels and familiarise myself with the process. Moderating judgements

The fact that there was a variety of experience among the moderators: 

4.

Having the work to level prior to the training day Looking at nationally agreed samples of levels - will need access to the Standards Files or another source of national exemplars. Pre-course activities helped to focus me on the sorts of conversations I might have in schools around levelling.

Update on current KS1 Assessment and Reporting Arrangements Good to have the latest updated info

Other aspects of the training:  

Having lots of detailed information and paperwork e.g. the prompt sheet for ringing schools, and example phrases for use in visit notes Training refreshed some of the skills I had not used so much recently.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

3

Things moderators would find helpful in their training next year (and will inform planning for the 2011-12 training):  

 



Having some completed visit notes as good examples Perhaps more examples of the evidence you may expect/hope to see in schools. More opportunities to moderate children‟s work as a group. Extremes – particularly P scales. Perhaps SALs could have a short session on these and a newsletter could include some guidance. Of course, it would always be good to have more time to spend on the training!

For a number of moderators their responses to the question ‘What could be improved on the training?’ suggested that they felt that everything they needed had been included:  Good question – can‟t think of anything!  Hard to say - I found it all useful

Support for moderators following their training As a new moderator, shadowing Lead Moderator on first visit  As a new moderator I found the first school visit which was where I was shadowing as extremely useful. It gave me the opportunity to see a visit in practice and to clarify any queries I may have had  Visit to AAIA regional moderation meeting was really helpful too  Would be good to have a twilight meeting after we have done our first one or two moderations (to help clarify any queries). 

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

4

Moderators had very positive comments to make about the schools they visited:  

       

 



The warm welcome and open and honest dialogue with colleagues in schools All the schools I visited were very positive about the process and were actively involved in discussions taking place The commitment of teachers (and some HTs) to the process and their desire to be accurate and thorough. The willingness of teachers to see another point of view and adjust their levels when they could see it was fair. Schools were generally well organised with lots of evidence as they had received the guidance Many teachers well prepared and able to talk knowledgeably about their pupils Most had read the materials sent before the visits and were as well prepared as they could be Good number of Y3 teachers involved Difficulties involving the Y3 teacher(s) in the schools I visited if separate infant and junior schools The area of the school set aside for the meeting usually allowed for a table to work on and spread out work samples. Some of the schools have decided to use the Y2/Y3 moderation model as their school practice APP now embedded in most schools and having a strong impact on quality of teacher assessment this year. In previous years I have often been given APP sheet as evidence; this year I was given APP highlighted sheet, and then shown the relevant evidence in children‟s books that had led the teacher to highlight certain aspects of AFs. Much more confident use of APP as a tool for periodic assessment in most schools. For NQTs there was a positive impact when the mentor was also able to engage in the moderation visit.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

5

Moderators were also positive about the changes to the 2011 moderation process: 

    

Easier to make appointments this year- perhaps because of 2 week time frame, also because I offered selection of times/ dates from which schools could choose. I found the new visit notes easy to use, the questions were nice and open and allowed good discussion I found it easy to record the question outcomes and this led to conversation rather than constant typing The improved visit report enhanced the meetings this year The format of the new visit notes worked well. The visit notes form this year was easier to complete but enabled just as much detail to be provided.

Although there were still some issues for them:  I missed having the spring visits - felt that March visit gave schools time to try a different approach, encourage teachers to use tests early.  It would be helpful if it were stressed early on in the process that moderators themselves do not select the children and that the sending of the names of children selected is out of everyone‟s hands  I found it quite hard to keep to the time scale and was glad I didn‟t have two large schools to do in one day. It was often time wasted waiting to see the head.  If the meeting is viewed as a training opportunity too then timescales were very tight, especially when discussions involved a few teachers and judgements came into question. Typing as I went along was an added pressure on time. Two visits in a day was quite challenging  There was often a lack of independent work for lower ability children  I appreciate that the visit notes form has been shortened to keep moderation visits within time constraints. Schools put a lot of time and effort into preparing sample of work, releasing staff and presenting evidence to support judgements- my visit notes are probably almost as wordy as previous years in order to provide the feedback that most schools seek as part of their own self evaluation and review. Do we need consistency within the moderation team in the amount of detail or does it vary on school by school basis?  Quite difficult to fit in quite a lot of moderations in a two week period, if you are school based  Quite hard working to tight timescale (2 days to return visit notes) as busy time in school.  Lots of discussion at evaluation meeting re. possibility of doing an initial visit to NQTs/those new to Y2 in the spring term.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

