From The @TES Blog: Five Songs To Get Your After-SATs Party Started

Another bit of fun from me over on the TES site: https://www.tes.com/news/five-songs-get-your-after-sats-party-started

From The @TES Blog: Eyes Down, It's Time For SATs Reading Test Bingo

In what must be the article with the shortest shelf life that I've ever written I've made some tongue-in-cheek predictions for the content of the 2019 Reading SATs:

Read it here: https://www.tes.com/news/eyes-down-its-time-sats-reading-test-bingo

From The @TES Blog: 5 Things To Do Instead Of Revising For SATs

This might come across as idealistic or cynical. It might even sound hypocritical to those who’ve taught Year 6 alongside me. But there really is more to Year 6 than Sats revision – even in Sats week.

Regardless of your views on key stage 2 testing, it’s the system with which we’re currently lumbered. And I would always advise that children are prepared for them.

But by preparing, I don’t mean drilled to within an inch of their life: Easter booster classes, daily past papers, hours of homework and the like. There are other ways of helping children to be ready for that week of testing in May – ways that prepare them mentally; ways that ensure they remain emotionally intact.

Here are five suggestions:

Click here to read the whole article: https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/five-things-do-instead-sats-revision

Comprehension Strategies And The KS2 Reading Test - What and How Should We Teach?

In my first blog post in this series I explored the difference between reading comprehension strategies and reading skills. I noted that many of the skills that are tested in the KS2 SATs also have a matching reading comprehension strategy. With the conclusion that the deliberate use of strategies develops and embeds skills, I posed a question to myself:

Is there a way to teach comprehension strategies that prepares children well for the KS2 reading test?

In answering my second question I had to consider that which is different about the reading test. Whereas the commonly-used comprehension strategies do not require children to give written answers to questions they ask or generate themselves, the test does. This is the main difference. In addition to this, the year 5/6 National Curriculum objectives mention no requirement for children to provide written answers to questions and many of the objectives aren't tested at all by the SATs. The objectives circled in red aren't tested by SATs; the ones outlined in blue are.
Without having any evidence back this up with, I believe that there are children who, having been taught strategies which have become skills, are able to complete the reading test, confidently giving written answers to the questions it asks. I suspect that these children are also able writers and they have probably had a healthy relationship with literacy in general from an early age. There is a potential argument here for a sole focus on teaching comprehension strategies and never asking children to spend time practising giving written answers to comprehension questions.

But, I also think that there are probably children for whom some explicit instruction about how to give written answers to comprehension questions will be useful and necessary (if they are to have a chance of demonstrating their reading skills in a test, which all year 6 children are). Again, I have no research evidence to back this up, only anecdotal experience. However, there is research evidence to back up the idea that particular written activities do support reading comprehension.

I turned to Steve Graham and Michael Hebert's 'Writing to Read' report which states:

"Writing-about-text activities had a positive impact on struggling students’ understanding of a text. An important key to success in using these activities with lower-achieving students was to provide them with ongoing practice and explicit instruction."

The report recommends that students do write in response to things they have read and outlines a series of recommendations of activities. One of the recommendations is that teachers should have students answer questions about a text in writing, or create and answer written questions about a text:

"Answering questions about a text can be done verbally, but there is greater benefit from performing such activities in writing. Writing answers to text questions makes them more memorable, as writing an answer provides a second form of rehearsal. This practice should further enhance the quality of students’ responses, as written answers are available for review, reevaluation, and reconstruction (Emig, 1977).

For generating or responding to questions in writing, students either answered questions about a text in writing; received practice doing so; wrote their own questions about text read; or learned how to locate main ideas in a text, generated written questions for them, and then answered them in writing. These practices had a small but consistently positive impact on improving the reading comprehension of students in grade 6–12 when compared to reading or reading instruction."

Lemov et al's 'Reading Reconsidered' also provides plenty of classroom evidence that writing supports reading comprehension. They summarise:

"...the strategic use of writing made reading and discussions of reading- the other core activities of English class—more rigorous, focused, productive and engaging- ‘better’ in short.  Writing is a deeply valuable endeavor in its own right, but it is also an endeavor that works in synergy with reading in specific ways."

From 'Writing To Read'

Activities other than answering questions include responding to a text through writing personal reactions or analyses/interpretations of the text, writing summaries of a text, taking notes on a text, and creating and/or answering questions about a text in writing. Actually, all of these activities have a greater effect size than answering questions and therefore should be explored further in the primary classroom - another blog post for another time!

