Do all schools mark their reception reports in the same way? - feeling a bit deflated!

[averywoomummy]

I got DDs reception report today and feel a little bit deflated. She got all expected except one which was emergent. I wouldn't expect her to get exceeding in everything but one or two would have been lovely especially in communication and understanding which I think have always been really strong points with her (and in fact her teachers said at open evening that she was working at a year 1 level in these).

I'm a bit more bemused because a friend with a DD at a different school says her child got every category as exceeds. I know the DD well and would have said that her and my DD are fairly equal development wise so was wondering how much consistency there is across the schools in terms of deciding on grades?

My head says I am being silly and that I should be pleased that she is where she should be...but my heart wishes there had been just one exceeds!

I say 'very bright' because it seems that everyone I meet has a 'very bright' child which statistically can't be true, so excuse my cynicism. I think John o'Farrell hit nail on head with his excellent satirical phrase 'approaching gifted'.

I mention university because I thought it clear that successive gov policies for number of years now has been to push university education on all and that testing and grading five year olds was simply the sad and inevitable result of this kind of policy.

Well, I seem to have a very average child. Reading this thread is making me depressed honestly. He got expected for all but three, which he got emerging in. I'm really pleased about the expected ones and worried about the emerging ones. Plus seeing that all these kids are way beyond my son with reading etc are getting expected is making me wonder if my son should have gotten it at all. Though I do understand it is a huge range.

There isn't a whole hell of a lot I can do about 2 of his emerging results because it is communication/making relationships related. He is quite introverted. The other is numbers. I'm not sure if I should go nuts trying to get him up to speed or what. Apparently he is confident working with numbers up to 10 (halving, adding etc) but not up to 20.

It makes me really sad to hear people saying things like "she is only expected". These kids are five years old fgs. They have achieved exactly what was expected of them in their first year of school and this is somehow disappointing?!

teafor1 the one thing that is clear from this thread is that schools are judging exceeded very differently and that it's unusual to get many exceededs. They're very little for predicting future success - they have up to 13 more years of school to nail it! At the start of reception my primary goal for dd was that she felt confident socially and was able to talk to adults as she can be very shy. I was also hoping her reading would get going and that she'd get plenty of art and craft in as she loves it. All these have been achieved. If i read more than that into her report they'd like her to be more independent and solve problems in maths. I'm not planning to do anything about these - she can get on with it in y1.
Ds is also in reception - my goals for him were that he didn't hit anyone, learnt to make friends and poo on a public toilet. I don't have his report yet but he's done all those things and loves school, he's positive about everything.
I don't know about anyone else but mine are both knackered and looking forward to a few weeks off to play out in the garden. We'll still read at bedtime but that's it.

that was me intheshed and yes I am disappointed she only got expected.

BUT I am not disappointed in her or her actual achievements, I am disappointed in a system that means a child on book band 11 and reading chapter books and doing everything required to go with that is marked as expected level in reception when I think it should be seen as more than that. It seems like it would be in some schools. Other areas I could say she hasn't made any progress in at all in the whole of reception because she was working above the 'expected' level with them when she started school. The schools are supposed to be working on the same levels and should be moderated so how can there be such variation in it all?

Well, I have further proof that schools are being inconsistent in their levelling. We got DD1's report today- 1 emerging, 1 expected and the rest exceeding. I've been looking pretty closely at the EYFS guidance, and I believe she is actually exceeding in 3 or 4 areas- certainly not 15. So the school have obviously marked very leniently compared to others mentioned on here.

DD1's school apparently has an intake with a low baseline (according to Ofsted) so I wonder if they've been swayed by the class average?

FWIW I agree with other posters that levels are not important at this age. What matters to me is whether DD1 is well-behaved, happy and enjoys learning.

But we have a system that is supposed to tell us if our children are on track, ahead or behind for their age. I think this is a reasonable thing to want to know- but the system seems to be failing miserably.

Thanks BabiesAreLikeBuses. Even though my son got the 3 emergings I did see a huge improvement in those areas this year so I'm trying to keep that in perspective. And as I said, I'm thrilled about all the expected.

