Tag: writing

10 changes to KS1&2 writing assessment with direct impact at KS3

10 changes to KS1&2 writing assessment with direct impact at KS3

The DfE have released further changes to the KS1&2 writing assessment frameworks this term. It is inevitable that these will have real impact on students’ knowledge and language acquisition as they reach KS3. Here are 10 amendments with potentially longer lasting impact.

10 changes and their impact:

1. KS1&2: Proof reading
At the end of Year 2, ‘proof reading’ has been added to the ‘greater depth’ level. To achieve this, students will be expected to make simple revisions to their own writing, checking for errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation etc. This continues into KS2.
KS3 impact: 
It may be that embedding this practice at such an early age will result in students who are better able to use self-assessment as they move through the primary years. It will largely depend on how much investment individual schools put into this – Will the process be modelled? Will students be expected to do this regularly? Do students get effective feedback to know how and where to look for errors, and what to do when they find them?

 

2. KS1&2: Secure fit vs. Best fit
Having previously worked from a ‘best fit’* model prior to 2017, there will be a return to this following the attempt at a ‘secure fit’** model in Summer 2017. 
*Best fit: T’s make a fair judgment of a S’s ability based on their own knowledge of the student and the work they consistently produce.
**Secure fit: T’s must ensure that S’s have met every single criteria from the assessment framework before claiming they have reached a certain level. The DfE states,

“A pupil’s writing should meet all the statements within the standard at which they are judged. However, teachers can use their discretion to ensure that, on occasion, a particular weakness does not prevent an accurate judgement being made of a pupil’s attainment overall. A teacher’s professional judgement about whether the pupil has met the standard overall takes precedence.”

KS3 impact:
There may be greater variation in the opinion of a collection of pupil’s written work. If you have a number of different feeder schools (some secondaries in London have up to 60 of these…) you may find that students arrive with conflicting grades. Schools are moderated at random to ensure accuracy of assessment is upheld, but there will naturally be some discrepancies as a result of greater flexibility. This will also directly address the fact that many students could not reach ‘greater depth’ last year due to poor spelling/handwriting. 

 

3. KS1&2: Writing Conventions
Students will continue to learn writing conventions of different styles and genres. This includes knowing that an autobiography requires first person narrative, in contrast to  3rd person narrative for a biography.
4. KS1&2: Literary Devices 
Teachers are expected to embed the explicit teaching of literary techniques such as similes, metaphors and analogies in their teaching of reading and writing.
5. KS1&2: Awareness of Reader/Author’s Intentions
Students are expected to comment on the impact of certain words and phrases chosen by the author and suggest what effect they may have on the reader.
KS3 impact: points 3-5
Teachers may consider revising their approach to tackling these areas above, reviewing how these are currently mapped out within the KS3 curriculum. It may be that KS3 Leads explore ways to dig deeper into some of these concepts if there is already a surface level understanding. It’s vital that KS3 leaders are mapping their own plans against the KS2 expectations in order to minimise unnecessary overlap, as well as reaching back to ensure students are recalling knowledge learnt previously.

 

6. KS1&2: Increased use of dictionaries
The use of dictionaries has now been added as an explicit statement on the 2018
writing assessment.
KS3 impact:
Students may reach KS3 with greater familiarity of a dictionary – and how they work. Students are sometimes presented with a dictionary or thesaurus at KS3 unable to locate the words they need, having not been shown explicitly how to use one. This addition to the framework may reduce issues around this at KS3.

7. KS1&2: Greater emphasis on composition
Having moved away from a focus on composition in 2017, the DfE have returned to this point for 2018. Students will be required to produce pieces of writing that contain an element of style once again – rather than working solely to a clinical list.
KS3 impact:
Students who may have reached expected standard or greater depth as a result of their ability to meet each piece of criteria on a checklist last year will now need to demonstrate that they can write with style. This may have direct impact on students who are tutored for grammar schools, or EAL students who can use a ‘subordinate clause’ or a ‘fronted adverbial’ but continue to find the syntax of regular sentences particularly difficult. 