What does come through both the 'Writing To Read' report and Lemov et al's 'Reading Reconsidered' chapter entitled 'Writing For Reading' is an emphasis on explicit teaching: if we want children to be able to write well about the things they read in order to develop a better understanding of what they read, we must explicitly teach these skills - they must be modelled well by the teacher.

What I have found is that evidence from both research and successful classroom practice shows that an approach to teaching reading strategies which includes giving children the opportunities to practise giving written answers to comprehension questions (in order to prepare them well for a test) is not something we should avoid, but is something that, if done right, could be beneficial to the children we teach.

From the IES guide

So, is there a way to teach comprehension strategies that prepares children well for the KS2 reading test? Yes, I think so. As long as there is modelling, discussion (book talk) and time for children to practise, a sequence of learning that will improve reading skills can (and should) focus both on teaching reading comprehension strategies (as outlined in the EEF and IES guidance) and the elements of the National Curriculum (as outlined in the content domain in the KS2 test developers' framework) as they can act reciprocally due to similarities between the skills and the strategies. Reading instruction which includes, amongst other things, teachers, asking children to respond in writing to well-written questions based on a manageable amount of text is a good idea when preparing children for KS2 tests. It shouldn't be the only element of reading instruction but it should help. Where children lack particular skills it will be best to focus modelling and practise on those particular skills.

If children are only given written comprehension activities the comprehension strategies are not likely to be employed or developed. But if the written comprehension activities are backed up with explicit teaching of the supporting strategies (as well as vocabulary, any other necessary background knowledge and how to write answers), then comprehension strategies should be developed. Such explicit teaching (including modelling and discussion) should focus on ensuring that children know what the strategy is, how it is used and why and when to use it. Children can be shown how to use the strategies when completing written comprehension activities.

The York Reading for Meaning Project assessed three reading comprehension interventions delivered by teaching assistants in 20 primary schools. The three interventions were carried out with children who had been identified as having the poor comprehender profile - the three interventions were intended to help children who struggled with reading comprehension to overcome their problems. The three interventions differed:

• Oral Language Programme: vocabulary, reciprocal teaching with spoken language, figurative language and spoken narrative
• Text Level Programme: metacognitive strategies, reciprocal teaching with written language, inferencing from text and written narrative
• Combined Programme: all of the above (vocabulary, reciprocal teaching with spoken language, figurative language, spoken narrative, metacognitive strategies, reciprocal teaching with written language, inferencing from text and written narrative)

Based on the findings, the report concludes that 'the Oral Language intervention overall was the most effective of the three programmes. Theoretically, this finding provides strong support for the theory that the reading comprehension difficulties seen in those who show the poor comprehender profile are a secondary consequence of these children’s oral language weaknesses.'.

Here then is evidence that children who are struggling with reading comprehension, and are falling behind, will benefit from an oral language programme as intervention. In the context of this blog post - which focuses on teaching all children (including those are aren't struggling with comprehension but are still learning new skills and strategies) - it is worth questioning whether these research findings bear relevance - should we scrap writing as part of first teaching of reading and focus solely on an oral approach?

Examples of combined programmes from The York Reading for Meaning Project: An Overview

However, the outcomes of the project also show that 'all three interventions (Text Level, Oral Language and Combined) improved children’s reading comprehension skills'. In this blog post I have been suggesting what is essentially a combined programme for everyday classroom-based reading instruction (see the examples above). The question the research doesn't answer is, where first teaching of reading comprehension is concerned (i.e. not interventions for poor comprehenders), whether or not the benefits of writing discussed above are still outweighed by only focusing on an oral-only approach.

What is potentially telling is that 'the children who received the Combined programme experienced all components but at half the quantity of the other two intervention programmes'. What if children were given a whole quantity of both oral and written approaches? Isn't this something that a reading lesson, with an adequate amount of time given over to it, could offer children that an intervention (in this study set at 30 minutes long) could not?

It would be interesting to know which approach (oral, text or combined) shows the best results for all learners rather than interventions for poor comprehenders . For teachers working on helping children to be prepared for KS2 testing it would be good to see research which focuses on first teaching for all learners where the results are taken from SATs performance. Whether you are in support of year 6 testing or not, they are currently a feature of the UK's education system. In order for children to feel prepared (and hopefully not stressed by uncertainty about the tests) and in order for schools to demonstrate accurately the reading ability of their children, most schools will want to allow children to practise giving written answers to comprehension questions. Would it be too much of a gamble in this case for schools to take an oral-only approach?

