How to talk about DD's abilities without sounding irritating/precious

[clemette]

Dear all,
DD (4.5) starts full-time in reception in January. She is almost the only one that won't have been to the school pre-school/ attended part-time this autumn.
The pre-school that she is at keep stressing to us that her abilities are unusually high for her age, but TBH I am not sure if they are. She can count to 100, count back from 30, count to 20 in French, can do addition and subtraction, read simple words, write clearly etc etc Most of this she has learnt a her very small pre-school.
Anyway, we went to the open evening for her new school and the reception teacher was talking about how they were working with the children to identify shapes. I was wondering whether it was worth phoning the teacher to talk about what DD can do, or whether I should just trust their professionalism to see that she might be a little beyond what they are doing with the majority.
I don't think she is G+T particularly (and working in secondary education realise that children often even out eventually). I also don't want to present myself as an ultra pushy parent, as we have really tried not to be and let DD develop as she will.
I just wondered if anyone had any advice?
Thanks.

trickerg, ha ha, I'll take it that was your attempt at saying that I know nothing about schools or education. Please yourself.

DAL do you genuinely care what level your child is at? What difference does it make if you think they are level 5 and the teacher says level 4. (my bold)
What makes you think I care at all about the exact level they've recorded for DS? That's a weird question to ask unless you misunderstand the context in which we were discussing levels and how they help in stats manipulation.

Feenie, yeah, sure, everything's changed in the last five years and it couldn't ever happen now! The example I gave wasn't from five years ago, it was May 2009.

I've got my wife's best friend (who's a head), her husband and a couple of other friends over for dinner in a few minutes so I'm going to dash off and get ready for a boring evening of a bunch of teachers talking shop all the time

More later.

But the situation in KS1 isn't from 2009, presumably, and that's the situation that would tend not to happen now.

But don't take my word for it, read some recent Ofsted reports to check the up to date criteria for checking assessment for learning and tracking systems. Shouldn't be too difficult.

What a strange attitude you seem to have towards teachers - which extends even towards your wife and her friends.

Was thinking that, Feenie Sounds like everyone is going to have a ripping good time at the dinner....

He will probably be grilling them on their G&T policies...

Or just grilling them if they're really unlucky.

yes, it's clear he hates teachers. I wonder what his dcs' teachers think of him

I totally understand where the OP comes from in terms of anxieties. But I hope what I am post will provide some reassurance.

My DD started reception Sep 09 and started school barely being able to write her name and knowing some letters of the alphabet. Now she can do all the OP describes and lots more and it's all being taught at school, with very little parental input. The school has done an amazing job with her and they constantly stream the kids and do one to one teaching to bring them along at the pace they can learn without alienating them.

But most of all, let me tell you my DD LOVES school, there is so much more going on than learning. And this is a state school by the way, in case you were wondering and not in a leafy suburb either.

I am sure you will have a similar experience, when she starts. I hope so anyway!
Emy x

Thanks Emy.
DD has just told me that she is worried about school because some people will believe in a different god! We are not religious, she is not religious, but MiL seems to be doing a good job of secretly indoctrinating her with her own brand of Daily Mail inspired Christianity. Looks like I have more different things to worry about than I thought!

Dinner over. Get a few teachers together and there's a high chance they'll drone on and on about school. I love my wife dearly but she's no exception. I managed to steer the conversation to holidays and things ... but not before I learnt more than I needed to know about the politics of two local staff rooms.

The last thing I want to do is talk G&T with teachers socially. Teachers generally don't know a great deal about G&T (Fact. Numerous examples even here in MN). When people who've made no previous contribution to the thread jump in to attack me rather than what I've said it demonstrates the lack of anything useful they have to say.

I may not agree with Feenie, but she addresses the issues (mostly)! Since you raised it, Feenie, have a look at my previous posts, I've got a great relationship with DS's teachers and the school. Both my wife and I do a lot of voluntary work with them. Trying to portray a problem with bad teachers into antagonism towards all teachers is a very old NUT stunt. DS has an excellent teacher. I know a lot of excellent teachers (which I've mentioned in numerous threads). I also know a lot of crap ones. I believe almost 100% of teachers work very, very hard and that over 90% of teachers have their hearts in the right place. That's not incompatible with believing that below 90% are competent teachers and an even lower number good. (Not stating this as a fact - unlike the G&T fact above, because it's not something I can prove)

When we discuss what's not happening in schools or where things are going wrong, you don't bring out the best teachers as examples. Trying to demonstrate how a child can be stagnant but be considered improving doesn't involve showing best practice.

But don't take my word for it, read some recent Ofsted reports to check the up to date criteria
Got a specific link to for me? The topic was an environment where it's possible for a child to stay static but not be recorded as under-achieving. If there are some new rules under which it's completely impossible for this to happen, please do point me to them. I'd be very interested in seeing how they've blocked this kind of injustice from happening, this type of "bad teaching" from being covered up.

ey72, great news, the vast majority of children love school, even in reception where it's all new and unfamiliar. My own DS was OK in literacy and maths but had a problem: he was very shy and wouldn't mix with the other kids. And that's what his teacher focused on - a more difficult job IMO - and he was a different kid by the end of the year!

