School Marking policy in Year 1

[GrowlingTiger]

OK, name-changed as I've made myself unpopular at school by raising this, but would appreciate a "professional" view on it if any knowledgable teachers pass by.

Ds is a summer born Year 1 child, so 5 and a half. His pencil control is OK but not great. He has a weekly test in spellings and number bonds/timestables. Am not entirely enthusiastic about these (esp when in the first term he was learning to spell words that he could not yet read!) but accept them as part of the overall package.

His report at the end of last term said "Ds must learn the number bonds and multiplication tables for the weekly tests as his results have been a little disappointing". I was slightly narked as this wasn't raised at the parents evening and I'd personally been pleased with his progress whilst being aware that he isn't the most able boy in the class by some way. Report also commented that he lacks confidence is addition and subtraction.

Roll on this term and now the marking policy of the school has tightened up so that for numeracy, if the child reverses a digit (ie mirror reflection of a single digit, not 16 rather than 61), then the answer is marked as wrong. Ditto spelling, so if a letter eg "g" is reversed despite being in the right place in the word, then the spelling is marked as incorrect. Ds has got all items tested correct for spelling and computation but because of these reversals is getting lower marks (eg 6/10).

I guess I am slightly frustrated that if the object of the exercise is to say learn the 3 times table then ds knows his 3 times table forwards, backwards and at random. Yet the marks indicate otherwise and I suspect his report will too.

When my older child was going through this the approach seemed more laid back - with the idea that they would grow out of the reversals. But it is stricter for my younger child. How does this match up against other schools (ds is at a private school in case that makes a difference). I've been told that the change in policy is in effort to raise standards. But does this really work - ds thought that he had worked well but is getting lower marks than ever. I am concerned that this will put him off.

Yes, you do that a lot too, Melissa - should anyone dare to disagree with you, you declare that they are 'sad' and should 'get a life', and generally resort to personal insults.

You do advise parents a lot here, Melissa, as do I and a lot of other teachers. However, when you assert things with such conviction it is imperative that you are factually right. You did say that number reversals would be penalised - this is very wrong, and I wouldn't like Y2 parents to be misinformed (again).
I didn't say you were wrong about letter reversals, but when you misunderstood me you tried to cite Ros Wilson's marking critieria as law at me. There is little point in referring to it since it is not statutory.
Incidentally, Ros Wilson is a huge believer in upholding high spelling standards across the board in Literacy, regardless of where one writes/types, Melissa, to add to a conversation you and I had the other day?

Thanks for the information r.e. Reception/Y2 - it does help your credibility. I hope you get some up to date training on Y2 assessment soon to help you.

"It is so unfortunate that their (sic) are people like you Feenie who come along into a posting and ruin it for all involved. Was anynoe accusing anyone of anything or arguing before you came along? No, and this seems to be the case in other posts you have been in as well, as soon as you arrive on the scene all hell breaks loose. Maybe you should check Mumsnets policy on Trolls??"

How rude.

"No, and this seems to be the case in other posts you have been in as well, as soon as you arrive on the scene all hell breaks loose"

Oh, and bollocks. Only when I have stepped in on a couple of occasions to correct you.

"hulababy, you would be a great catch to have in the classroom! "

Well I certainly hope so. I do try I do think, however, that I have to be careful that school don't use me as a teacher substitute rather than a TA - I know how easy it could be for them to do this, esp as I have QTS.

Feenie

oh dear Feenie...I often wonder if you DO READ posts, or just skim them? Without having to post what I said AGAIN, I did not say Ros Wilsons way was statutory, but you have decided that I did? Not once, but twice!
Not that it is any of YOUR business, but I have had training on the primary framework for Y2 as you so kindly suggested, and I have in print, that number reversals can be marked wrong in Year Two...perhaps you should get a hold of some training??

"Oh, and bollocks. Only when I have stepped in on a couple of occasions to correct you" Perhaps you should go back and check your posts AFTER you have come in on them....oh, thats right, you don't read them, just assume what they say

Hulababy...too true, be careful with that! You musn't be taken advantage of

To the rest, I hope this post goes back to the issue of the OP, and not constant claws being drawn out without justification

At my dd's school there are no timestables tests. However, addition and subtraction sums would be marked wrong if the digits were reversed. For spellings, they would be marked wrong if the a child muddled b and d, but would not be marked wrong if a letter was formed slightly incorrectly.

I think that it is important to show a child if they are making mistakes, otherwise how will they learn. At our school achievement certificates are generally given out for effort etc, not for getting 10/10 in tests. eg. my dd in year 1 is fairly academic, but her last certificate was given for a craft activity.

But you can still show a child that they have made an error in forming the word or number without putting a cross next to the answer and marking it down.