If you would like Aidan to work with you on developing reading at your school, please visit his website at https://www.aidansevers.com/services and get in touch via the contact details that can be found there.

Expanding on some of the ideas in this blog post, in previous blog posts I have written about...

• how written responses to questions might be used in primary reading lessons: How To Use Questioning When Teaching Inference-Making
• how lessons might focus on one particular reading strategy or skill: Should We Teach Reading Strategies In Isolation Or In Combination?; Reading Comprehension: A Structured Way Of Teaching Inference-Making
• how to write comprehension questions for use in reading lessons: How To Write Good Comprehension Questions
• how reading skills and strategies might work together to build understanding: Scaffolding Structures for Reading Comprehension Skills

Scaffolding Structures for Reading Comprehension Skills

This is a very different blog post to the sort I normally write; it represents some very hypothetical thinking and the purpose of writing it is to open it up to discussion. My hypothesis is that the reading skills outlined in the English Reading Test Framework for KS2 (and KS1) might be best taught in a particular order. I also hypothesise that when teaching particular skills (represented as being higher up the model pictured) teachers can guide children through how to use other skills (lower down the model) to arrive at a better ability to practice and use the skills that are higher up the model. First of all, here's the model I've put together to which I refer:

Skills (taken from English Reading Test Framework for KS2) are listed in the order that they might best be taught. This suggested order is based on the idea that some reading skills might be required prior to developing others. The most basic skills are towards the bottom.

The inclusion of 2d (inference) may depend on the text type. For example, in many non-fiction texts there is no requirement to infer information, only to retrieve it. In these cases the 2d (inference) step/building block can be skipped.

The only reading skill from the test framework which isn’t included here is 2h (make comparisons within the text). It is possible that texts can be compared at many different levels, for example, the vocabulary used can be compared (2a), summaries of plot can be compared (2c) or structure of the text can be compared (2f). The skill of making comparisons (2h) could be seen as a ‘floating’ skill – one which could be applied in different ways alongside other reading skills.

All of the following symbols and colours refer to the Reading Roles, a system I designed to make the different skills memorable for children and teachers. Read more about the Reading Roles here: http://thatboycanteach.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/reading-roles-cognitive-domains-made.html

2d – Inference (this one is lots of detail here: http://thatboycanteach.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/scaffolding-inference-trialling.html)

In order for children to begin to make inferences they need to at least be able to retrieve information in the text, and before this they need to be able to understand what the words mean.

(2a)       give/explain the meaning of words in context

(2b)       retrieve and record information/identify key details from fiction and non-fiction

(2d)       make inferences from the text/explain and justify inferences with evidence from the text

2f and 2g are very interlinked as they are both about meaning – one with a focus on word and phrase choice, and one with a focus on content choice. It is possible that 2g and 2f should precede 2d in the teaching sequence but if making inferences is one way in which we take information from a text, then arguably we need that information to make meaning; we can then go on to identify and explain how that meaning is enhanced through word choice and how the content included contributes to the meaning. The fact that these skills are not included in the KS1 test framework might suggest that this is correct, and that these are more advanced skills than making inferences.

2g – Author’s purpose

(2a)       give/explain the meaning of words in context

(2b)       retrieve and record information/identify key details from fiction and non-fiction

(2d)       make inferences from the text/explain and justify inferences with evidence from the text

(2g)       identify/explain how meaning is enhanced through choice of words and phrases

2f – Language structure and choice

(2a)       give/explain the meaning of words in context

(2b)       retrieve and record information/identify key details from fiction and non-fiction

(2d)       make inferences from the text/explain and justify inferences with evidence from the text

(2g)       identify/explain how meaning is enhanced through choice of words and phrases

(2f)        identify/explain how information/narrative content is related and contributes to meaning as a whole

Once children understand word meanings, can find and infer information, explain how language has been used to communicate meaning and, as a result, can understand the meaning of a whole piece of text, then they can begin to summarise the text, or make predictions based on their understanding. It might not be necessary to summarise a text before making a prediction, and the ability to summarise a text should not rely on the ability to make predictions based on it. These two skills are both included in the KS1 test framework, but children at this stage summarise and make predictions based only on word meaning, information retrieval and inference (missing out 2f and 2g) – summaries and predictions at this stage might be at a simpler level. It is probably true that in KS2 similar summaries and predictions could be made, without paying heed to 2g and 2f.

