Foundation report interpretation please!

[Sops]

Got ds' report today. No EYFS scores so how can I interpret the following?
PSRN- 'achieving elements of'
CLL- 'beginning to achieve some'
KUW- 'excels'
PSED- 'made some progress but still has work to do'

The other aspects sound about average, but these few I'm kind of unclear on.
The summary is that it is a very good report, but the way I'm reading it seems like he is not doing particularly well in PRSN or CLL, ie. the 3Rs. And pretty poorly in PSED. Am I right?

Is this reception?

Yes, mrz.

In that case your summary sounds accurate given the limited information the school has provided.

Hmmmm, I see...
They have said more, but I just identified the key phrases there to keep it succinct.
I wonder why the head's comment says it is a good report?

Here's a bit more detail:
CLL- ds is working at 40-60 mths of the EYFS and is beginning to achieve some of the early learning goals.
PSRN- ds has made good progress in mathematical development this year and is working securely within 40-60 mths of the EYFS and achieving elements of the early learning goals.
KUW- ds really excels in this area as he has such an enquiring mind and is very able to grasp new concepts and make intelligent links between different ideas.
PSED- ds still has work to do in this area but substantial progress has been made.
PD- ds uses increasing control over an object, can balance on blocks and jump and land appropriately.

Teacher comments: ds has a wide general knowledge and is keen to participate in discussions. He has a very questioning approach to his learning and will often ask very direct and pertinent questions. ds is improving in his ability to concentrate. In order to maintain the progress he is making, he needs to give his full concentration at all times. ds should be proud of the hard work that he has done to gain such a good report.

So for CLL& PSRN he's right where one expect an about to turn 5 child to be.

We just got working towards/ met/ exceeded the end of foundation stage expectations, and a paragraph about what they do in school for each area. PSRN comment is similar to yours and I am quite happy that my lad is just fine on that subject.

your Lads KUW is good.

I thought 40-60 months is the equivalent of 1-3 on the EYFS and that most children achieve those before starting school. The early learning goals, I thought they were expected to achieve by the end of reception.
My ds is 5.3 so not particularly young in the year.

Now I am very confused.

I've just printed out the EYFS profile and ticked off the sentences that appear in his report. He scores all 7's in PRSN so why is that 'working securely within 40-60 mths of the EYFS and achieving elements of the early learning goals?'
I know that the criteria on the profile can be achieved in any order (except 9 when you need all the others first), but for PRSN most are mentioned and those that aren't I know he is secure on (eg. says number names in order).

He gets two 7's and 2 8's in CLL. Why is this interpreted as 'working at 40-60 mths of the EYFS and is beginning to achieve some of the early learning goals?'
All boxes are ticked except 'hold a pencil and use it effectively to form recognisable letters, most of which are correctly formed' (which I know he can't do).

I thought that 'achieving expectations' was 6, is that right?

Have a chat with his teacher. As a rule I never send home a report that would surprise a parent.

Yes I think i'll have to ask his teacher.
Unfortunately I'm going to have to wait now until monday afternoon- why do they give out reports on Friday night? I'll just have to spend the whole weekend wondering how he is doing and re-reading the report for clues!!
I have tried googling the early learning goals and it seems they are the same as the foundation stage profile. Obviously it's a rare child that achieves all the goals ie. gets all 9s, but I would have thought that getting 7s and 8s in CLL was doing more than 'beginning to achieve some of the goals'.
I can't have misinterpreted his scores as they are there word for word in the report, but 'achieving elements of' sounds just like 'not doing terribly well' to me.

GRRR! I don't want to wait til monday to find out...

Is he achieving all the points up to and including 7? For points 4 to 8, they can achieve any of them before another ie they don't need to be achieved in order and so achieving 7 without also 4-6 would mean they were at point 4 (ie they had achieved 1-3 and one other).

Not sure if that says what I am trying to say - hopefully a teacher will see this and make more sense than I am doing.

I think that the "expected level" by the end of reception is to be on point 6 so to have achieved 1-3 and three out of 4-8. So different children on point 6 could actually have demonstrated different elements.

Thanks Lawrie, that makes more sense.
However, in the reading column he gets ticks in all five boxes ie. scores 8, yet he is only on red level books. Can that be right?

I've checked and those scores all still hold out in the main. The PRSN ones that aren't mentioned (use words to describe position/count reliably up to 10) I know he can do. Just writing goes down to a 7 because he can't use a pencil effectively, but how can he get a score of 7 in writing when he can't really write?!

I just had a thought, maybe there is a cut and paste mix up here and it is half a report for ds and half for another child and that's why it seems contradictory. Is that possible? If it is, then which bits refer to ds?
Surely the head would notice that though when she writes her comments (although she has got a whole school to do so maybe not).

Can he write recognisable letters, simple words, his own name? Hold a pencil correctly and form letters correctly?
Does he write lists, letters, stories?

He has just written me a note saying I Love You
This is how he has written it:
uL i
v yon
The L and the y are written back to front and the u is upside down, luv is written backwards and over two lines.
Can this child be scoring a 7 for writing? He admittedly doesn't have a tick in the 'using pencil effectively and form recognisable letters mostly correctly formed' and I suppose he does do the other things they say he does.
I just imagined that a child who scores well for writing must have reasonable handwriting, but I guess the two are not quite the same thing.
He can make up his own stories and they have a beginning, middle and end. He gets me to write them for him word for word and do specific illustrations too. Here's an example:
"I, the Red Ninja, saw a skeleton. The skull motorbike came and zoomed fast. The Ice Dragon shot ice out of it?s nose and he froze the skeleton in his tracks.
We had a big battle and guess who won- me, the Red Ninja.
The White ninja helped me and the Black Ninja too. Guess who lost- the skeleton."
At school this week he wrote sentences about 'captin jac sparro on the blac pel' (several letters reversed and pretty all over the place on the page but spelled as written here).

I would expect letters to be mainly formed correctly

In the report he gets ticks in all the 4-8 writing boxes except using a pencil correctly (he has really struggled with this), if LawrieMarlow is right he would score a 7- is this correct?

Obviously his teacher is happy with his work in school

Is she?
This is the conundrum- on the one hand she has put all the phrases in that, when checked off the EYFS, add up to 7s but on the other hand the first comment is "ds is working at 40-60 mths of the EYFS and is beginning to achieve some of the early learning goals".
Is that contradictory or have I misunderstood?

I interpret "working at 40-60 mths of the EYFS" as ticking all of 1-3 and "beginning to achieve some of the early learning goals" as getting one tick in 4-8 in some areas ie. totals of 3 or 4, well below average.
This was what I was worried by when I first read the report as the stock phrases didn't mean anything to me.
But when I checked the report against the EYFS profile (to see quite how bad it was) then it added up very differently- mostly 7s and a couple of 8s (4 or 5 in PSED, but that's another area we know he struggles in)
But which is correct?? Is he way behind or doing well??
Dh is away this weekend and I could really do with his opinion on it!

It actually sounds to me as if the report has been generated by the e-profile rather than written by the teacher.
I would roughly expect points 1-3 to be achieved in 30- 50 months and points 4-8 40-60+ months (reception year) although all children are individuals

www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/eyfs_practiceguid_0026608.pdf

I think it is definitely an automated report, with a good dollop of 'our topics have included x, y & z' and 'over the year we have been working on a, b & c'.
I have just skimmed through and there are only 3 actual personal/real comments in the whole thing!
I've looked at that link thank you. So 'working at 40-60 mths' means working at reception levels 4-8?
But 'beginning to achieve some of the early learning goals' means what?