In the hope of widening my understanding of the perception of formative assessment, or assessment for learning as some like to call it, and also the broad nature of the challenges we face in the classroom, I have started this collaborative document.
People from all over the world have outlined what they believe are the biggest challenges to implementing and sustaining systems or habits of formative assessment. I will be looking for trends within the issues raised and hope to write a post soon about some of the common themes identified within it.
Please consider adding your own contribution to the document by editing it here and leave a comment of anything you are beginning to notice once you have read through the ideas so far.
Thanks to Steve Philp for sharing this interpretation of the draft Early Years Foundation Stage Framework which will be implemented from September 2012 and until the end of this September is under public consultation.
I have a pretty close understanding of the EYFS after spending some time in that age group and getting through a county profile moderation. It is interesting to see the intention to slim the framework down. From the Department for Education
A new, slimmed down early years curriculum for 0-5-year-olds, more focused on making sure children start school ready and able to learn, will be introduced next year under changes set out today by Children’s Minister Sarah Teather.
Responding to the Tickell Review of the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), the new framework radically reduces the number of early learning goals from 69 to 17. It focuses on three prime areas of learning critical to making sure children develop healthily and happily. These areas form the foundations on which children can then master the basic literacy skills they need for school.
Steve’s Wordle interpretation cuts through the gloss and acts as a good simple look at the language used which does help for us to see the overall theme or language trend. At my previous school the headteacher got into the habit of running policies and other planning documents through a Wordle to quickly look at the main focus on the piece.
As Steve Philp points out with regard to the below image – Interesting that ‘children’ and ‘must’ are the two biggest words…
I am not so surprised “children” appears so large, but the word “must” feels a bit odd in this context, and seems largely out of place. I’d be really interested in your reactions and those of current early years teachers to the proposed changes and to the Wordle itself and what it implies about the language and phrasing contained within it – why not leave a comment.
In September I will be teaching a mixed age class of Year 5/6 children. This will be first time that I have had the unique challenge of working with a year group comprised of two different ages. Your advice and expertise about some of the questions I have would be most welcome.
Much of my concern relates to the content of the curriculum and how best to plan to suit the needs of such a broad range of children. No doubt this is just the same as any classes we have, however a Y5/6 class has the added dimension of (possibly) doing SATs in 2011.
My class will be made up of children from 3 separate classes: a Year 4/5 class (who followed the Y5 curriculum), a straight Year 4 class and a straight Year 5 class. This mixture means that they have had a mixture of curriculum content too. Some have had the usual Year 5 curriculum whereas others have not.
We will be able to provide the older children with TA support to booster them nearer the time for SATs and also ensure that the coverage is in place for Literacy and Numeracy. Another challenge with such a class.
We’ll need to consider any impact on the Year 6 curriculum as there will be children moving into Year 6 next year.
It has been established that we will be using the Year 5 curriculum as a platform to build from and I will be working closely with the other Year 5 teacher (not the Year 6 teacher). Much of the content of the curriculum (especially topic based work) will have to be brand new, as there is the possibility of patchy repetition from the other classes.
Importantly we need to continue to engage and inspire this group of learners, no matter how old they are and I want to provide them a time that they will remember.
Faced with such an intricate challenge in terms of curriculum design I would greatly appreciate your help, advice and expertise.
Much of the detail around these curriculum foundations is applicable to our own school development. We are at the stage of exploring what should underpin the curriculum design, this is very relevant to us. Here is the diagram.
…will help us see the curriculum in a new light, as long as we remember that we are striving not to create a system which produces a plumber at one end and a surgeon at the other, but produces intelligent, well-informed, inquisitive people who understand the ideas of leadership and teamwork, and the vital role of intellectual enquiry and endeavour.
I certainly agree with him, this is a valuable starting point. Once you throw in the local requirements for a curriculum and wider stake holder perspectives we will be some way to establishing the foundation we need.
One of my responsibilities in my new role as Deputy Headteacher is to take a fresh look at our primary curriculum. Ever since I began I have had numerous conversations about the process we are going to go through over the course of the next year.
We are seeking to build upon the successes of what we already do and make our curriculum more relevant and connected to the community it serves.
When the Rose Review was dashed on the rocks of the parliamentary washup, and then the UK coalition government put a large red line through the proposed changes, many primary teachers were disappointed. Much of what it outlined made a great deal of sense. Despite that we are continuing with our own curriculum redevelopment.
Next week we have our second staff meeting about curriculum development and I am keen to share one of three films with the staff to provoke some discussion about education change. I am unsure about which to use and I would appreciate your thoughts on which might be most effective. I will, no doubt, share all of them in time but for now I am looking for one which resonates the most with teachers about how we should better connect our curriculum with our pupils.
An entertaining talk from Sir Ken Robinson, the follow up to his “Killing Creativity” piece. I liked the way that he described the system of education conforming, as he says:
…we have sold ourselves into a fast food model of education. And it’s impoverishing our spirit and our energies as much as fast food is depleting our physical bodies.
We should build learning establishments that are more like Michelin starred restaurants than fast food chains – providing children with a locally grown curriculum that meets the needs of those it serves and not and all for one menu.
I enjoyed listening to this from Charles Leadbeater and appreciated how he outlined the need for more learning that starts with questions and not just going through the motions of filling children with knowledge. We feel that this will be central to how our curriculum may be designed. This has led me to explore Project and Challenge Based Learning and would appreciate any thoughts from those that have experienced this approach in the classroom.
Interestingly he touches upon the food outlet idea that Robinson also used. Leadbeater perhaps refines the idea somewhat in the sense that there are thousands of schools and yes they are all have the same purpose but they should be locally unique.
A small remark that was important to me was that schools,
…often hit the target but miss the point.
Crucially we need to reposition the primary curriculum so that it has a clear and unfettered purpose and that the children understand that more than anyone else.
Dan was (very recently) a classroom teacher like me. That very fact is important. His perspective was from within the classroom and not from the outside looking in. Although Dan speaks about the changes he sees vital for the maths curriculum, what he says is relevant to the whole curriculum.
He takes apart the mundane questions presented in maths textbooks and cuts to the chase. His approach is about developing patient problem solvers in our pupils. This could be applied to how we approach topics within a curriculum. We can extract a much more general theory from what Dan puts forward and once again it boils down to children being faced with problems, challenges or questions.
_
In a way the three different perspectives are clear. Meyer speaks from within the classroom, Leadbeater after seeing learning in different circumstances and Robinson from a wider more systematic stance. Arguably they are at different distances from the point of learning.
Each has their strengths, but which do you think would be the most relevant to busy teachers at this early stage of primary curriculum development?