My DC Head Teacher told me that emerging is the equivalent of the old EYFS score of 6 (where a child is expected to be at the end of reception), expected is the same as a 9 on the old scale (or a 1A/B NC level wise) and exceeding is a 2C.

DD's writing fluctuates and can be a 2C (sometimes) but as she only writes stories (with a beginning, middle and ending) and love notes she got expected.

And yes I was suprised tbh as all year the school have been telling me how academic she is etc etc but I have had a meeting with the HT and calmed down and quite frankly when she is 7 her report at 5 is not going to matter that much

Pozzled - my DD's class has 90 kids and she got the only exceeding, I volunteer in another school (reception) and they have 120 kids and 6 got exceeding.

The EYFS Head in the school I volunteer in said they (and a lot of other schools) are waiting for the scores to be published Nationally I guess to see if they have been too strict/lenient.

A child was never expected to have a score of 6 simpson ...they were expected to achieve all the ELGs so 8 was expected but most children achieved 6 and 9 was beyond expected in reception

Ok, the way it was worded to me was that expectations were a 6 or 7 before.

However she (HT) did say it was only a basic example as the two EYFS are completely different.

Simpson, my DD most definitely isn't a 2c yet for either writing or maths- both areas where she got exceeding. She's probably around a 1b for both.

If it helps, I don't think it's any better to be over-assessing than under-assessing children. It will set up unrealistic expectations and potentially too much pressure for the Y2 SATs. The report we had also gave us very little indication of what to work on- I would have liked more specific details of what she can/can't do, especially in maths as I haven't worked with her on that as much.

I just hope some of the inconsistencies are ironed out by the time DD2 is in reception.

I'm afraid your HT either doesn't know much about EYFS or is trying to pull the wool over your eyes simpson

Simpson, how do you know she got the only exceeding?! I would be v surprised if the school gave out that information and I'm sure you can't have asked all the parents of the other 90 children!

And then also there are areas that can be an NC level like "friendships" how is that assessed??

There are 4 kids in reception who are reading stage 8/9 books and none of them got exceeding which astounds me tbh...

because the assessment isn't based on reading scheme levels

Yes I get that but surely their comprehension and inference would match the book level, otherwise it's the incorrect level for them iyswim??

DD has done a number of assessments which are based on ORT assessments, not a book but a piece of text (which has the level at the top).

Teacher then has to tick how many words she got correct, ask however many questions there are and write down word for word what DD says back...

Eyfs and nc levels are different systems. I don't see how one can directly equate to another...
Certainly dd is not 2c for writing and got exceeded but she does love writing and you can understand what she has written. I reckon going on nc levels she's prob a 1b but she hasn't done enough formal stuff yet for all that.

Babies - exactly especially when they have not been taught to that level

Mrz - am I right in thinking 78 points was considered a good level of development for the old EYFS profile - made by achieving 6 points in all ELGs or more in some but less in others (to get an exact score of 78)?

Do you know what the average point score used to be (roughly as I'm sure it varied somewhat by year)?

EYFS is about development not levels or inference or ORT assessments they just don't correlate I'm afraid

But this is where the confusion lies as some schools are not giving exceeding unless a child is a NC 2C which by that definition is about levels (NC ones).

This is from the National Assessment Authority

Point scores are levels of achievement and not the points in the profile, i.e. a score of 6 does not mean profile 6, it means point 3, plus 3 aspects achieved of sections 4-8. Children with the same points score will therefore probably have a different level of achievement.

There is ongoing research into the relationship between FSP and KS1 outcomes, and it would appear that some of the links are spurious.

? The FSP is more about assessment for learning than average points scores.

Some scale points, known as ?super scale points?, with research, appear to have a greater link to KS1 outcomes than others, particularly those that involve creativity, thinking and applying, rather than rote learning. Some specific scale points (the ?super scale points?) seem to indicate that without them, a child is unlikely to achieve more than 2c at KS1.

? It is therefore not enough to say that the acquisition of 6 scale points is indicative as an acceptable basis for the next stage; it depends upon the particular scale points achieved.

I agree Simpson - if it is purely development based then that would explain many schools seemingly giving out exceeds more willingly but there appear to be quite a few with much stricter criteria for it.