You could do what dd's teacher does - write clearly next to the mistake the correct formation. Then when dd gets the sheet or book back, she practices a couple of times. And still gets recognition that the working out or spelling was right, just that the formation of the number/letter was poor.

Writing will become more reliable with time and practice. I don't agree that 5.5 (yr1) is the time to be marking children down for their immature letter or number formation.

pooka and madsometimes, I totally agree with you, I think it is important to put the correct formation next to the childs reversals for both numbers and letters in Y1, because you're right, otherwise, how will they learn. If you allow them to continue to do it incorrectly, then they get into the habit, and habits as I mentinoed before, are very hard to break!
What I do/did with both my own children and my pupils, is write the corrected version next to it (dependant on ability for pupils) and then they have to write the corrected word again three times next to it. Of course, others do it differently, but as long as the system used works, then all the better!

Just off the phone with Cognita's Director of Education. Feel so much better.

His view is that you can't have a blanket policy at this stage of development which does not take an individual view of the child. A child should be marked in terms of the progress that they are making, and it is likely that there will be different standards in place especially between the autumn born and summer born children. The mantra was very much that every child matters.

He has encouraged me to raise a complaint with the school directly in order to get it escalated to Cognita.

Melissa, I haven't got 'constant claws out', I am simply trying to have a grown up conversation with you, something which is proving particularly difficult as you get more and more insulting and rude.

You said "this is because in level two (the average for a Y2 child to be acheiving by years end is a 2B) they get marked down for letter and number reversals".

I repeat again, this is not true, children are not marked down for number reversals.

No, you did not say Ros Wilson's marking criteria was statutory, but you did cite it as a reason for letter reversals not being "allowed". I say, patiently, again - I never said letter reversals were allowed, but there is little point in quoting that particular document at me as evidence of anything because it is not statutory. Please do try to read this last bit carefully - if you read back over your posts, you will see that actually you have misunderstood pretty much everything I have said so far, and in the same posts have accused me, quite nastily, of the same.

The training I refer to would be that of the new(ish) style Y2 assessments - last time I discussed this issue with you, you seemed to have a lot of misunderstandings of the latest requirements, and your advice to parents was at times quite worrying.

All this seems to have come about because I dared to contradict you - but you seem to be utterly unable to debate a professional point sensibly.

To the op - I am so sorry for hijacking, just wished to correct a relevant misunderstanding

Yurtgirl

Feenie I have read some other threads today and I could double that wink to a double wink if that was a mumsnet option!!!!!

Ooh, it should be!

are the winks between you two to say "well done"? how sad!
feenie...your post does not warrant a response...I am not going to get in a back and forth with you. You seem to always want to have the last word...so reply to this, and you shall have it, I am done trying to argue with your high horse. I will continue to talk to other mums on here like myself who are interested in a conversation about topics affecting their children and my own, and you can continue to come on trying to intimidate others.

The winks are to reassure me that I, at least, am following a rational line of discussion.

Melissa, you misinformed parents on this thread. Do you really expect someone who notices this to sit back and say nothing, and allow the misconception to be perpetuated?

It's okay to be wrong - and there are two ways of dealing with it. Hulababy graciously demonstrated the first on this thread, and you have thrown your rattle out of the pram in demonstrating the second.

You say you are "am done trying to argue with your high horse." My high horse is factually correct, Melissa.

You say you "will continue to talk to other mums on here like myself who are interested in a conversation about topics affecting their children and my own" - that's fine, but if you continue to misinform parents, then I will continue to step in and correct you.

"and you can continue to come on trying to intimidate others." How bloody dare you . A simple search on my good name shows I have never intimidated anyone. The only person who has been nasty and personal on this thread is you.

Even though I don't want to get involved in any argument, I just wanted to say ds2 got a 2a in both literacy and numeracy at the end of yr 2.
As I said earlier, a large percentage of his letters/numerals are the wrong way round, so he can't possibly have been marked down for it.

Melissa - My wink to Feenie was to demonstrate that I agreed with her that you were being somewhat inconsistent or incorrect (delete as you prefer)

On many occasions you dont not come across as entirely genuine (I am really sorry if you are, truly I am, but that is how you come across to me)

Also as I observed on other threads you are frequently very rude and 'chippy' towards other posters.

I honestly do not intend to offend you

Growling Tiger - I hope you get some joy with consignia

Feenie
"you misinformed parents on this thread"

Ok, and I find it interesting Feenie that you are convinced YOU are right...what makes YOUR way the right one??

And how old did you say your own children were again? I think I must have missed that part

"My high horse is factually correct" show us your evidence then...I showed mine, I posted the links...wheres yours since YOU are so correct.