 

8. KS1&2: Reduced focus on SPaG in the writing assessment*
In combination with the point above, it seems as though the DfE have realised that the ‘recipe’ model of writing they had moved towards might not be the best answer after all. In ensuring written pieces contain a checklist of certain features with such precise specifications, students are losing the ability to write with style and flair, thus churning out cohorts of students who use endless amounts of extended noun phrases but only produce bland, clinical pieces of work. *Students will still be required to complete the discrete spelling, punctuation and grammar (SPaG) test.
KS3 impact:
Students may arrive to KS3 able to use subject terminology to identify SPaG techniques, but less able to apply them to their own writing. It may reveal that students can demonstrate their understanding of such tools in a discrete way on demand, but less able to embed them. This will be largely dependent on the approach of individual schools.

 

9. KS1&2: The DfE are exploring comparative judgment
In the DfE’s ‘Government Consultation Response‘ document to Primary Assessment
(Sept 2017) it states,

“A significant number of respondents were interested in the potential of comparative judgement as a method for assessing writing. We know that there is promising work taking place amongst the sector to explore the use of comparative judgement in the assessment of writing, notably the Sharing Standards pilot run by No More Marking. We were encouraged by the results of this year’s pilot, which involved 199 schools. We will work with No More Marking to evaluate larger pilots in the near future, to explore the potential of comparative judgement in the assessment system.”

KS3 impact:
These exciting developments in comparative judgment (see the work of @daisychristo and her team) may have direct impact on assessment at KS2, changing the entire process of transition from KS2 to KS3. It makes you wonder whether there will be opportunity here to reduce the vast chasm between primaries and secondaries, promoting greater collaboration of assessment in the best interests of our students.

 

10. KS1&2: The DfE are exploring local peer moderation

In the same document mentioned above, the DfE mention that they are looking into a local clusters model for peer-to-peer moderation. The consultation says,

“Many respondents expressed interest in a peer-to-peer model of moderation that would involve schools working together in local clusters, overseen by a local moderator. It was felt that this approach could further encourage the sharing of best practice, and support teachers’ professional development on moderation. To explore this model, we intend to run a small-scale pilot in the 2017 to 2018 academic year.”

KS3 impact:
As with point 9, we may see these models cascade beyond KS2 if results from the pilot stage look successful and methods are deemed fit for purpose. More information is due to be released later this academic year.

 

References:

DfE Consultation Response:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644871/Primary_assessment_consultation_response.pdf

Shareen Mayers:
http://rsassessment.com/2017/09/27/9-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-ks1-and-ks2-teacher-assessment-framework/

Comparative Judgment: 
https://www.nomoremarking.com/
https://twitter.com/daisychristo

KS2 Teacher Assessment Framework:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/647107/2017_to_2018_teacher_assessment_frameworks_at_the_end_of_key_stage_2_PDFA.pdf

KS2 Exemplar Writing Materials:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2018-teacher-assessment-exemplification-ks2-english-writing

 

 

Advertisements

Whole-School Literacy: why every school needs a Sisyphus.

This post is a response to Alex Quigley’s recent blog, ‘Why whole-school literacy fails!’.

If you have any knowledge of Quigley, you’ll know how unnecessary it is to build an opposing argument to his. There’s rarely a moment where my own viewpoint is misaligned with his when it comes to teaching and learning – and all things language. And, in truth, 80% of the post I do agree with. However, having lived out the role of a ‘modern-day Sisyphus’ as he describes (that of literacy co-ordinator) for a number of years now, I’m keen to offer an alternative angle on the importance of literacy and language in schools.
a

To keep it brief, it’s clear we agree on some key fundamentals:

  1. There is no more important act in education than helping children to learn to read.
  2. Developing our students as confident readers, writers and speakers is the core business of every teacher, regardless of age, phase or subject specialism.
  3. The matter of ‘literacy’ really is a boulder of gargantuan proportions, beyond the will and wit of any individual leader (including especially me).
  4. The domain of literacy is so wide and so complex.
  5. The education profession has been known to package ‘literacy’ into a small, relatively useless box, which sits on a shelf until Sisyphus gets an hour’s PPA time to shift data around on an excel spreadsheet or photocopy handwriting sheets for tomorrow.

