The consultation closes on 22nd June 2017 and I suppose I am writing this to encourage anyone with a vested interest in the outcomes to put their views forward.
I initially attempted to complete the online survey (Link) a few weeks ago and was put off by the initial questions about Reception baseline. I felt that I just didn't have enough information to give an informed view on it and wondered if others might fall at this first hurdle. On my second attempt, I was keen to get through to the questions that I wanted to give my opinion on so I didn't get bogged down with the feeling that I needed to give an erudite response for every aspect. For some questions I gave a brief answer or simply declared I had no strong opinion on the matter.
The questions from the consultation cover a broad range of subjects including -
- Reception Baseline
- Moderation
- Progress measures
- Times Tables Test
- KS1 Grammar Test
- KS2 Writing
For most primary teachers there will be something within the consultation that should pique your interest and have a direct impact on your job. Given that time is a precious commodity, I think it is perfectly reasonable to skip a few questions here and there in order to give your opinion on what matters to you. If you take this approach you can be in and out of the survey in 5-10 minutes and you can rest easy that you have contributed to preparing a more satisfactory 'breakfast' to sustain us in the future.
The full text of the questions is provided below and the consultation can be completed here.
Q1. The EYFSP measures a child’s development against the ELGs set out in the EYFS statutory framework. Should the profile be improved to better assess a child’s knowledge, skill, understanding and level of development at the end of the early years? If so, please describe which elements could be added, removed or modified.
Q2. The EYFSP currently provides an assessment as to whether a child is ‘emerging, expecting or exceeding’ the level of development in each ELG. Is this categorisation the right approach? Is it the right approach for children with SEND?
Q3. What steps could we take to reduce the workload and time burden on those involved in administering the EYFSP?
Q4. How could we improve the consistency and effectiveness of the EYFSP moderation process whilst reducing burdens?
Q5. Any form of progress measure requires a starting point. Do you agree that it is best to move to a baseline assessment in reception to cover the time a child is in primary school (reception to key stage 2)? If you agree, then please tell us what you think the key characteristics of a baseline assessment in reception should be. If you do not agree, then please explain why.
Q6. If we were to introduce a reception baseline, at what point in the reception year do you think it should be administered? In particular, we are interested in the impact on schools, pupils and teaching of administering the assessment at different times.
Q7. Our view is that it would be difficult to change key stage 1 assessment in order that it could be used as the baseline for progress in the long term. If you disagree, what could be done to improve the key stage 1 assessments so that they would be sufficiently detailed, and trusted as a fair and robust baseline?
Q8. If we were to introduce a new reception baseline measure, do you agree that we should continue to use key stage 1 teacher assessment data as the baseline for measuring progress in the interim years before a new measure was in place? If you disagree, what do you think we should use as the baseline instead?
Q9. If a baseline assessment is introduced in reception, in the longer term, would you favour removing the statutory requirement for all-through primary schools to administer assessments at the end of key stage 1?
Q10. If we were to introduce a reception baseline to enable the creation of reception to key stage 2 progress measures for all-through primaries, what would be the most effective accountability arrangements for infant, middle and junior schools’ progress measures?
Q11. Do you think that the department should remove the statutory obligation to carry out teacher assessment in English reading and mathematics at key stage 2, when only test data is used in performance measures?
Q12. Do you agree that the key stage 1 English grammar, punctuation and spelling test should remain non-statutory beyond the 2016 to 2017 academic year, with test papers available for teachers to use as they see fit?
Q13. At what point in key stage 2 do you think the multiplication tables check should be administered? Please explain the basis for your views.
a) At the end of year 4 b) During year 5 c) During year 6
Q14. How can we ensure that the multiplication tables check is implemented in a way that balances burdens on schools with benefit to pupils?
Q15. Are there additional ways, in the context of the proposed statutory assessments, that the administration of statutory assessments in primary schools could be improved to reduce burdens?
Q16. Do you agree that the statutory assessment of writing should afford teachers greater flexibility in determining a pupil’s overall standard of attainment than is currently the case? Please give reasons for your answer.
Q17. Please give details of any robust alternative approaches to the assessment of English writing, which the Department for Education should explore.
Q18. Please give details of any effective models of moderation or standardisation of teacher assessment that the Department for Education should explore.
Q19. Do you think that any of our proposals could have a disproportionate impact, positive or negative, on specific students, in particular those with 'relevant protected characteristics' (including disability, gender, race and religion or belief)? Please provide evidence to support your response.
Q20. How could any adverse impact be reduced and are there any ways we could better advance equality of opportunity? Please provide evidence to support your response.