Upload
deborah-collins
View
221
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Sue HackmanAAIASeptember 2007
Developing assessment
Key Stage 3 English (2006)
Key Stage 3 English: high attainers (2006)
Key Stage 2 Maths (2006)
Key Stage 4 Maths: FSM boys (2006)
Key Stage 3 English 2006
Girls Boys
Addington High School KS3 English 2005
61% of pupils achieved Level 5 or above in 2005
28% of pupils achieved Level 5 or above in 2000
19% achieved Level 4, of which:
3% Absent
5% Stuck at Level 4
11% Slow Moving through Level 4
1% Fast Moving through Level 4
0% Regressed to Level 4
2% No KS2 record
5% at Level 3
12% at Level 2 or below
Two different Local AuthoritiesWhite FSM Boys GCSE English
Key KeyLocal Authority A Local Authority B
The elements of the Making Good Progress Pilot
Progression tuition
• One-to-one tuition for pupils who entered below national expectations, and still making slow progress.
Progression premium
• An incentive payment to improve the proportion of pupils adding 2 levels of progress
Assessment for progression
• Level-by-level “when-ready” tests to improve the pace of progression
• Pupil tracking, reported termly.
Progression targets
• Increase by 4% the number of pupils making 2 levels of progress in the key stage” – it would apply to all pupils.
Key stages: KS2 and KS3
Subjects: English and mathematics
Local Authorities: 10 LAs, geographical spread
Duration: Two year pilot over 2007/08 and 2008/09
• 152 responses, a third of which were from professional associations, unions and other groups
• Most respondents agreed that the whole system should have a stronger focus on progression
• 65% of respondents agreed that we should pilot the four strands described in the consultation document
• The big picture of responses for each strand of the pilot:
• Assessment for learning: strong support for a more systematic approach
• Single-level tests: quite strong support, but there were some concerns about how the tests will work, over-testing and teacher workload
• Targets: responses varied; some questioned the whether two levels of progress per key stage is the right target
• Premium: the least popular strand; many not convinced it would reach the hardest-to-reach pupils
Responses to the MGP consultation
Levels 1-8Sheet of A3 for Reading, Writing, mathematicsTermly reporting (sub-levelled high/medium/low)Underpinned by APPSame criteria used in Single Level Tests
Tracking
Reading, Writing, mathematicsLike the Music modelExternally markedTwice-yearly window – an opportunity not a compulsionShortEntry when teacher is sure the pupil is secure at that levelExpect most pupils to pass if accurately teacher-assessedLatest result in the result
Single level tests
Retains accountabilityEmphasises the forward trajectory as well as the accurate
assessment of individualsAttends to all children, not just borderlinersMotivational during long key stagesTeacher assessment leads, the test is confirmatoryTracking criteria are also the test criteriaThe MGP pilot backs up assessments with research, tuition and
incentives
Benefits
Securing continuity of standardsThe initial bulge of entriesHaving to do both types of testWhat happens if it works?
Some headaches at this stage
ProgressionPersonalisationAssessment for learning (the promised training)InterventionSame thing, really
An integrated agenda
Moving from Catching up to Keeping upFewer set piece ‘by age’ programmes, more ‘just in time’
interventions by stageAlignment of other progression ladders in systemTeaching by stageA significant change
Implications for practice
Questions and comments?Now and later
AAIA’s role
Sue HackmanAAIASeptember 2007
Developing assessment