New EYFS how does it differ?

[simpson]

Hi

DD is currently in reception and all year she has been assessed on the old EYFS and parents have been told where their DC are according to the old assessments ie working at a point 6/7.

Their school reports have just come out and they have suddenly switched to the new EYFS which seems tougher and they are not awarding any DC an "exceeding" unless they have reached an NC level of a 2C, surely this can not be correct?

Also it now seems that certain things have not been covered (ie money and telling the time) as they were using the old EYFS iyswim so then no child got "exceeding" in numeracy because they have not been taught it

Only one child out of a possible 90 got "exceeding"

Are there other areas that should have been taught that haven't if they have been using the old EYFS?

(Have meeting on Thursday, so want to get my facts straight!)

[Alibabaandthe40nappies]

simpson this seems really weird, and is bad of your school to have taught to the wrong curriculum if that is really what has happened. I remember the reception head of curriculum talking at the new parents evening back in autumn about the new curriculum and how they had rewritten a lot of material to take it into account, so my impression from that is that there was a fair amount of change.

DS1 is in reception this year too, and got exceeding in more than half of the 17 areas. We were kind of expecting it, they've been telling us how far ahead he is since he first got there - bizarrely the thing I'm the most pleased about is that he got expected for personal care and forming relationships, because these have been the problem areas for him.

Some parents have been indiscreet about their DCs results in the playground, and there seem to be a sprinkling of exceedings - so I don't know if our school have marked more generously?

Sorry none of that is very helpful perhaps - but I would be furious at them just missing whole chunks of the curriculum and then assessing against them. That is really unfair.
I guess it will make the school look like they have done a fabulous job with them in year 1 though...

[Periwinkle007]

that is rubbish. Did your daughter get exceeding for her reading? I hope so!

I have no idea how the 2 differ in actual what is taught though so can't help there but I can't believe they didn't check what they were supposed to be teaching them.

I can understand that yes it is tougher so there won't be as many exceeding as there used to be 7/8/9 but 2c can't possibly be right in any of the areas or it couldn't be reception level.

[mrz]

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/194179/Early_Years_Foundation_Stage_Profile_Handbook.pdf annex 2 gives exceeding guidance

[mrz]

A children working at exceeding level is working beyond reception level (they are exceeding what is expected in reception)

[simpson]

I was sooo when I got her report tbh...

She was given 4 exceeding s in reading, speaking, numeracy and writing and 3 were taken off her.

There are other kids who are reading stage 9 books who got expected!

DD got the only exceeded in the year.

Other parents have been told their DC are bang in where they need to be all year and come the report have all emergings

My concern is that if she has not been taught the correct stuff how can she learn it?

Also a 2C is nearing end of yr2 level so surely this cannot be right?

[tiredbutnotweary]

I've been waiting for this (in a writing on the wall way).

If you google the EYFS profile FAQs re moderation (I think) one of the FAQs specifically states that schools are NOT to say that a child must reach level 2 to be awarded exceeding. Putting DD to bed so can't link to it now but will do later if no one else finds it.

Also check out TES primary forum (search exceeding) where you will find teachers awarding exceeding from orange band (even below).

This level of disparity, between schools / LAs / moderators, makes a mockery of the whole thing.

Finally check towards the end of the hand book - a child awarded an exceeding in reading but not in attention and listening would be considered an odd profile. Something I have no doubt I will be raising with DDs school as my money is on her only getting an exceeding for reading and nothing else ....

[Periwinkle007]

we haven't got ours so no idea from our school at all, last parents evening was Feb.

I am pleased for your daughter she got 4 exceeds, that is brilliant but from what you have said on here that the school have told you I am surprised she hasn't got more especially when I have seen people saying their children have got a lot more exceeds than that.

Yes exceeds is above the level expected but I know perfectly well that in many ways my daughter started reception ahead of the old expected levels but looking at the new ones I think she will get maybe 1 or 2 exceeds. In a different school perhaps she would have had more.