When I consider what it was about this post that fired me up enough to respond, I suppose it’s the knowledge – and driving passion – that underpins my work; one that promotes a different kind of literacy. It’s not the implied bolt-on accessory that I’ve seen countless times in so many schools. Like Alex, I’m fully behind Geoff Barton’s message of clarity in his book, ‘Don’t Call It Literacy!’, where he argues that teachers so often see literacy as an additional burden to teaching; just another box to tick or a passing fad, like so many others they’ve seen come and go before.

I hear exactly where Alex is coming from when he explains the overwhelming responsibility of a role such as this, and he’s right. It’s colossal. To oversee the assessment of literacy and language, ensure students who need additional support (e.g. phonics) receive it, make sure that staff feel fully-equipped to deliver robust teaching around core language within their subject domain and assess the long-term impact of these interventions in offering greater access to the curriculum – it’s almost impossible.

sisyphus_happy_excerpt

I guess, for me, the wrestle occurs in negotiating the solution to the boulder-up-the-hill dilemma. Having trained in primary teaching before moving to secondary, one huge shock in that transition was the realisation that teachers across the school were expected to apprentice students into effective reading for comprehension, and model extended writing in their subject without any prior training. For me, the solution to raising the bar with language and embedding a deeper knowledge of literacy across the curriculum is inextricably linked to having a key figure in place to drive these vital whole-school priorities forward.

The difference, then, between the Sisyphus analogy and my own utopian ideal, is in the careful appointment of the role, but also in the discernment of building structures that would likely scaffold the creation of robust systems. To me, a perfect candidate for ‘Literacy Co-ordinator’ is someone who is open to the vast complexities of the role, yet understanding of the need to build capacity by establishing focus teams around core priorities. Alex’s list below is a great starting point:

  • Reading for pleasure;
  • Reading issues(such as poor decoding, weak comprehension, dyslexia, and the readability and accessibility of texts for our students);
  • Academic vocabulary;
  • Teacher explanations, talk and questioning;
  • Improving writing;
  • Improving spelling and writing accuracy;
  • Speaking and listening;
  • Enhancing teacher knowledge and providing training for all of the above;
  • Developing parents’ knowledge and understanding of all of the above.

I’d add these three after a quick think:

a) discrete teaching of roots, prefixes and suffixes
b) effective transition from KS2 to KS3, knowing the long journey of language acquisition that students have already taken
c) effective oracy – presentation, communication, assimilation

Y7 Welcome 2016 JM reduced file.jpgAs I’ve said, there’s much I agree with. Teams are better suited to developing whole-school systems required for long-term positive impact on language and literacy. The use of allocated non-contact time to address literacy targets and data sheets has big potential to do a real disservice to stakeholders, if one is blind to the true needs of students and staff alike. One person alone cannot master this field. FACT.

I just question that the answer, in light of the above, is to admit defeat and remove the role from schools entirely. I’d much rather ensure that literacy co-ordinators have regular opportunities to deepen their own knowledge and understanding of the non-negotiables listed above, supported by senior leaders and cluster teams to ensure that school priorities are mobilised as effectively as possible, all working towards a shared goal. Without a driving force behind these principles, I’m concerned that time constraints in this busy profession would ultimately mean that those schools not yet awakened to the utter importance of embedded literacy and language would witness a decline in this area.

It’s true: the absence of a literacy co-ordinator has got to be better than the appointment of a poor one who demonstrates negative impact. I’m just not prepared to see this role as a dead root in the tree of school life yet; there’s so much more to be done.

And, for me, there needs to be a central force – be it a single person or a couple more – who possess responsibility for carving out the vision of literacy and language, ensuring no student or member of staff on this ever-evolving journey is left behind.