2c - Summarising

(2a)       give/explain the meaning of words in context

(2b)       retrieve and record information/identify key details from fiction and non-fiction

(2d)       make inferences from the text/explain and justify inferences with evidence from the text

(2g)       identify/explain how meaning is enhanced through choice of words and phrases

(2f)        identify/explain how information/narrative content is related and contributes to meaning as a whole

(2c)       summarise main ideas from more than one paragraph

2e – Predicting

(2a)       give/explain the meaning of words in context

(2b)       retrieve and record information/identify key details from fiction and non-fiction

(2d)       make inferences from the text/explain and justify inferences with evidence from the text

(2g)       identify/explain how meaning is enhanced through choice of words and phrases

(2f)        identify/explain how information/narrative content is related and contributes to meaning as a whole

(2e)       predict what might happen from details stated and implied

The model suggests that an understanding of word meaning is core to all reading – this model assumes that children already have the skills of decoding, sight recognition and phonological awareness. The model only includes reading skills outlined by the test framework and does not include factors such as the necessity of activating prior background and literacy knowledge when reading.

The model also suggests that there is a hierarchy of reading skills and that children might benefit from having some reading skills taught before others.

It also suggests that when requiring a child to work on a skill which is ‘higher up’ the model that they work through a sequence of skills usage in order to initially scaffold their ability to exercise the ‘higher’ skill. For example, if requiring a child to summarise a passage, they might first answer questions about the vocabulary used, the information contained within (given both literally and inferentially) and what the authors purpose was with regards to structure and language choices.

This model focuses on the following strands of Scarborough’s reading rope: vocabulary, verbal reasoning and language structures:

I hope I have made my thinking clear in this blog post and I would really appreciate any thoughts about what I have proposed. If you can back any of your comments either with research or with case studies from experience then even better!

If you would like Aidan to work with you on developing reading at your school, please visit his website at https://www.aidansevers.com/services and get in touch via the contact details that can be found there.

On The Third Space Learning Blog: 2017 Maths SATs QLA Analysis

It's often helpful to use data to inform teaching but finding time to sit down and go through it with a fine enough tooth comb isn't easy.

The Question Level Analysis for the ks2 tests now provided on ASP (the RAISE online replacement) contains national and school data which can be useful to key stage 2 teachers to inform their future teaching. It's also useful for year 7 teachers, but they don't often get access to this information.

So, for the benefit of many teachers and children, here's a breakdown of the parts of the 2017 maths tests that children scores the country struggled with the most:

https://www.thirdspacelearning.com/blog/sats-qla-year-6-sats-revision-data-2018/

9 Important Changes to the Primary Maths Curriculum and Assessment

In response to the DfE's latest documents, I wrote this for Third Space Learning. It's a summary of the key changes in the way primary maths will be assessed over the next few years:

On 14th September, just as we were all getting settled into the new school year, the DfE published not one, but two documents of considerable importance: ‘Primary assessment in England: Government consultation response’ and the 2017/2018 ‘Teacher assessment frameworks at the end of KS2’. Both documents reveal changes that will no doubt affect our approach as teachers and leaders.

Whilst the most imminent and significant changes involve writing and reading, there are also some interesting developments in Maths.

Click here to read more: https://www.thirdspacelearning.com/blog/2017/9-changes-to-primary-maths-curriculum-and-assessment-slt-guide

The documents referred to throughout are these ones:

Primary Assessment Consultation Response: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644871/Primary_assessment_consultation_response.pdf

Teacher Assessment Frameworks At The End of Key Stage 2: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/645021/2017_to_2018_teacher_assessment_frameworks_at_the_end_of_key_stage_2_PDFA.pdf

KS2 Maths SATs On Reflection: Why We Teach For Mastery In Maths

Here's one I wrote for Third Space Learning: https://thirdspacelearning.com/blog/reflections-primary-maths-leader-ks2-sats-new-curriculum-blog/

‘Without reflection, we go blindly on our way, creating more unintended consequences, and failing to achieve anything useful.’ - Margaret J. Wheatley

Perhaps that’s a little over the top, but there’s something in it. As a teacher it’s always worth reflecting on a year just gone, looking back at what went well and what might need changing for the next year. I spent the year as Maths and UKS2 lead whilst teaching in Year 6.

