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

Baseline assessment for reception

Discussion in 'Early Years' started by williams81, Sep 25, 2010.

  1. I have just assessed pupils in reception on letter names and letter sounds. I have got a score for each out of 26.
    I now need to know what the baseline assessment for entry to reception is. What phonic percentage / score would you expect a reception child to get at the start of reception?



     
  2. Is there any expectation at the beginning of Reception?
    Phase One of Letters and Sounds, for example, does not promote looking at letter shapes along with learning about speech sounds and leaves it very woolly as to what is done.
    Many nurseries and FS 1 settings, however, do a bit of basic sounds and letters stuff - often using Jolly Phonics I expect.
    Some parents might have done some early phonics or alphabet activities.
    So, you may well get quite a varied baseline at the beginning of Reception.
    In practical terms, I suggest you 'park' letter names for the time being, and just focus on your phonics teaching.
    What were your findings about letter names and sounds? For example, can you share some of your scores for our interest - and did you find children muddled between sounds and letters - or giving one or the other, or both?
     
  3. On a slightly different note:
    Having worked in nursery last year and in reception this year (at a different school) I have been shocked by the apparent inaccuracy of information sent up from nursery (the children arrive from a pre-school or a nursery both attached to the school, a large primary). I find 3 factors worrying:
    • I am assessing the children as best I can within the first 2 weeks of Reception in all areas of learning (not my idea). Is it reasonable to expect to get an accurate viewpoint of 30 children within this time, especially considering that they will probably not be performing (I know, not a good word, but you know what I mean) typically in an unfamiliar environment? Is this why the F1 data look so inaccurate and I will later find that the children are more able than they seem?
    • You could interpret the apparent backward step in children's social development as a result of a less congenial environment. If PSE development is so dependent on environment is it right to use it as a measure of progress at all?
    • If the results from F1 are truly inaccurate what are the pressures and misunderstandings that result in such inaccurate assessments, and, if this is widespread, what is the point of having such assessments done at all? If used as a baseline they risk giving a false picture and making end of F2 results look unimpressive. If discarded they are a waste of time for nursery staff.
    Has anyone else had similar problems? Any thoughts? I'm just hoping that my results from last year don't seem totally exagerated to their reception class teachers!
    To answer Debbie's query - I have found that the children do not know letter sound correspondences (maybe 2 LSCs at most) but some do hear and repeat initial sounds. There is a tendency to add /uh/ to consonant sounds (know there's a german sounding name for that but have forgotten it!). Some know a couple of letter names. Some are familiar with the Jolly Phonics actions.
     
  4. I have only one classes data so far and we found that chn recognised more letter names than sounds. Scores varied enormously from 0/26 to highest which was about 15 /26.
    I have been told to provide an average baseline score for Reception e.g at the start of year 3 you expect average child to be a 2B. On the Durham website it says to achieve DM scale 4 chn need to know 20/26 sounds and 14/26 names. They definately haven't scored that in sounds so I assume the average so far is DM scale 3 at the start of Reception.
     
  5. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    williams are you in Durham? are you not using Flying from the Start?
    I think the profile point you mean is an ELG not a DM ... Links sounds to letters, naming and sounding letters of the alphabet
    http://eyfs.durhamlea.org.uk/16242

    I wouldn't be assessing it at this point in the year it is one I leave until summer term
    One entry to reception most children will be working at the first 3 profile point level (as these are DM) with most children scoring 1,2 or 3 with very few achieving ELGs
     
  6. Thumbie I have had children come to me from private nurseries scoring 9 on the EYFSP in ALL areas! I now take nursery assessments with a pinch of salt I am afraid to say as they vary so much.
     
  7. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    We once had a three year old child join our FSU nursery from a private day nursery already scoring 9 in all areas (she had 2 terms before she even started reception) and was a normal 3 year old not a child protegy so I'm quite sceptical about high entry scores.
     
  8. I can see that children from private settings might be wrongly 'scored' (I've come across those many a time), but I really feel we should be able to treat the ones from school nursery settings as correct.
     
  9. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    you would think so wouldn't you [​IMG]
     
  10. Leapyearbaby64

    Leapyearbaby64 New commenter

    70% of our children have been in our nursery. There were some issues about the information being passed on and we'll sort them out this year. I too find reports from other settings vary wildly and have been in two minds about what to do. However, I've decided amongst myself that I am looking at what happens in my school. Therefore, the child who has yet to speak to anyone else may have had super relationships elsewhere, but the change of setting has affected progress in that area and therefore I assess what I see. Do you think that is right? It is very clear (and you would expect it to be so) that the children who are familiar with the setting have made progress more quickly in the first month.
     
  11. Leapyearbaby64

    Leapyearbaby64 New commenter

    PS Our nursery scores were low rather than high.
     
  12. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    I think it is important not to base line children until they are settled or the results will be useless.
     

  13. I queried information from one nursery about a girl who had blue for language for communication and thinking, grey for writing, yellow for reading and nothing for linking sounds and letters! Very confusing information being passed up.
     
  14. I agree so much Msz, and actually wonder if the early baselining that is demanded is a sneaky way of getting low 'scores' that can show an impressive improvement by the end of foundation stage. I have had to do this early baselining in nursery and in reception over the last two years and to be honest I am p'd off with it. Just when you should be supporting children in settling and teaching routines and behaviour expectations you get diverted into the impossible task of assessing where they come on the DM. It makes me livid! [​IMG]
     
  15. I totally agree that children should be allowed a settling-in period before baseline observations or assessment.

    However, if things like phonics teaching start in the meantime, then you are not going to get an transparent baseline either.
    So, settle in but 'baseline' assess before explicit teaching.
     
  16. inky

    inky Lead commenter

    I railed against the sort of baseline nursery assessments we were required to perform at my school. So detailed. So inappropriate. So unfair. It's reassuring to read posts that question the way this data-gathering is managed in Reception!
     
  17. Hettys

    Hettys New commenter

    Why???
     
  18. Because:
    • Practitioners within the private sector tend to be less well-trained than practitioners within schools, with the workforce containing fewer teachers and a lot of NVQ students.
    • These settings are not answerable to a SMT regarding their results and their effect on overall results for the school.
    • Private settings, in order to attract custom, need to look highly successful.
    This is why they might be inaccurate.
     
  19. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    The most common reason I've seen for "inaccuracies" is ego (often from school nurseries)

     
  20. And yet you wrote this. Have you had results from school nurseries as inflated as this?
     

Share This Page