How can a level 2 even be mentioned in relation to reception levels. I don't understand that. the reception levels surely have to be below the NC levels or are we going to suddenly find next that the NC levels are all changing? otherwise if you have children only getting expected in reception who you would presumably then expect to be an expected 1b at the end of Yr1 will have already met it before they even get into yr1 or am I missing something here.

as for the fact she hasn't been taught stuff and how is this going to be sorted out which is at the end of the day the most important part of your post I think you need to request at your meeting (and follow it up in writing IMO) that they confirm to all parents what work was NOT covered in reception that should have been and how exactly this will be addressed to ensure all children are taught this in Yr1 without it impacting on their Yr1 learning. I suppose as many things in reception are introducing stuff they will then recover and build upon in yr1 then hopefully they will be able to do this without it being a problem. If you are not satisfied they are going to do it then you want to know exactly what has been missed so you can look at it with her yourself.

[simpson]

Tired - could you link it for me as I cannot find it

[simpson]

Peri - that is why I am so cross is that there could be stuff she has not been taught that she should have been.

Her report only showed 1 exceeding, the other 3 were removed by EYFS Head before I got them...

[Wafflenose]

Hello,
The school shouldn't have been referring to the old levels at all, and they can't have taught that curriculum. They just can't.

Around 40% of children are achieving 'expected' across the board. The bar has been raised so far that 'exceeding' is rare. DD2 got 'expected' for everything, and 'exceeding' for reading and writing. I wondered if she'd get it for art and imagination (which as you know she is very strong on) but the teacher said some of the things they now have to do to get 'exceeding' are so, so hard that she couldn't quite award it. So I really wouldn't worry about getting hardly any - it's merely a reflection of the difficulty of some of the new targets. You know your DD is doing really well for her age, and the school knows this and should teach appropriately next year.

Neither the old or new system is linked to NC levels whatsoever... our teacher made that VERY clear. So if the children have the skills (through learning at home, or being stretched in class) to have reached a NC level 1 or 2, they might well tell you off the cuff (they did with my DD1 when she had 2Bs at the end of Reception - during the mornings she was taught with year 1) but I would not expect these to be mentioned on the report because there's no facility to report it, as such...

[Wafflenose]

Are you sure they were not giving out last year's EYFS levels as well as this year's to make an easier comparison for parents? They shouldn't be compared anyway, but is it possible? Because ALL schools know that the changeover happened last September. In any case, I don't see it as teaching a different curriculum at all... just a different way of assessing the same thing, with harder targets.

[simpson]

DD's teacher said today that there are things (especially in numeracy) that was not on the old EYFS system.

The teacher also said the EYFS Head re-marked all the exceeding marks because they were not a level 2C.

I have not spoken to EYFS Head yet as she is part time.

All year I have been told DD has been assessed on the old EYFS and the teacher even showed it to me at parents eve.

I knew that they should have been using the new one from Sept but just assumed they would stick with the same one (however naughty that is) all year, not suddenly change it in July (cynical side of me wonders if its because Ofsted were in last week).

I was not expecting NC levels in her report as NC levels is nothing to do with EYFS which is why I can't understand the level 2 comment (for exceeding).

I mean, to have 90 kids with no exceeding (apart from DD's one) is not right is it?

Teachers and HT's comments in her report "X has exceeded all academic expectations this school year" and then all levels (except 1 are expected).

[Wafflenose]

I take the point about the maths and the 2C thing, which are blatently wrong.

But to give one 'Exceeding' and to say she is exceeding (without the capital e, so to speak) are not mutually exclusive. Yes, DC can be well ahead, without meeting every single one of the new impossible targets. I'd tackle the Head about the old targets/ 2C thing. But in terms of curriculum, there's not a massive difference. In both my children's Reception years, it was free flow and structured play, with some ICT, PE, group reading and phonics lessons. Maths consisted of counting, learning about shapes and ordering. If they did any time or money, it consisted of playing with clocks and coins. I don't think there was anything formal.

