1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Accuracy of Ros Wilson Writing levels compared to NC

Discussion in 'Primary' started by teacher242, Apr 5, 2012.



  1. <font size="3" face="Calibri">I'm trying to put together assessment packs for writing - we
    don't use APP templates but do assess children regularly against Ros Wilson's
    descriptors. I'm trying to combine different forms of assessment to make a much
    more user friendly assessment sheet/ guide.</font>
    Anyway, I just searched for the original NC level
    descriptors to copy and paste for the top of my sheet and they do not seem to
    match up to Ros Wilson's levels.
    I'm not Literacy coordinator, so have not had anything to do
    with training for assessment or APP came so am looking for a bit of guidance
    and wondered if any other schools/ literacy coordinators have had any issues
    with Ros Wilson.
    Some examples:
    <ul style="margin-top:0cm;">
    <li style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;tab-stops:list 36.0pt;" class="MsoNormal">In
    NC levels it does not mention paragraphs until level 5 <font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
    </font>[/LIST]'Organised appropriately' is mentioned at level 4 so I can
    see that it has a place
    <ul style="margin-top:0cm;">
    <li style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;tab-stops:list 36.0pt;" class="MsoNormal">The
    connectives expected at each level seem to be moved up one level from APP
    sheets to Ros Wilson's. Ros Wilson, level 3 : if, after, while, as well
    as, although, however, also, besides, even though, nevertheless (from
    level descriptors and connective pyramid) APP level 3: and, but, so are
    most common connectives, subordination occasionally<font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
    </font>[/LIST]I appreciate that all of those connectives from Ros Wilson
    can be used for subordination, but its the word 'occasionally' that is missing.
    Ros Wilson levels don't seem to suggest that a level 3 piece of writing would
    rely heavily on and, but and so.
    <ul style="margin-top:0cm;">
    <li style="margin:0cm 0cm 10pt;tab-stops:list 36.0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri">At
    no point in NC level descriptors are bloody colons and semi colons
    mentioned. Level 5 NC: 'A range
    of punctuation, including commas, apostrophes and inverted commas, is
    usually used accurately.' </font><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
    </font>[/LIST]I can see that it
    says including, so it's not a definitive list, but no mention of half the
    things in Ros Wilson's punctuation pyramid</font>
    I'm more than
    willing to except that I am wrong and that all of the things in Ros Wilson's
    descriptors can fall into the more vague NC level descriptors, but would
    equally like to know if others feel that there is a mismatch in some parts. </font>
    Also, I'd like to
    say that we use the assessments mainly to determine next steps for children/
    groups/ classes, so it doesn't matter so much in that case. However, with SATs
    being teacher assessed this year and arguments over 'you sent X up to me on a
    Level 3b, there's no way he is, now my pupil progress data looks bad...' I feel
    that I do need to equip the teaching staff with a reliable tool for accurate assessment.
    </font>

     
  2. I think you need to have a school wide assessment criteria for each sub-level. This is really the job of your literacy co-ordinator or team. Choose one, that all staff use, and stick to it.
    In my school, we have looked at Ros Wilson, APP and others (like Rising Stars and other LA grids) as well as going right back to the levelling within the NC doc. We have decided to use the APP grids as we feel these are the most representative of 'true' levels. It has taken time and lots of argument and discussion, but this is the only way we can truly avoid the 'now way he was that level' type bad feeling that then accompanies every Autumn term otherwise!
    We ALL use the same criteria grids now, have regular writing moderation sessions in staff meeting time, and each teacher meets with the teacher immediately above and below them at the end of the Summer term, to 'sign off' each child's level. We are expected to defend our levelling using evidence if necessary or where there is disagreement about a child's level.
     
  3. We had an INSET from a consultant from Andrell - she was AMAZING! We looked at assessment and, as a result, we purchased the ACE publication - Assessment Crteria Expanded. It's abolutely brilliant. all those points that you scratch your head over, can I give it or not.....? There is an explanation for each point AND corresponding next step child speak targets. This has secured our assessment of writing. The criterion scale is slightly harsher than the SATs marking scheme - the reasons being the only surprises you will get at SATs will be nice ones and also to raise expectations and outcomes for children. Surely, if we want children to paragraph at L4, they need to be having a go for L3????
    I know you have to pay for the book but it was on &pound;30 and I've copied sections for the whole staff. it has brought us all onto the same playing field and moderation sessions are now more a pleasure than a chore!

    I hope this helps
    xx
     

Share This Page