Modblog 5
Welcome! Thanks for visiting this blog. If you haven't been here before, this blog is used to allow teachers to comment on and moderate examples of primary school writing. The initial reasons for the blog were based on my own doubtfulness and difficulty consistently moderating and levelling writing. Already I have found this process, and most importantly the input of people who add votes/comments, extremely helpful and valuable. Please feel free to join in.
A Visit to York
Yesterday we went to york and we went to a museam and we saw loads interesting things there. My faviroute thing at the museam was the victorian street because you got to go in all the shops in the past. At the end we went on the merry go round outside it was really fun because it went really fast. I liked it when we we saw what a kitchen would have looked like in the 1980s I thought it looked like the kitchens now. The best part of the day was when we had lunch because for pudding I had a big choclate donout and it had milk choclate and white choclate sprinkels on it and some choclate iceing. When we had finished looking at the museam we went to the shop and I bought a ring with 3 dimonds on it.
A general overview of Level 2 writing
- Simple and compound sentences with basic connectives that could be repetitive (such as ‘and’, ‘then’ and ‘so’).
- Writing style shows some evidence of purpose and awareness of audience.
- Often uses capital letters and full-stops.
- Writing is organised to show some understanding of the purpose of the task.
- Uses simple noun phrases.
A general overview of Level 3 writing
- Simple and compound sentences with connectives (such as ‘because’, ‘but’ and ‘while’).
- Some variety of sentence openings.
- Writing style is sometimes adapted deliberately and usually relevant to suit the purpose.
- Sentences show an understanding of sentence structure and include accurate use of capital letters and full-stops.
- Speech marks, question marks and exclamation marks sometimes used correctly.
- Some adverbial and noun phrases are used and are sometimes well-chosen.
I have deliberated over this one as I feel it's on the borderline. I don't know if I'm being too harsh keeping it at a 2A as I definitely feel it meets most of the level 2 criteria, I just don't feel it's quite a 3C. In terms of the level 3 criteria, I would say it meets 3, 6, 7, 12 and 16. It needs developing to make sure all full stops and capital letters are secure, that it is organised in time order and the writer needs to use more ambitious vocabulary. Wouldn't take much to tip it into a 3C though.
ReplyDeleteLook forward to seeing what the rest of you think and whether you think I've been too harsh.
Thanks Miss Dawson, I didn't realise how tricky this would be as my initial feeling was 3- just but the criterion scale again seems to provide clarity. Last week it was secure 1 stepping into 2' this week maybe secure 2 pushing into beginnings of 3. Certain phrases such as "we saw what a kitchen would have looked like" demonstrate a secure grasp of language and grammar, yet the structure and lack of vocabulary to link events hold it back.There is some variety with sentence openers and evidence of complex sentences. I am in agreement with you that we are close to the borderline but I am going with 3c, I think.
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly why I started this. You have given me so much help with your contributions. I
This is a 2a for me. Very close to Level 3 but vocabulary needs more development, greater variety of sentence openers and perhaps some more audience engagement. I don't think punctuation is quite secure enough yet, too.
ReplyDeleteNot far away at all though.
Thanks again for your input here PJ. There are a couple of votes for level 3, it would be interesting to see other views and interpretations. You have really summed up the steps required to make this writing a level 3 clearly. I appreciate all your help with this.
DeleteMy initial impression when I read this was a 2b piece of work. Def not a level 3. I think it is missing high quality descriptive language (other than the doughnut), a range of connectives (only because is used), higher level punctuation (a comma in a list of !) And generally for level 3 I would expect more writing broken into paragraphs.
ReplyDeleteOn closer inspection I think there is some nice use of language and phrasing. The recount flows and is all in past tense. She (?) has also included personal opinion well. I would be happy with a 2a level judgement.
Thanks for joining I again,Claire. This has been a tricky task for me and brings me back to difficulties I have with levelling the writing. The general flow and style of the language to me is within low level 3 yet you are right that there is little evidence of description, adventurous vocabulary and connectives-especially time related connectives .
DeleteTriggered by an idea of yours, I am asking anyone who is interested to ask a pupil to write a story (prompt on home page of this blog) so that I can use a collection of writing samples where the task is the same. I think it will help with clarity and hopefully I can build a collection of a range of writing for different purposes. Don't want to put anyone off though because I'm really happy with how this blog is going, it is immensely helpful to me and I really appreciate your involvement.