"but if you continue to misinform parents, then I will continue to step in and correct you."
Again, where is your evidence...

Feenie, you seem to come in and attack me instantly that I am ALWAYS wrong...but yet I have yet to see anything to back YOU up. You say that what I am saying is not factual...says whom? you?
Everyone I know in the teaching field has done it the way I have posted...so perhaps maybe you need to start proving your credentials, because right now, your "facts" are not correct IMO. Perhaps your not the genuine one as yurtgirl has interpreted I am not.
You say that I am constantly misinforming parents, but yet not once has their been any proof. Interesting

Until you show me evidential proof that what you say is factual is in fact true, you have no right to accuse me of being the opposite.

yurtgirl "On many occasions you dont not come across as entirely genuine" Excuse me?? Please provide examples...I can't wait to hear what they are

So come on Yurtgirl and Feenie, you two have all the "facts" where are they then?

and since I can predict your ways feenie, do not pick up on the typo of their instead of there...it is simply childish

BTW Yurtgirl
"I observed on other threads you are frequently very rude and 'chippy' towards other posters"

Please point me in the direction of this, because the only people I have been "rude and chippy" to are the ones who have attacked me for not being "factual" or making a typo in a word.

I would like you to tell me exactly who I have been rude and in what post, outside of my responding to the attacks in this one and the one about the spelling typo, both of which were provoked responses from myself.

Don't make the accusations if you can't back it up.

"A simple search on my good name shows I have never intimidated anyone"

Well, thats a lie in and of itself, because you have tried to intimidate me with your unbacked up "facts".
I also know of others on here who have felt the same from you, but it is not my place to name them, so that aside, I will just speak from my own personal experience with your posts

Like Lovetingles2, I do not want to get in the middle of any arguments, but I must say, I do agree with melissa75. Feenie, I have seen some of your other posts on other threads, and you do come across as intimidating at times. Just an outsiders POV.
I am not a teacher, but am a Mum who volunteers in a school and has been doing so for the past 5 years in different year groups, so I cannot speak to what is right or wrong in this situation, but perhaps providing some of the factual information that you say melissa75 is incorrect about would help to alleviate the problem, because you seem fairly adament that your correct?

IMHO it is such a shame when posters on here get away from the ethos of Mumsnet, which is for us Mums to come on and get some support and advice from one who has 'been there, done that'
I personally have found melissa75 to be very helpful and has provided a lot of friendly information.

It's interesting, mum2twinboys, how a search on your name brings up only 4 posts, all made today, 2 of which are in praise of Melissa.

The ethos of Mumsnet would, I presume, include providing factually correct information. Would you prefer me to ignore obvious serious misconceptions? Why?

"And how old did you say your own children were again? I think I must have missed that part" Not sure what you mean, Melissa. My own child is 3, and this is my 16th year of teaching. I have been a Literacy and assessment co-ordinator for 10 years, a Year 6 teacher for 5 of these and a Year 2 teacher for another 5. In my role as assessment co-ordinator I am closely involved with assessment in both key stages, and as such am required to know assessment procedures and requirements inside out. I have been through the moderation process by the LEA twice, and our assessment procedures have been found to be exemplary. This year, as part of my Performance Management, I am helping our Y2 teacher through the assessment process because of my extensive experience in assessment. I have a long history of posting to help people both on here and on TES, where I use the same username. You won't find anywhere where I have intimidated anyone in 10 years of posting, but you will find that my credibility stacks up.
Number reversal documentation has been hard to find online - the evidence exists inside each KS1 mark scheme for Mathematics, where it clearly states that children must not be penalised for number reversal at level 2. It is half term now, but I am quite willing to type word for word the advice given in the document, but as it is widely available in schools, perhaps Melissa would like to find it herself now she knows where it is. Preferably before she starts wrongly penalising her Y2 children.

"and since I can predict your ways feenie, do not pick up on the typo of their instead of there...it is simply childish"

Their/there is not a typo. I don't care whether you know the difference between a typo or a grammatical error or not, I just presume and hope you are less careless in the classroom.

This thread is seriously a piece of work. I have just refused to let a misconception to be posted unchallenged - I can't see why this is intimidating. Your posts to me, however, are rude, personal, insulting and at times unhinged.

"I also know of others on here who have felt the same from you, but it is not my place to name them, so that aside, I will just speak from my own personal experience with your posts"

You are barking, Melissa. There you go, I have finally been rude to you, in the face of reams of provocation. I truly think you are nuts.

I haven't read the hight posts so i am sorry if I repeat anyone here...i teach in a private school and I don't amrk spellings etc wrong for digit/letter reverals although i may get them ot correct them. seems to go against the objective of the lesson