[Wafflenose]

I meant impossible!

[Periwinkle007]

well that sentence sums it up.

there is definitely something wrong if the EYFS head has remarked all of them because they were not a 2c and I think that definitely needs clarifying and justifying to be honest.

I would be surprised at only 1 exceeds out of 90 children on 17 areas so 1/1530!

[mrz]

New Early Learning Goal
Children count reliably with numbers from one to 20, place them in order and say which number is one more or one less than a given number. Using quantities and objects, they add and subtract two single-digit numbers and count on or back to find the answer. They solve problems, including doubling, halving and sharing.

Previous

1. Says some number names in familiar contexts, such as nursery rhymes.
   
2. Counts reliably up to three everyday objects.
   
3. Counts reliably up to six everyday objects.
   
4. Says number names in order.
   
5. Recognises numerals 1 to 9.
   
6. Counts reliably up to ten everyday objects.
   
7. Orders numbers, up to ten.
   
8. Uses developing mathematical ideas and methods to solve practical problems.
   
9. Recognises, counts, orders, writes and uses numbers up to 20.
   

1. Responds to the vocabulary involved in addition and subtraction in rhymes and games.
   
2. Recognises differences in quantity when comparing sets of objects.
   
3. Finds one more or one less from a group of up to five objects
   
4. Relates addition to combining two groups.
   
5. Relates subtraction to taking away.
   
6. In practical activities and discussion, begins to use the vocabulary involved in adding and subtracting.
   
7. Finds one more or one less than a number from one to ten.
   
8. Uses developing mathematical ideas and methods to solve practical problems.
   
9. Uses a range of strategies for addition and subtraction, including some mental recall of number bonds.

[caffeinated]

But 2c would be exceeding for the end of year 1 so that's ridiculous.

[Wafflenose]

I wonder if their choice of term, 'Exceeding' is part of the problem. Maybe they should have called it "Absolutely exceptional" or "Highly unusual" or something...

[simpson]

Exactly!!!

I guess I am concerned that there is other stuff that has not been covered that I don't know about.

I am not worried about it as I know a lot is re-covered in yr1 but just cross with the school who have not been teaching what they should have iyswim.

As you know DD's teacher is truly fab and DD has had an amazing reception year but I just want to get my facts right before tackling EYFS Head who I have had "issues" with before

There is a G&T group in reading (apparently - I found out today) and they do guided reading together at stage 8/9 and not one of them (apart from DD) got exceeding and then there are kids who are on book band 2/3 also on expecting

[simpson]

Well, DD can do all those numeracy things (and more) so am now even more confused....

[simpson]

Wafflenose - I do agree and think that there should be 2 levels above expected, one that is very rare and one that says a child is ahead of the expected level iyswim.

[mrz]

Level 1
count up to 10 objects, read, write numbers to 10, order numbers to 10,
begin to use the fraction, one-half, understand addition as finding the total of two or more sets of objects, understand subtraction as ?taking away? objects from a set and finding how many are left, add and subtract numbers of objects to 10, begin to know some addition facts,
solve addition/subtraction problems involving up to 10 objects,

[simpson]

Wafflenose - my annoyance is because possibly one little thing could be stopping DD being exceeding, which I am not so bothered about, what I am bothered about is that it is picked up mid July because they have been using the old system and its too late to do anything about it...

[Wafflenose]

I agree Simpson. But there isn't - if the child has completed all the targets, they now get 'expected', whereas they might have got an 8 or 9 before. (I'm NOT saying you can compare the numbers, because you really can't. The teacher explained it all to me pretty well.)

They can be able to do far, far more, and will still get 'expected'. To get 'exceeding', they have to achieve everything on some seemingly very difficult, secret list. Or at least it's secret in our school. The teacher didn't show it to me!

[Alibabaandthe40nappies]

simpson I think your school have marked very harshly, on the basis of what you say about the reading.