As such I have the privilege of being up to date with the changes taking place in primary education, especially with regards to the expected standards in assessment. Now that I’ve got a few weeks of holiday under my belt, my mind is a little fresher. It's on natural then, that I begin to look back upon KS2 Maths SATs 2017. Read on for my reflections on the end of July and the ever-present changes to how Maths is assessed in UK primary schools...

https://thirdspacelearning.com/blog/reflections-primary-maths-leader-ks2-sats-new-curriculum-blog/

Changing The Teaching of Reading: Did It Work?

Disclaimer: Although this blog post is all about SATs data, it's not what I'm all about, nor has it been our singular focus this year. This blog post merely serves to analyse test data, however flawed it is turning out to be, in the spirit of transparency.

Regular readers will know I've blogged quite a lot about reading over the last year (slight understatement). I've developed ways of teaching reading (based on research, not just whim) which I've shared with others, and which others have used in their own classrooms. I've been eager to share my approaches because I've been excited about them, but there was always a question in the back of my mind: "What if they don't work?"

So, as results day approached, I was worried for more than just one reason: I hoped I had not let my own school down, and I hoped as well that I hadn't sent those who'd tried some of my ideas down the wrong path.

And because I've shouted loudly about how we've tackled our approach to teaching reading, particularly in year 6, it's only really right that I share something of our results with my readers.

I feel that first off I must signpost an excellent blog post by Mr. Jennings: 29% to 92%, a reading journey! The blog is an in-depth exploration of everything his school did to make a supremely impressive jump in their percentage of children reaching the 100 scaled score in the 2017 key stage 2 reading test. I feel honoured to have been mentioned in the blog post as part of Mr. Jennings' journey, but I now hail him as my new hero! What an achievement! I shall be learning from all the amazing work he has done this year.

Attainment

Well, we didn't quite get a 63 percentage point increase in our reading results - ours was a much more modest 21 percentage point increase, meaning that roughly half of our 60-strong cohort reached the magic 100 mark.

I was pleased with the increase - I've been told that a school working very hard to improve something can expect a 10 percentage point increase in results on average.

However, I was hoping that we would get 60% of children reaching the pass mark. Looking into the data, I found there were a number of children who were between 1 and 4 marks off getting 26 marks - these children would have brought the percentage of children reaching the 100 scaled score to my desired 60%. (I am hoping to have 3 of these children's scripts remarked.)

Progress

So, whilst our attainment was low, it wasn't a surprise. Our school's history and context (in short: Inadequate Ofsted December 2013 leading to academy conversion January 2015, 94% EAL, 37% disadvantage) means that our children haven't consistently had good teaching.

A review of historical data shows that only 22.2% of this cohort made average or above average progress during their time in lower key stage 2, and, as a result, only 5.6% of them were working at age related expectations in reading at the end of year 4. This figure was 26% (at ARE) by the end of year 5.

Our online tracking system (SPTO) takes a CTF file from the NCA Tools website and assigns points to the different scaled scores. Using this data, this 94.8% of this cohort have shown to have made average or above progress. In fact, 91.4% made accelerated progress. Looking at progress from official key stage 1 data shows that only 10% of children didn't make expected progress - at the beginning of the year that figure was 43% not making expected progress across the key stage.

So, even though our attainment results don't yet reflect the progress being made due to low starting points, there is considerable reason to believe that the approaches we took in the teaching of reading have had a positive impact on the children.

Test to Test

One or two of you may remember that I reported that before Christmas almost 50% of the cohort achieved the pass mark on the 2016 reading test. This is something that has caused me quite a bit of consternation: did no progress occur between December and May, given that the same percentage of children passed in May as in the December?

So, I spent some time looking into the data. Thankfully, I'd kept the scores from when the children tried the 2016 test as we wanted to see if taking the 2016 test was a good indicator of how well children would do on the actual test so that we could rely on using it as a practice paper in the future.

Positively, I discovered that:

• two extra children 'passed' in May who hadn't passed in December (one child who had 'passed' in December didn't 'pass' in May).
• of the aforementioned children who had scaled scores of 97, 98 or 99, all of them got significantly more marks (between 6 and 12) than on the 2016 test and all but one of them (the one who 'passed' in December but not May) got a higher scaled score, for example one child moved from a scaled score of 90 to 97.
• most of our lowest attaining children, and our SEND children, made the most progress between the two tests: some of the most vulnerable children getting a double digit increase in both their scaled score and number of marks gained.
• overall, children had made progress, some very impressive, from one test to the next, even if this did not mean that they achieved the 100 scaled score.

