Primary teachers can expect yet more changes in the way that they assess pupils from 2018, with a major new government consultation expected as Tes went to press.
But first, they must get through this year’s assessments. And for those fearing a repeat of last summer’s chaos, the signs are not good.
One of Ofsted’s most senior officials has revealed that the inspectorate is just as reluctant to use this year’s writing assessments as it was in 2016. Back then, the watchdog warned its inspectors not to base judgements of schools on the results.
Asked if inspectors would receive the same advice as last year, Sean Harford, the inspectorate’s national director of education, says: “Yes. Unless we’re convinced that there’s anything different this year than last year, then we will give the same advice that we gave inspectors last year…to treat it with caution.”
And it will remain “unless we are convinced that the frameworks have got better, that the moderation has got better… there isn’t evidence at the moment that that’s the case,” he says
Last year’s confusion led the Department for Education to decide that schools that had dropped below the floor standard due to writing alone could not be issued with a warning notice unless the extent of change was beyond what could be explained by the reforms.
NAHT headteachers’ union general secretary Russell Hobby wants that guidance to stay.
“We need to keep treating these results with caution until we have a stable system and we’re not there yet,” he says
“The data should be reliable, but it isn’t. It should be a stark warning to us all. We need to get away from this idea that one number over one year can tell you anything meaningful.
“If, at the end of this, we can come out of this with that realisation, then that would be the silver lining in this cloud of assessment chaos.”
Details of just how much variation there was across the country in the treatment of writing assessments is provided by analysis from Michael Tidd, deputy head of Edgewood Primary in Hucknall.
‘Reckless approach to reform’
Harford believes it could be “years” before the system settles down. “Last year you had quite different outcomes from local authorities in how they moderated compared with others,” he says.
“If there’s a similar volatility again, it will bolster us in saying caution is needed. I think over some years this will settle down.
“People say, ‘well it was new last year, but it’s not new this year’. Well things don’t settle down as quickly as that in terms of data.”
The Ofsted director was speaking earlier this month, following his appearance at the Primary Rocks conference in Manchester and before the expected announcement of further changes to primary assessment from 2018.
While Harford’s caution might be welcomed by headteachers - as proof that the inspectorate is taking a nuanced view- it does not bode well for primary teachers hoping for a stable and certain system of assessment.
The writing assessments are an essential part of the primary Sats and are included in the floor standards that primaries must meet to avoid forced academisation.
“I think Sean Harford’s advice is very sensible,” says ATL general secretary Mary Bousted. “I think the data has to be treated with caution.
“But the issue is not with how Ofsted treats the data - the issue is the government’s reckless approach to assessment reform. The key stage 2 tests last year were a disaster.”
The way writing is judged - using pupils’ day-to-day work - was overhauled in September 2015 in time for last year’s assessments. But clarifications are still being issued 18 months later.
A video from the Standards and Testing Agency (STA), released earlier this month, sets out what counts as pupils’ “independent” work for the purposes of assessing writing. It says, for example, that the success criteria teachers give pupils, such as “use a varied range of sentence openers”, must not be “over-detailed”.
But Tidd points out that teachers may interpret “over-detailed” differently.
“I think Mr Harford is absolutely right,” the Nottinghamshire deputy head says. “The biggest concern I have is that schools and teachers are still unclear about exactly how much support can be given and still be classed as ‘independent’. All the time those rules remain unclear and open to such varied interpretations, the resulting data will essentially be junk.”
Simon Kidwell, head of Hartford Manor primary in Northwich, Cheshire, is also concerned about the constant need for clarification. “The continuation of confusing eleventh-hour input from the STA is damaging the teaching of writing and demoralising our teachers,” he says. “There is no evidence that the 2017 outcomes will be more accurate than they were in 2016.”