Sorry, that request could be construed in a way that would make it very difficult to deliver, Feenie. I'd be happy merely with any link which demonstrates what you were saying about the new system and what can't happen under it.

I've seen quite a lot of your previous posts, DaL, and many had seemed to include comments involving your disrespect for teachers in the G and T area. So I am pleased to see you clarify your opinions towards the teaching profession, and feel slightly better.

As for links, try this from Leader magazine, which explains the new judgements:
"Ofsted is clear: it will brook no excuses for underachievement ('achievement' being a judgement which uses attainment in combination with learning and progress)" i.e. value added
"On narrowing the gap, there will be a particular focus on students with special educational needs or disabilities, on vulnerable groups (such as looked-after children) and on any sections of the student body where there seems to be underperformance (gifted and talented students or those in the middle, for example)."

Disclaimer - I do not subscribe to 'Leader' magazine .

Or a random Ofsted I clicked on, from this week:
"The inspectors.....looked at other documents such as the school development plan and the school's tracking data for pupils' progress" - that would be tracking from Reception up to Y6, not just statutory assessments.
The new inspection focuses on the progress of individuals and groups, hence this judgement from the same inspection:
"Teachers always share the learning objective for a lesson with pupils, but it is aimed at those of average ability. The learning outcome for more-able pupils is not specified and consequently work is pitched too low for this group. It also means that the provision for more-able pupils cannot be checked by managers through a scrutiny of teachers' planning. Although progress of more-able pupils is satisfactory, it is often slower than for other pupils in the lesson." Satisfactory progress in Ofsted speak is 3 APS points per year (one and a half sub-levels).
Or try this quote from our own recent SIP report, which all schools have. (School Improvement Partner - provides professional challenge and support to the school, helping its leadership to evaluate its performance, targets issues highlighted by Ofsted):
"Effective systems are in place to track, analyse and use the tracking of pupil progress across the school. The assessment data is being used increasingly well to inform targeted teaching and intervention to accelerate progress and meet the needs of this diverse school population."

Thanks for taking the time to dig those out, Feenie.

Ofsted is clear: it will brook no excuses for underachievement
It has a nice ring to it. But if I go dig out OFSTED quotes from five years ago they're likely to have said pretty much the same thing (they're hardly likely to have ever said they turn a blind eye to underachievement).

All the other quotes demonstrate this really because they could have been lifted from reports in any recent year and don't represent any improvement in watchfulness.

I tried to make the below into links but MN has started truncating URLs ... so you'll have to copy and paste. And you may still have to remove spaces MN is adding. sorry. (MN's webmaster, please take a look at this bug)

"use of assessment data":
www.google.com/#hl=en&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ofsted.gov.uk%2F+"use+of+assessment+d ata"

"meet the needs of a diverse school population":
www.google.com/#hl=en&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ofsted.gov.uk%2F+"meet+the+need s"+"diverse+school+population"

"school's tracking data":
www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ofsted.gov.uk%2F+"school's+ tracking+data"

progress of able pupils is slow
www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ofsted.gov.uk%2F+"able+pupils "+%2B+"progress+is+slow"

That OFSTED have in your example pointed out that progress for more able pupils is slow ... may suggest that there's some new openness/recognition of under-performance, but it's no different to what they'd have said last year or the year before. And it doesn't change the SATs example I gave of how a child can stay static while the tables show improvement.

There are a lot of good changes on the way (including MOTs for teachers and hopefully the sack for the crap ones) and I'd be delighted if they worked.

"And it doesn't change the SATs example I gave of how a child can stay static while the tables show improvement."
I think it does. Progress within schools has to be tracked between published data, and Ofsted (and SIPS) check for this. There is even Ofsted speak for this progress - satisfactory = 1 and a half sublevels, and good progress = 2 sublevels (per academic year).

Even if a child like your ds was assessed as level 4 now in KS1 (instead of level 5), he would have had to have reached level 6 in Y6 for this to be deemed satisfactory.

To me, a good teacher/school will ensure every child reaches their absolute potential, and will provide an environment where children enjoy their learning and positively flourish within it. That's where I fall out with your support for a G and T list, because if a teacher fails to do this for gifted children, it stands to reason that other children will fall by the wayside also. Putting them on a list won't change the quality of teaching, unfortunately.

And on the subject of poor teachers, I think we are in agreement, although I'm not sure yet if MOTs are the right answer.

Sorry, haven't looked at your links yet - will do later.

I'm not sure if MOTs is the right answer either. But something needs to be done. Teachers who can be retrained should have their skills/attitude brought up to date and the thousands of persistent bad eggs should be sacked (though how that would sit with the unions is another matter).