Another vote for 2a here, with evidence of some level 3 criteria starting to be met. Using the Criterion Scale, I would tick the same features for level 3 as Miss Dawson above.
ReplyDeleteI think this is an interesting one because, as you say, there is clearly some sophistication there at a sentence level ("when" and "because" used to make complex sentences throughout; more difficult verb forms like "what a kitchen would have looked like" used correctly). Overall, though, the lack of cohesion as a whole (events not in the right order; no time connectives other than "when"; no sense of different sections of the recount), as well as the absence of any really ambitious word choices or details to add interest for the reader, and the lack of confidence using punctuation, make it difficult to level it any higher than a 2a using the Criterion Scale method.
This highlights a big problem with writing assessment for me... I had a staff moderation meeting last week where some teachers were talking about their "gut" instinct, and how they used this to level writing. I mention this because I think there are features of this piece (the sentences referred to above; the confident grasp of basic grammatical structures throughout; even the nice handwriting) which could easily lead to a "gut" feeling of Level 3-ness, but as soon as you use a rubric like the Criterion Scale it becomes clear that these features are hiding the fact that there are very few other criteria for Level 3 that are actually being met.
I haven't used the APP guidelines to assess this piece, but a quick glance suggests that it would be difficult to award Level 3 for any of AF6 (punctuation), AF3 (organisation), or AF4 (cohesion), with evidence for AF1 (interest/detail) debatable, meaning that the highest possible level would be a 2a.
Definitely agree with the gut feeling comment. We have some in our school that would give this higher just because of the neat handwriting. I tend to have a gut feeling over which level on the criterion scale to start with but always use the scale/app to hone it down to sublevels
DeleteThanks for taking the time to analyse this piece in such depth. Your point about gut instinct rings true and it's clear the writer can write confidently yet in terms of specific evidence there are lots of things lacking. THe ultimate goal must be consistency and accuracy in assessment. This was written by a year 2 pupil and without any doubt she will be writing at level 3 from the beginning of year 3, and probably in other pieces (highlighting the need for a broad range of evidence and examples of writing to reach a true level).
ReplyDeleteEverything about this process is raising common issues and helping me with my own moderation ability. The votes look divided on this one so far. On the home page of this blog I am asking teachers to send in a piece of writing using the same prompt- a story using story shakers dice for ideas.
Really appreciate your input.
Completely agree that consistency is key - in a way, it doesn't really matter what assessment guidelines you use, or even what you label the different levels of attainment, as long as everyone in the school uses the same method, and uses it in exactly the same way.
DeleteIt's all very well having a highly-developed "gut" instinct when it comes to summative assessment (as I've seen many experienced teachers profess to have), but the problem with this is that if your instinct is different in any way from someone else's - as it inevitably will be - then any notion of progress between year groups and across the school becomes impossible to quantify accurately. In a system with such high levels of accountability and pressure on teachers to evidence progress, this is clearly not good enough.
This is what I like about the Criterion Scale system... I think all assessment rubrics have their weaknesses, but this system makes it very clear, in as objective a way as possible, what features a particular piece of writing or range of pieces does or does not contain. Moderation/professional dialogue should then focus on the extent to which teachers agree that a specific criterion has or has not been met within a child's writing and, by extension, what pieces of writing that meet that criterion should look like in practice.
APP has a laudable aim, I think: to develop a more nuanced understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of a child's writing within a range of contexts. Unfortunately, however, I think that, in practice, this approach allows for a greater level of subjectivity - for example, I have seen many examples of teachers awarding a child a level based on a "gut" feeling, then highlighting their APP criteria in order to match that assessment, rather than the other way around.
For me, this will always be a potential weakness in "teacher assessment" models - for formative assessment (as APP was designed to support) this is fine, as of course it is teachers themselves who know best what pupils' strengths are and what areas they need to improve; the "level" here is irrelevant, as the only thing that matters is what the child can do, and what they need to do next as a result. But as soon as teacher assessment is used to inform a highly-pressurized, accountability-driven model of summative assessment (i.e. "levelling"), it becomes difficult to justify methods that are so susceptible to subjective judgements, unless a school has clear systems in place to limit this subjectivity and to make the assessment process as transparent and evidence-based as possible.