6

Moderators were asked how they felt about the consistency of judgements within the schools they visited. Of the moderators responding to this question 57% felt in- school consistency was good and the remainder felt it was excellent. They were also asked about consistency between schools. This evoked a less positive response, with 71% of moderators feeling this was good, 14% indicating they felt it was excellent, but the rest feeling it was just slightly better than poor. Their comments, which reflected the differences between the schools they visited, included: •





• • • •









When the school is bigger there was good moderation. In one school I visited the teachers had been in year 2 for a very long time and they relied on their experience and were not really checking against the level descriptors.I had to ask both teachers and the year 3 teachers, who had been invited to the moderation, to level a level 3 in writing and we eventually agreed 2A. I worked with a range of teachers many of whom were moderating within school accurately but for one or two this was difficult. Sometimes this was lack of experience or understanding of levels Those schools using national curriculum level descriptors and using whole school moderation effectively appeared to have a secure knowledge and consistency with their levelling I found that teachers clearly discuss and moderate when there are 2 or more classes. Teachers in single form entry schools had a harder job in some cases and were not as well supported as they might have been I think there is more consistency within schools. Teachers worked together to discuss assessments and moderate together Between the schools – at the extremes of the scales – level 3s weren‟t always recognised (felt political in some cases) and P scales – some schools using other versions of the P scales which gave slightly different pictures

Some good debates when children got higher or lower levels in SAT compared to TA. Interesting to see how teachers are becoming more confident in their teacher assessments and the ability to produce a range of evidence to back up judgements. Capturing of evidence for reading and AT1 in maths is improving-stronger in reading. Schools I visited had worked hard to improve guided reading notes and most were involving other adults successfully recording relevant assessment evidence. Photographs showed that children do have experience of problem solving and Yr2 teachers were able to talk about individuals but less recorded evidence such as annotations to children‟s work, observations by TAs. Perhaps schools need to build confidence and skills of other adults to know what they are looking for in practical maths/ problem solving. There still does not appear to be a great deal of moderation between schools. There is a lot of moderation in house.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

7

The following table shows the number of judgements that were changed following discussion with the KS1 moderators:

This followed visits to 166 schools with a minimum of 3 children‘s attainment for each subject being discussed (and in larger schools, the attainment of greater numbers of children being discussed). Moderators’ responses to the question: ‘Teachers’ judgements. Were they generally in line with national standards?’ included: •

Yes



Mainly



Generally although if anything Y2 teachers are harder when levelling than those in other year groups – many felt the national standard for L3 writing for example would be more likely moderated within school as a 2A



Teachers seem to want to be cautious and levels in some cases had to be raised. Some schools were not using the national standards directly. All in all though the levels were generally in line with the standards.



More secure within level 1 and 2; more differences at either end



Most were - although in one or two cases they had forgotten to use NC level descriptions and relied on APP to level which did then affect the accuracy in a small number of cases



Yes. Three of my schools this year are having a high level of LA support from literacy and numeracy consultants due to low attainment/ Ofsted categories. This involves frequent pupil progress meetings, whole school moderation of work and often use of standards files for INSET.



Other schools have worked hard to establish an understanding of levelness through moderation within the school and occasionally with neighbouring schools

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

8

Moderators’ thoughts about the question: ‘Were there any subjects where teachers were less confident or less consistent in their judgements – and which ones were they?’ again demonstrated the similarities and differences they encountered between the schools they visited: 

No



Reading still provoked most discussion as less evidence is available to look at



Always reading judgments were pretty good overall, but many teachers did seem to lack confidence in this area.



Writing



Writing at the higher levels



Teachers were less consistent with writing assessments. They tended to give higher levels when evidence was only seen in one piece of work.



Cross curricular writing was rarely seen, unless teachers were asked specifically about this - which sometimes happened if the range of genres available for the moderator was rather limited.



Less consistent judgements were in writing where there is most evidence although teachers generally felt more confident about assessing this subject. There tended to be less evidence for L3 reading and maths than for writing.



Not subjects, but the jump from a 2A to a Level 3 lent itself to lots of discussion as did Using and Applying in Maths



Writing around P scales and P8/1C in all subjects



Not really – it wasn‟t subjects but levels. I think teachers are generally unsure of 1a/2c and 2a/3c levels and what makes a child a 2c and not a 1a and a 3 and not a 2a.



I felt teachers were less confident when it came to assessing maths and this was where tests were being used more frequently. I also felt that there was a lack of consistency when levelling writing if APP was only being used and national level descriptors were not being referred to.



