Language and Literacy Levels

Module 1.4 Internal

ModerationSeptember 2014

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

Internal Moderation

The purposes of internal moderation are to:• to confirm the accuracy of assigned levels with

colleagues• to develop consistency of assigned levels across the

school• to develop consistency between assigned Levels and

other data sets eg. NAPLaN, school grades, previous Levels etc

• to develop consistency across schools (NB. In some cases, this process may extend across a Partnership)

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

Benefits of Internal Moderation

Assigning accurate and consistent Levels: • ensures that the correct amount of funding

will be paid to schools • means schools are confident with their

Levels data• enables schools to monitor EALD student

progress

Building Accuracy and Consistency

To build accuracy and consistency: • inexperienced teachers should work with a

partner who is experienced in assigning Levels• refer to the R- 7 or Years 8 -12 Moderated

Evidence • decide on some benchmarks (eg. agreeing that

one set of evidence is at Level 3, another at level 6 and another at Level 9) and then compare other sets of evidence to these.

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

Internal Moderation processes

Option 1 - all staff assign Levels• when Levels have been assigned, groups of teachers

share their copies of one set of evidence and discuss the accuracy of the assigned Level

• this process and the discussion helps establish common understandings of consistency i.e. one teacher’s Level 4 is if the same standard as another teacher’s Level 4

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

Option 2 – a panel assigns Levels• when Levels have been assigned, panel members

place texts in piles of same assigned Level (eg. all Level 6s together, all Level 7s together, all Level 8s together etc)

• after enough texts have been added to a pile, a teacher with more experience scans through the pile and gives feedback to the teacher who assigned the Level if he/she thinks it is inaccurate

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

Option 3 – an individual EALD teacher/ teacher/school leader undertakes moderation• teacher is reliant upon own experience and

Moderated Evidence• this is not the preferred option in schools with

more than a few EALD students because:o there is no or little opportunity for professional

discussion to confirm the accuracy of assigned Levels

o knowledge of language remains with one staff member and is not shared with others

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

After Assigning Levels• Compare Levels data to other data sets o e.g. Are Year 3, 5, 7 and 9 students’ Levels similar to their

NAPLaN writing results? o e.g. Are subject English grades similar to Levels? If they are different, this may need to be explored• The reason/s for the difference may be valid (e.g.

student has recently had a long term absence)• If one of the reasons is the accuracy of the Levels then

this should be addressed in the school’s planning for next year’s assigning of Levels (e.g. greater use of Moderated Evidence, a panel instead of a individual, further training about the Levels)

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide Master The University of Adelaide

The Next Step

After discussing the possible reasons for any variations between different Levels and other data sets and making any necessary adjustments to the school’s internal moderation process, what are the implications for future planning and teaching?