Interestingly, I also found that a number of children who 'passed' both the tests achieved lower scaled scores in the 2017 test than in the 2016 test, with an average of a -2 points difference. For some children it appeared that the 2017 test, although easier, with its raised pass mark was actually harder to pass than the more difficult 2016 test with its low pass mark.

So, is the 2016 test a good indicator of how well a child might do in the 2017 test? Yes, although some children may get an equal, or lower, scaled score on the more recent test as it could be considered harder to pass.

And does the fact that our percentage of children passing both tests despite the extra teaching time in the middle mean that our approach to teaching reading didn't work? I believe not as most children made progress between the two tests, gaining both extra marks and higher scaled scores - this was particularly evident for lower attainers. 

However, it draws attention to a group of children who were scoring in the 90s on the 2016 test in December who would have benefited from some additionality - this is the challenge for next year: what does that intervention look like? What do those children need in order to be more consistent when answering comprehension questions? Are there other factors that meant these particular children struggled to reach the pass mark, despite showing progress?

I hope that this blog post has been read with interest and without judgement - I only seek to be transparent. I am fairly certain that I can conclude that what we have done in reading has been successful on the whole, and that like most new approaches, now just needs some adjustments and additions. However, I do share this hoping that I might gain insight from outsiders on how else I might interpret the data and make conclusions - for example, if it seems to you that my approach hasn't at all worked, I'd prefer to know that and not waste any more time on it!

A small request: I'd be interested if you would share with me, publicly or privately, the increase in percentage you have experienced between the 2016 and 2017 reading results (between last year's cohort and this year's).

KS2 Tests 2017 Maths SATs Round-Up

https://www.thirdspacelearning.com/blog/2017/ks2-sats-results-2017-what-they-mean-what-they-ll-never-tell-you-what-to-do-next

I produced a quick response to the KS2 maths SATs results for the Third Space Learning blog.

In it I cover what to do once results are opened: support staff, conduct a marking review, report sensitively to parents and children, learn from the results and look for the positives in the results.

To My Brilliant Year Six Teachers

To my brilliant year six teachers,

Thank you and well done for all your incredibly hard work this year. I could not have asked for more commitment and dedication to the children of our school. They have received top-notch teaching and a highly-tailored curriculum this year - you have thought of each and every one, assessing their needs and then working on them meticulously to help them to make, in so many cases, very rapid progress.

You have had the highest of expectations for all the children in your care and have not let anyone get away with anything sub-standard. At the time, that might make you feel like an ogre, but, it is absolutely necessary in ensuring that the children have the best possible chance of present and future success.

It has been so encouraging to see how you have worked together, trying out new things and analysing their success. You have really made every effort to be excellent teachers - and it has paid off. Your self-reflectiveness and your desire to always better yourself has been an absolute gift, both to me as your leader and to the children.

And so, whatever the 2017 KS2 tests results say, I stand with you and support you. Should they be good, we will celebrate. Should they be disappointing, we will look for and celebrate the successes that are sure to be there. And we will optimistically plan for the future, resolutely seeking ways to better our practice from this year. 

Yes, I am now speaking about 'we' and not 'you' because, although your personal commitment is independently commendable, we are a team and we did this together. This is not a case of 'you', it is 'us' - that 'us' includes all the school's leaders and every other member of staff who has touched the lives of our outgoing year sixes. We did this together and we will stand together.

Thank you though for all the times you felt you were on your own, but you kept on going anyway - you truly do put the children at the centre of all you do.

When those results come in, think not of them as the only measure of each child's achievements, no matter how well they have done. They do not measure all the things that you have told me, and that I have seen, throughout the year: the small wins and the big successes. That child who was working on year two objectives who can now successfully demonstrate understanding of many year six objectives. That child who only started with us this year, having not been in school for a good while. That child who has discovered a love of reading, of writing, of maths, of history, of Shakespeare. That child who now speaks up in class. All those children who are raring to go to secondary school, confident that they are learners and that they will be successful as long as they hold high expectations for themselves. You did that. 

They might not thank you for it. But I do. And in years to come they will look back and remember all that you have done and they will wish that they had thanked you. 

But I know you don't do it for the thanks. You do it because you care. There is not enough thanks to cover that.

A vast understatement to finish, because anything attempting to sum it up would sound far too hyperbolic and platitudinous: this has been a great year and you should be proud of what you have achieved with the children.