You could argue that all this will be irrelevant soon, as the government has announced the imminent demise of "levels" as a framework for assessment - will be interesting to see what they are replaced with, however...
Really agree with the points you have covered James.Transparency and consistency are crucial, and the high pressure nature of accountability does skew things.
DeleteIts only just struck me now you've said it about the removal of levels... No idea what that will bring. Teachers are still going to need to evaluate where the strengths and weaknesses of a pupil's writing are, and what measures need to be addressed to move forward and make progress.
Very good potential and with focussed teaching to targets, will be a 4 in a term or less.
ReplyDeleteOne short of being a 3B.
If using the Criterion Scale number 2 can't be assessed so lower thresholds by one.
Targets:
* WOW words
* Range of punctuation used accurately - create opportunities for a question, ellipses or exclamation
* Accurate spelling & handwriting.
It would be interesting to discuss which level 3 criteria you think it meets so we could come to some consensus about what counts and what doesn't. I think that's where I struggle with the criterion scale.
DeleteThanks for joining in again Ros, I appreciate your comments. It might be in this case that the task given in this case hasn't provided opportunities for extended examples of level 3 writing to shine through yet with this work some of the phrasing and structure of sentences fall well within level 3 eg "we saw what a kitchen would have looked like" and "When we had finished looking at the museum......" . "The best part of the day...."
ReplyDeleteThis piece of writing has made me look hardest not only at the writing but at the assessment criteria.
I do agree this is level 3 and the more I look closely at the criterion scale I feel that judgement can be justified, despite the obvious weaknesses of the work.
This is why I find this process so fascinating (and difficult) - it's amazing how much potential there is for different judgements, even when using the same rubrics for assessment...
ReplyDeleteOne thing we don't have present at my school moderation meetings, however, is the person who designed the scale in the first place! Ros, it would be really useful to know which 10 Level 3 criteria you would award for this particular piece of writing - I am thinking I was probably too harsh in not acknowledging these features:
1 - “work is organised, imaginative and clear” – not sure how organised it needs to be for L3, but I felt that it was a series of unsequenced recollections rather than a chronological recount of the day – too harsh?
13 – adverbs and adjectives for description – maybe I was thinking that the adjectives are fairly simple, but then I suppose that is all they need to be at this level?
14 - spelling of common/phonically-regular polysyllabic words - some are correct (like "kitchen" and "pudding"), but other fairly common words are not (like "faviroute” and “choclate”)
15 – “can develop characters and describe settings, feelings and emotions” – probably should have given this one, looking back at it, as emotions/preferences are clearly expressed, even if they are at a fairly unsophisticated level.
That would be 9 criteria (1, 3, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16) – what would you have added? Number 10 maybe (ability to adapt to form, although I wasn’t sure if this could be ascertained from one piece like this, as the language for a recount like this is fairly conversational)? Or number 17? There is certainly some opinion/detail there, but I didn’t feel it was quite enough to show a real attempt to interest the reader…
Overall, I suppose, it’s not that I thought that some of these features were not present at all, but that I wasn't sure whether they were present to a sufficient extent... I guess this comes back to my concerns about subjectivity - for the system to work, everyone needs to have the same understanding of what, for example, "clear and organised" work or "adjectives for description" should look like at Level 3, and this is why I find this kind of moderation so useful.
Would be really interested to hear your thoughts.
Both queries are basically asking the same thing – what the decisions are at Level 3. The following is my response:
ReplyDelete1. I said ‘Is this a 1? No. Is it a 2? Maybe. Is it a 3? Maybe. Is it a 4? No.
2. Pitch in at the lower possibility, so I started at L2. It scored 11 (WOW words) and 21 (accurate handwriting) Judgement = 2A so I MUST assess for Level 3.
3. I gave 1. I feel it goes beyond a series of recollections and has some strong links and a sense of sequence. The following are the full sequence of sentence openers: Yesterday...My favourite... At the end... The best part... When we had finished... , which I feel are quite good and clear links.
4. Number 2 can’t be assessed when it is a narrative, recount or report as these are all the 1st forms children write. Put a line there & lower the thresholds by 1.