P scales in all subjects



Less consistent judgements were in writing where there is most evidence although teachers generally felt more confident about assessing writing. There tended to be less evidence for L3 reading and maths than for writing.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

9

Moderators’ comments about teachers’ confidence in their assessments included: 

The majority of staff were very confident in their own judgements. Some NQTs less so



This was quite high



High confidence



Needed advice re P Scale children and children on cusp, especially from a 2A to a L3



Some lack of confidence around P8 into 1C but not surprising and looking at best fit rather than how many statements highlighted.



Teachers‟ judgements are generally accurate but I think they always lack confidence that they are correct and like to have it confirmed through moderation.



The teacher‟s confidently discussed the children in their classes. They found the TA moderation level grids useful.



Differed between schools – as did support from SLT



In one school they were under pressure to keep levels as low as possible to reduce impact on KS2 levels.



Good. Improved confidence with good range of evidence.



Teachers were generally quite confident though nervous at first. Most confident to assess writing and number.



Overall they were confident and willing and able to discuss the whole child and pose a valuable argument about the level of each child.



Whole school/ KS/Yr group moderation much more common now, giving teachers confidence to talk about how they reached level judgement. Some still given tentatively- “Well we think……”, so communal decision.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

10

Moderators were asked: ‘How much reliance did you find teachers/schools are placing on test results?’ and their responses reflected the differences in the schools they visited.     

 



 

 

Very little, fortunately It was good to see TA had the higher weighting, with tests to support Far less now. Test results were just a part of teacher assessments. Quite a lot in maths but not as much in English Teachers generally didn‟t rely on the test results – they were secure in their teacher assessment judgements. What the test results did however was make them question if their teacher assessment result was correct and then go back and make sure that it was. Tests are still dominating a small number of schools Still too much overall. Many teachers are still unsure about how many tests/tasks they need to do - they seem quite surprised when told they only need to do one test/task whatever the outcome. The response usually seems to be „Well, it‟s good practice for the children!‟ In about 75% of my schools the test just acted as an extra piece of work but I did see an example where tests still were making up a large proportion of evidence.

Teachers were using tests as evidence to support their teacher assessments. Mixed – some schools it was seen as confirmation and as part of the evidence but in some schools we started with test result and then found evidence to back that up as teacher assessment They used these to support their own judgements. Not a huge amount. I feel they are using them to support their judgements and some were keen to argue that despite achieving a higher level in the tests they were not fully working within that level and had assessed them at a lower level

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

11

Finally the moderators were asked whether they had any further comments they wished to make. These are best separated into three topics: Reporting the teachers’ feedback:  

These are comments, following moderation, from teachers that I have spoken to who have been moderated this year: They all welcome moderation as they like the discussion about levels. They would still prefer (and I don‟t know what we do about this) to choose their children as they want to be able to discuss the ones they are unsure of rather than the ones they are sure of. As one teacher said to me „I knew the child was a 2b in reading but I had one where I couldn‟t decide if they were 1a or 2c‟. They also didn‟t find it helpful to discuss pupils who were statemented and on P scales.

Issues still facing schools: 

 



  

I think more schools need to work together collaboratively to ensure good CPD takes place and staff get to see standards in other schools. Evidence of extended writing is still an issue that some schools face, along with problem solving in maths. Out of my 6 schools 2 heads were not in school on the day I visited or they had other meetings arranged. The deputy Heads were more familiar with Key Stage 2 and this was a little difficult in the feedback. Most schools said they had looked at the standards files but I could not see the impact on their evidence gathering. Some teachers had them on their assessment files but the documents looked untouched P Scales still causing some confusion. I do think that schools need to have clarification on the use of the national level descriptors when using APP Still very few schools (1/6) using the tests and/or tasks in the spring term (Spring visits previously provided opportunity to suggest this).

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

12



It was a great experience



I really enjoyed the moderating experience



In general I was impressed with the consistency of assessment in all the schools I visited. Staff are aware of national standards and use Standards Files to consolidate their knowledge.



I loved going into different schools and seeing how teachers assess on a daily basis. I also picked up lots of new ideas and became more astute with my own assessment practice. Lots of very good practice going on and moderating is the ideal chance to celebrate this.



I really enjoyed the experience of working alongside other Y2 teachers and seeing the range of evidence. Thanks for the opportunity

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

13

With grateful thanks to the KS1 Moderation Team for their commitment and professionalism.

Sue Sapsed, Lead Moderator.

KS1 Moderators' Evaluation 2011

14