This was re-blogged on the TES site: https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/sats-year-6-teachers-results-day-there-arent-enough-words-say-thank

How To Stay Sane Now The KS2 SATs Are Over

The fourth and final post in my series of blog posts for Third Space Learning focusing on teacher and pupil wellbeing during the key stage 2 SATs testing period:

An almost audible collective sigh of relief rises from Year 6 teachers and KS2 pupils across the realm. Suddenly, the prospect of life beyond SATs becomes tantalisingly real and, at least for now, it is there to be enjoyed.

Feelings during the next few weeks will (though I hate to have to remind you) morph from the relief that the end of the SATs week brings into the impatient wait for results day on July 4th.

Click here to read my five tips for staying sane now that the key stage 2 test are over: https://www.thirdspacelearning.com/blog/2017/sayonara-sats2017-5-golden-rules-for-year-6-teachers-to-make-the-most-of-lessons-after-sats

Twas The Night Before SATs by @parky_teaches

Twas the night before SATs, and all through the land

Not a teacher was stirring, the curriculum banned.

Past papers pored over, practised just so,

Fingers are crossed that thresholds are low.

The children were fretful, nervous in their beds

While visions of ticking clocks danced in their heads.

Heads in their offices give keyboards a tap

Writing excuses for that OFSTED chap.

When out in the playground arose such a chatter

Of parents and media to see what was the matter.

They could not believe just what they had heard, 

And started to panic about things like adverbs.

Would the Reading test reduce children to tears?

This was just the first of their fears.

Revision packs bought, tutors booked up

Parents stressed out, leaving nothing to luck.

A courier arrives, so lively and quick,

The papers are locked in the safe with a click.

Staff arrive early, their visages bleak,

Year 6 teachers wishing for just a quick peek.

"Now, Kirsty! now, Donna! now, Seb and Mina!

On, Holly! On, Dev! On Connor and Tina!

To your new seating plan! Right next to the  wall!

Now dash away! Dash away! Dash away all!"

As children that before the biggest challenge try

When they're met with a SAT they let out a cry

"Not more past progressive, not more long division

We can take no more of the government's indecision!"

And then, in a twinkling flash of inspiration,

Memories flicker across the nation.

The teacher sits, fidget spinner in hand,

Hoping beyond hope things go just as planned.

They were just about dressed, from their head to their feet, 

And their eyelids droopy from the lack of sleep

A bundle of assessments, flung on their back, 

In case a standardised score is starting to slack.

His pupils - how they twinkled! (Well they did in year 5)!

Now they were dull, barely alive

Drilled into submission, all out of fear

That somebody's job might be gone next year.

The stumps of pencils found gnawed by teeth, 

And clumps of hair torn out in disbelief 

Looking over shoulders, "Is that a four or a nine?"

Mentally of course, we don't want a fine.

Once the first one is over, it's onto the next

They're really relentless, they are, these tests.

We jump hoops through SPaG, through every last trick,

Then it's onto the maths, the ol 'rithmetic!

They spoke not a word (they weren't allowed),

But when the time was up, they cheered and they howled, 

And laying aside their pencils and pens, 

They breathed a sigh of relief, along with their friends.

Teachers sprang to their desks, to their teams gave a whistle,

And outside they all flew like the down of a thistle.

But I heard them exclaim, ‘ere they drove out of sight,

"Oh wait, it's writing moderation next, bugger..."

Year 6 Teachers, You've Got This! Your 5-Step Game Plan for SATs Week 2017

The latest in my series of blog posts for Third Space Learning focuses on SATs week itself. The focus is on teacher and pupil wellbeing and provides 5 steps to take to ensure year 6 teachers and pupils aren't too frazzled by the end of it.

So, the time has come. SATs week 2017 is upon us. On Monday morning, after months (hopefully years) of preparation, the nation's Year 6 children will sit down to the first of 2017's Key Stage 2 National Assessments.

Year 6 teachers across the land will be pacing halls and classrooms, catching glimpses of questions and hoping beyond hope that the primary school children in their classes will do their very best.

And I assume you're probably one of those teachers, or a supportive Head or SLT member.

You'll be feeling a heady mix of excitement and nervousness while anticipating the children’s chance to show off all they've learned. You might also be wondering what on earth the test-writers have come up with this time.

Click here to read on over at the Third Space Learning blog: http://thirdspacelearning.com/blog/2017/year-6-teachers-you-ve-got-this-your-5-step-game-plan-for-2017-ks2-sats

From the TES Blog: The Pre-SATs Checklist: An Eight-Point Guide To Ensure You're Ready

Here's one I wrote for the TES blog all about those little things that might be forgotten in the run up to SATs but that, if sorted, will make the week run much more smoothly.