5. No. 3 is a dot – beginning to.
6. No. 4 is beginning to – a dot. Some bits of ‘nice’ language, but no WOW words.
7. No.5 = yes, as shown in no. 1.
8. No 6 = Yes. Uses ‘because’, ‘when’ and ‘with’.
9. No.7 = Yes, it is mainly grammatically correct.
10. 8 is beginning to. As far as I can see on screen, there are only full stops and a couple of awkward sentences and seem to be 2 or 3 missing ones.
11. No. 9 is Yes. As in no. 1.
12. No. 10 = Beginning to. The tone is appropriate for recount but there is no explicit adaptation.
13. No.11 Is no. Full stops only.
14. No. 12 = Beginning to. Not accurate. Second ‘museum is 2 clear sizes and several oversized Ss.
15. No.13 = Yes. Eg in 1st 8 lines: loads / interesting / favourite / really
16. No. 14 = Beginning to. There are half a dozen spelling errors.
17. N. 15 = No. Insufficient detailed description. Tends to be one statement about most things.
18. No. 16 = Yes. Links shown in 1.
19. No. 17 = Yes. She (?) voices opinions on what she liked best etc. Child can show any number or combination of these.
20. No. 18 = No generalisers.
21. No.19 = Yes. I found it quite interesting – this is only saying ‘beginning to’... She uses a good range of sentence openers, including a Power Opener. Had there been a wider range of punctuation, especially ? ! or ... it would have been stronger. This is the only one that, in retrospect, I would open to moderation and from your comments I would be willing to change to a ‘Beginning to...’
That is 9 ticks out of 18 (thresholds now 6 – 9 / 10 – 14 / 15 – 18). That is a secure 3C and would be very easy to push into a B. Even if I change the last judgement, it is still a 3C.
I hope this helps everyone.
Thanks for this detailed explanation Ros. I have learned a huge amount from all of this.
DeleteThank you for taking the time to respond like this, Ros - this is very helpful, and much appreciated.
ReplyDeleteThe entire discussion on this piece of writing has been so detailed and in depth and you have really taken care and given this a lot of thought. I could not have achieved this understanding at an in school or cluster moderation and I also think as many questions have been raised as answers in terms of consistency and accuracy of assessment materials/purposes.
DeleteI have always liked the criterion scale and have even been to a BIG WRITING training session and to share the way other people use it is extremely valuable. I am hoping to continue to develop the blog with perhaps people contributing samples of work. In terms of a relevant,valid and constructive moderation of writing I hadn't expected to learn quite so much from this. THankyou!
You are very welcome James. Isn't this a good idea from Modblog?
DeleteEvening all!
ReplyDeleteAs there has already been lots of great and detailed response to this piece I'm just going to go ahead and add my vote to 3c.
What I really like about this is the Text, Structure and Organisation - I think there is real potential for a writer who is thinking about the audience and who will be able to tweak writing for different purposes very soon!
Great to see this getting so many hits/comments!
I will add, that it is really important to moderate any teaching assessment with work in their book, from this writing I think that this is a writer who can carefully check work and responds really well to any next steps given.
Hi! Thanks for commenting again. The response last week was really valuable. It helped me the most and I am grateful to everyone. I think I have needed this to help me get my confidence higher in marking and levelling writing, but all the issues that I have felt were to do with me being less than an expert have kept coming up in the blog discussions.
ReplyDeleteI think your comments about the writing are fair and valid. My daughter (y2 age 7) wrote it in half term and I had no idea it would generate the best discussion of all.
I am in the process of collecting a few examples based on a prompt from story shakers to hopefully add opportunities for comparing writing.
Thanks again for being involved and helping.
Hi,
ReplyDeleteHaving just read the piece I was thinking along 2a lines like many of you. I've now scanned the detailed responses and am sitting on the 2a/3c fence! To award a 3 I would want to see another piece perhaps a story to judge the description and ability to engage the reader. I must admit that I haven't analysed it in as much detail as my colleagues here so can see that, with a more in-depth look, I would also settle for a 3. I would be interested to know how many folks are using the criterion above as I haven't come across it before.
Have a good week!
Becky
Hi Becky,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments.
I will put a question on the blog next week to find out how many people are using the criterion scale.
With best wishes