This document summarizes different viewpoints on introducing baseline assessment in early primary school, removing levels, and ensuring progression to secondary education.
It discusses the government's reasons for the changes to focus on giving schools autonomy while seizing assessment ownership. School leaders express concerns about disrupting established systems and the challenges of nearly 17,000 schools developing new approaches independently.
Pearson colleagues provide input, arguing baseline tests can identify early attainment gaps if implemented appropriately, and that progress should be the key measure backed by a threshold. They also suggest broadening measures of secondary readiness.
The author expresses views that changes create burdens for schools and that continuous teacher judgements could provide reliable data with proper support and sampling.
Primary school testing in England - life after levels
1. Tracking progress at Key Stages 1 & 2:
introducing baseline assessment &
removing levels
30th Jan 2014
Westminster Education Forum:
Primary testing, assessment and accountability
- baseline assessment, removing levels, and
progression to secondary education
Louis Coiffait @LouisMMCoiffait
2. Introductions
I’m wearing a number of hats today...
As a school governor
Chair of Governors, Springfield Primary, Hackney
Governor, Primary Advantage federation, Hackney
Secretary, Hackney Association of School Governors (HASGA)
As an education policy researcher
Head of Research
The Pearson Think Tank (thepearsonthinktank.com)
Office of the Chief Education Advisor, Sir Michael Barber
Editor
research.pearson.com
pearsonblueskies.com
3. 6 exam questions
I know you’ll give me a fair assessment…
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Will introducing a baseline test in early primary school achieve Govt. aims of tracking
pupil progress across KS1-2, and highlighting areas of concern at an earlier stage?
How well does the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) bring children to a level where
a meaningful baseline measure can be established?
How often should schools assess pupils between reception and Key Stage 2 to track
performance and progress during Key Stages, and what form should such
assessments take?
How will the removal of the national system of levels and level descriptors from 2016
affect the ongoing assessment and reporting of pupils’ attainment?
As schools gain the freedom to develop their own approaches to assessing and
reporting pupils’ progress, what are the challenges around providing meaningful and
clear information to parents, secondary schools, Ofsted, and other stakeholders?
What support is needed to help schools develop these systems; what steps can be
taken to minimise variation in teacher-led assessment? What oversight should exist
for schools’ ongoing assessment of pupils?
But I may still need to phone a friend… or two
4. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of government
Three principle reasons given for the changes;
Removing the previous ‘overly prescriptive’ approach
Gives schools autonomy to personalise their assessment approach
An opportunity for the profession to seize ownership of
(some formative) assessment
5. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of school leaders
It wasn’t broken so why ‘fix’ it?
Schools (and all other stakeholders) have spent years embedding
and refining the current system.
Pupils use levels and assessments to set their own targets.
Further ongoing development would have been more helpful,
instead of wiping everything, offering no alternative, and leaving
schools empty handed.
Nearly 17,000 primaries have to ‘invent’ different systems; may be
better, similar or worse… and consistency is important
6 questions all very real concerns, little clarity or support from Govt.
6. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of colleagues at Pearson
The experts in curriculum, resources and assessment.
Three key responses to the recent consultation on these issues:
1) Set the baseline at entry to primary school
Fully recognise implementation challenges, but can be overcome.
Tests must be appropriate, good examples exist, to improve further.
Tests from different providers should be comparable and rigorous.
Being summer-born needs to be controlled for.
Would identify attainment gaps early, encouraging intervention.
7. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of colleagues at Pearson
Provide useful formative assessment, to help teachers understand
in detail where children are ‘starting from’.
Helps show the value added by the school during KS1.
But important to avoid ‘labelling’
inappropriate to share individual results
to parents or even teachers.
Tension between individual progress
and overall school accountability.
children
e.g.
may
be
8. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of colleagues at Pearson
2) Progress as the key measure, backed by a threshold measure
Current proposals are for schools to first be judged on a threshold
measure (85% of pupils meet secondary-ready standard) and only if
they fail to meet that target (e.g. due to a challenging intake) will a
progress measure then be taken into account in order to determine if
the school meets the floor standard.
This is problematic.
A focus on threshold measures alone
encourages ‘teaching to the test’, a focus on
‘borderline’ pupils, and disenfranchisement/
de-motivation of the many learners who will
struggle to even get near such a high bar
9. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of colleagues at Pearson
The desired results can be achieved, and risks diminished, by a
‘dual floor target mechanism’, retaining threshold attainment
measure alongside progress-based measure, with latter taking
precedence.
The key measure of school performance should be equally adept at
exposing ‘coasting’ schools with high ability intakes as at
recognising high performing schools with challenging intakes. Only
looking at progress in schools that don’t meet threshold targets
risks insufficient focus on the value added by all schools.
Progress should not be viewed as a safety-net
or an ‘excuse’ for schools with difficult intakes,
but as the basic marker of how well all
schools are doing their job.
10. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of colleagues at Pearson
3) Develop a broader measure of ‘secondary readiness’
Strong English and maths key to success at secondary and beyond.
But it would be valuable to find a way of reflecting the broader
primary curriculum, as well as the attitudinal skills research has
found to be vital to making progress. Any measure of secondary
readiness should reflect this rounded view.
Current work on ‘Pearson ladders of progress’ in English, maths and
science to offer schools an alternative framework to levels.
Planning further work with CentreForum to develop other solutions.
11. Different viewpoints on the issues…
The views of colleagues at Pearson
Recent Pearson research with teachers:
Most important to assess
skills
48%
behaviour
46%
knowledge
13%
Most valued behaviours
manage own behaviour
follow instructions
respecting others
82%
61%
61%
Most valued skills
organisation
independent learning
communication skills
listening
Most valued knowledge
good Level 4 in English
breadth of knowledge
good Level 4 in maths
84%
81%
79%
53%
48%
48%
47%
12. Different viewpoints on the issues…
My own view (wearing policy researcher hat)
Yet another big sweeping change, creates further burdens on
schools, important that sufficient time, guidance and support is
provided
There is still a pernicious lack of trust in continuous teacher-based
judgements – yet it produces more data and if done right, with
appropriate sampling, could actually be more statistically reliable.
New approach could make national standard setting more difficult…
13. Different viewpoints on the issues…
My own view (wearing school governor hat)
Importance of in-year, almost real-time, progress data, rather
than retrospective data, or occasional Ofsted judgements.
GBs need the skills and confidence to interrogate that data,
without needing to rely on the SMT.
No small ask, a steep learning curve, requires strong data literacy,
to ask the right questions, to make appropriate use of it.
Agree with current focus on professionalising Governors, but with
two important caveats:
don’t lose sight of why people volunteer, it’s about local
community involvement
and again we need proper support to improve and adapt
to these changes – and that takes time and money.