EYFS - a question about writing(24 Posts)
We had parents evening last night and was happy with dd's progress. I have a basic understanding of the EYFS but don't understand how exceeding an ELG is measured.
DDs teacher said to achieve exceeding in writing they need to be able to put several sentences together with capital letters and full stops. Just wondering where this fits into the NC levels? DDs teacher seemed hopeful that DD would achieve this by the end of the year but I thought that was more what would be expected of a year 2 child?
Basically I'm worried because dd is good at maths (fair enough - she loves it and spends forever practising) but they seem to be pushing her extremely hard in all areas and although I want her to be challenged I am very aware she is only little.
I think more would be expected of a year 2 child than just writing a few sentences with full stops and capital letters. It appears that different schools in England interpret the exceeding criteria of reception in different ways. Are you worried they are pushing your child to hard above her ability? I guess the way to measure that is how much she enjoys school?
I live in Wales, DS3 is in reception. He currently writes in sentences with full stops and capital letters. At the moment is working at Welsh outcome 3a, and is expected to be at 4c by the end of the year. Outcome 4c is the equivalent of NC level 1c.
When DD was in reception last year, in order to get an exceeding in any academic subject they had to be a 2C (mid yr2 level).
However the next school down the road did it on a 1A
It might depend on how good her teachers are at explaining to her what's expected. Talking about things from time to time and finding out whether or not a child is able to do what's asked is one thing, and is all very good. But expecting a child to practise that task over and over again in order to get it right is not. So, it depends on what they're doing and how they're doing it, I'd say.
That's what I meant Simpson - seems bizarre that guidelines can be quite that open to interpretation! Given that so much predictive data is based on those results.
Exactly! I was so confused by it, I had a meeting with the HT and left even more baffled!
I was told in fiction writing she was exceeding (2C) but non fiction she wasn't (1A) but when I asked if she (DD) had been taught/asked to do non fiction writing, I was told "no" <<baffled>>
I think people need to take care not to over analyse grading, or treat it as an exact science. Don't forget the furore a couple of years ago about GCSE grade boundaries. And there isn't supposed to be any room for interpreting those. Marking is not an exact science and it never has been one.
On an individual child basis column I completely agree with you. I am quite happy to see that my children are progressing - whether I see that from the things they talk to me about, or the changes I can see in their written work etc. But from a governor point of view, so much software is now available that predicts what level a child should be at in KS1, KS2 etc based on previous results I am concerned when schools don't have the same benchmarking. If a child at Simpsons school gets exceeding ie 2c in reception they would be expected to be at a higher level at the end of KS1 then a child from the school down a road who got their exceeding with a 1a. The software prediction software isn't going to know if the school is awarding grades to a different level to the school down the road and the child's prediction at the end of KS1 would be the same. That either means the child with the 2c will be coasting, or the child with the 1a will be pushed unreasonably to attain a target they are not capable of.
Surely it'll depend on the software and how detailed the info typed in. I don't think it's possible to say that the program can't have a routine shouting, hey! The child has to have read Wind in the Willows twice to get grade c! If the programmer embedded one.
But, even if the programmer did include the routine, he can't prevent the teacher (or somebody else) typing in that the child has read it twice, when actually she has never read it because our school had its only copy stolen last year. People are human. And the only real way to ensure that the pupils excel is to educate them well, parents and teachers. I know that's a circular argument. It's very circular indeed, and not very helpful. But, unfortunately, it's also true.
I wasn't thinking about software like INCERTS which does have a 'tick the box when the child has done X' type system.
More like Fischer Family Trust which looks at say baseline entry data, KS1 results and CAT data and then says expected KS2 results would be....
I would have thought it is in the interests of the teachers to grade as conservatively as possible and I can understand why they would to be honest.
If you say a child is "exceeding" then presumably you have to maintain an awful lot of progress from that point to the end of Y2. When actually it could just be that a child "got it" quickly and is ahead of peers now but won't necessarily be ahead in two years time when everyone has caught up? The "exceeding" child may well be "average" in a couple of years time, yet the record will show that insufficient progress was made?
Our county says that exceeding is a 1B equivalent.
I am a Reception teacher and we were moderated last year by the local education authority. There is a document you can google - early learning goals exemplification materials - and according to that exceeding can be given if a child is writing for different purpose - lists, labels, instructions, stories etc. We were told that this would have to be independent writing ie child-initiated and that any writing that we specifically asked children to do did not necessarily show embedded learning. So actually it doesn't really relate to the NC levels.
Ah, that's interesting saadia.
In DD's writing she did stories, lists, labels but not instructions. Tbh I can't think of many kids who would think to write instructions without being asked to at the age of 4!
But I don't suppose her end of reception report will seem that important when she is a teenager
OK, she's not 4, but my daughter has written a reading guide for her sister. I'm not sure if it'll help her to learn to read. But it's a classic.
I'd agree a lot with what saadia says but add that not all the evidence needs to be CI. I used some unsupported but teacher-set writing in some moderation with my Y1 teacher.
independent isn't synonymous with child initiated and as RiversideMum says evidence can be from teacher directed work as well as child initiated
Mmmm, this was my issue that DD would need teacher directed work for writing instructions ie after they had done some cooking or something.
However, it is amazing what 2 terms of yr1 have done, she is constantly writing (at home ).
When the new 'minimalised' EYFS framework was introduced DFE officials mentioned that Exceeding was working on the level spectrum. I could be wrong, but at a 1c or highter I think.
That would be logical proudmama. However I suspect that this death by targets culture comes into play. Use the most challenging interpretation and it then looks like the children have made more progress in ks1. cynic moi?
I think what is dodgy though is if a child is judged to be secure in an area early in the year (or on entry to reception) to not give exceeding suggests no progress.
I have no intention of encouraging capitals and full stops in my dd op. I love her writing
Levels of Development – ‘exceeding’
Where a child’s development exceeds that set out as expected at the end of the EYFS, attainment should be recorded as being at the exceeding level for that ELG
Practitioners should consider the KS1 attainment targets and level descriptors, refer to the exceeding descriptors (annex 2 - Profile Handbook 2013) and then discuss with Year 1 teachers whether to deem a child exceeding in any ELG
Does anyone mind me asking where being 'developing' or 'secure' in the 40-60 months bracket is in relation to 'emerging', 'expected' or 'exceeding'?
My dd was in reception under the previous summative assessment (1-9) which I understood, but am confused by the 30-50 months and 40-60 months stuff.
Join the discussion
Please login first.