I agree about every child reaching their absolute potential. 100%. But disagree with you that setting a bar doesn't help. The ability level where children are least likely to achieve their potential remains the top few per cent and that's where the bar has been set. G&T is not meant to take care of just the top 10% (that's a misconception a lot of teachers have). Properly implemented it's designed to flow down and improve whole school performance. That key goal is lost in all the noise about preferential treatment for a select few already advantaged kids (which it is not).

The links just show all Google results of previous OFSTED reports where the text quoted made an appearance.

Don't think there's any truncation going on DAL

(That was one of your links BTW)

Cannot make links work!

catinthehat2, your link is truncated for me. It includes the "site:domainname" up to the "+" but excludes the keyword variables.

I suppose I should have used this workaround earlier:

use of assessment data

meet the needs of a diverse school population

school's tracking data

progress of able pupils is slow

odd.

I just copy pasted a link from yr 16.46, deleted a stray space and used the technique as shown bottom right.

Progress within schools has to be tracked between published data, and Ofsted (and SIPS) check for this.
How often do they check? Is there a definite guaranteed inspection every 2 years? Maintaining records is a lot different from maintaining accurate records. Who checks for accuracy? Is OFSTED doing a baseline assessment of every child to know that the school's current assessment is accurate (and that they haven't put an L5 down as an L3 just so they can show "steady progress" over the next 4 years)?

The question is whether a school can ever get away with such fiddling or, in most cases, just incompetence. I don't see any reason to believe that this has now changed. And, therefore, it seems a child can still make zero progress and still be seen as progressing at OFSTED's "satisfactory rate".

SIPs visit once a term. They do an annual overhaul of standards, too.
Ofsted - every three years, I think.
Accuracy - subject leaders monitor teacher assessment, and moderation is built in across the school. Teachers work as a staff to ensure levels are accurate, and Ofsted would use work scrutiny to check accuracy of teacher assessment. It's no longer the head/deputy in a little room with the Y2 teacher, applying pressure to massage one list of figures.

So the subterfuge which would ensure a child was undermarked would now have to extend to most of the school being in cahoots these days, DaL, and that's what I find hard to believe. Not that it didn't happen, but that it could be achieved now. More people share the data, there is lots more if it, and they also share the processes by which the data is arrived at. Everything is open, analysed and tracked to the nth degree - overly so, if anything. But the openness and justification is a good thing.

Not that it didn't happen, but that it could be achieved now.
When do you believe it "stopped" happening?

It's been a gradual shift change in the culture of assessment, DaL - I think it started to happen more than 5 years ago, when KS1 assessment changed. Around then, only Y6 and Y2 teachers were responsible for data, and could be easily coerced by a pushy and unscrupulous head.

But they aren't the only teachers who collect data now - it's amassed every second of every day, in every year group, shared, scrutinised, analysed and given ownership by the school, not the leaders. That's the part I can't picture now - if one part of the data was called into question, then the school's assessment in its entirety would be pointless. And since the assessment now has to be fed into day to day planning, targets and reporting, it would make a mockery of absolutely everything that teachers do now.

There are at least six children in DS's class who were at L4A-C in maths or Literacy (according to my wife who helps in the class) at KS1. Six of out 30 @ L4?! Not something many teachers believe possible, but I'll go with my wife's opinion as I don't find the stats particularly unusual. Kids are a lot smarter than we're giving them credit for. All these children were recorded at a 3A/3B and this was in May this year. Even if you don't buy those figures of 6 in 30, DS himself was assessed as a 3A!

(For those in the back row, no I don't care what level he got - this is a demonstration that schools do under-assess)

The schools is an OFSTED outstanding.

At my dinner party on Saturday I learnt there is one local primary where it's clearly the custom for the Infants to "help" the Junior School by keeping grading low (though, conversely, there is an infants that's not attached to a juniors that regularly inflates assessments much to the annoyance of the schools they are feeding).

I'm sorry, my evidence and personal experience suggests that your "shift change in culture" hasn't completely eliminated anything!

It looks like teachers' belief that everything is hunky-dory may differ a bit from the facts.

They may well have been a 4a to 4c in the one aspect of Literacy or Numeracy which your wife was 'helping'. Lots of clever children tend to be brilliant in at least one aspect of number, for example.

But that wouldn't necessarily make them a level 4/5 across the board.
'Helping' in a classroom doesn't give you a complete picture of every child's grasp of every single attainment target - it takes almost a term teaching a class of 30 day in, day out to gain enough different sources of evidence to make that kind of assessment.

As far as your son is concerned (and this is confusing me - wasn't your ds the child who hadn't made any discernable progress throughout KS2? Or do you have two gifted and equally hard done by children?) why haven't you challenged the school and asked them, with you and your wife's considerable knowledge regarding levels, which aspects of 4c they have failed to find evidence of him achieving>