By now, as a Year 6 teacher, you're probably fairly fed up of Sats-related advice, but bear with me. You see, there's always the chance that some minor detail has been missed. Sure, your scripts are all locked away in the safe, you know which test is happening on which day and you can bet that the children are as ready as they can be, but is there anything else you need to sort out in these last few days before the Key Stage 2 Sats tests kick off?

Here's my personal last-minute checklist, which I will be running through in the next few days.

Click here to read for free on the TES blog: https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/pre-sats-checklist-eight-point-guide-ensure-youre-ready

Preparing For SATs: Advice For Year 6 Teachers (Part 2)

You might question whether or not I'm a legitimate 'wellbeing expert' but regardless of that I hope you find enough helpful advice on my latest blog post for Third Space Learning.

It's the second in a four-part series focusing on year 6 and SATs. In this week's article I focus in on the two or three weeks after the Easter holidays and look at what's best avoided and what should be prioritised.

Even if you're not a year 6 teacher you probably know someone who is so please consider sharing this link with them.

https://www.thirdspacelearning.com/blog/2017/tackling-sats-week-2017-tips-and-tricks-for-y6-teachers-to-help-pupils-smash-ks2-national-assessments

Why your Maths interventions for KS2 SATs should not start in Year 6

When a primary school receives good Key Stage 2 SATs results, the whole school celebrates, and rightly so: all teachers in all year groups will have contributed to the success of each child who reaches Year 6 and sits those tests.

However, it is not uncommon for Year 6 teachers to feel a pressure that teachers in other year groups don't. When results aren't so good it is more likely for the teaching and learning in that last year of primary, as opposed to any other, to be called into question - I know, I've been there myself. And with such pressure it's not surprising that in Year 6 we can descend into last-minute panic of revision classes, interventions and extra Maths and English time, often to the detriment of other areas of learning. Ideally this wouldn't happen.

Click here to read the rest of the article over at the Third Space Learning blog.

Key Stage 2 SATs Results 2016 Explained: 15 Insights That Will Change How You Teach Year 6 Maths in 2017

Given that I'm maths leader at my school you'd expect that my blog would contain more than just one post about maths, but it doesn't. Until now, that is. And even this one's not a full and proper post, only a link to a piece of work I've done for Third Space Learning.

I spent some time with the Question Level Analysis document produced by RAISE online, working out what the most difficult aspects of the KS2 tests were in 2016 so that hopefully we can all prepare our children well enough for the 2017 tests.

Click here to read the full in depth analysis: Key Stage 2 SATs Results 2016 Explained: 15 Insights That Will Change How You Teach Year 6 Maths in 2017

UPDATED: Teaching Reading: A Simple Approach

In response to the 2016 KS2 Reading Test I've spent quite a bit of time researching and re-thinking my approach to teaching reading. This has resulted in the creation of a few resources which I've already blogged about. I have been asked a few times about the context in which I use these resources - this blog post will outline what a basic reading lesson might look like. Following the links throughout will lead you to more thorough information about the techniques and ideas mentioned.

Timetabling - my reading lessons happen on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday from 8:45 - 9:45. The children come in to a 'Do Now' which usually involves reading the day's chapter/passage/excerpt independently (more on this later). On those mornings I also teach writing-focused English for the following hour and then 1.5 hours of maths after break.

Whole-Class Reading - I do not have a 'traditional' carousel of activities. All children read and answer questions about the same text; research shows that children benefit from being exposed to higher level texts (when the teacher reads it aloud to them before they answer questions on it). Many of my reading lessons are based on a class novel which we read over a half term or a term; to facilitate this we have 'class sets' of many quality texts. Many people ask how the lower prior attainers can be catered for in these sessions - I've written more about that here. For more on the ideology behind whole-class reading please read Rhoda Wilson's blog post about it.

Lesson Sequence - During these sessions I ask the children to first read the chapter/excerpt independently, then I read the same passage aloud, then without discussion the children attempt to independently work through the questions giving written answers. Once the majority of children have done this we hold a whole-class discussion and I (or children who have written good answers) model best answers and children edit what they have written (in purple so as to distinguish their original answer from their edited answer). This sequence was inspired by Reading Reconsidered by Doug Lemov. This will usually be followed by a period of reading aloud the next part of the text (usually by me but I plan to begin to ask children to read aloud more often) which is often, but not always, accompanied by lots of discussion and modelling of my thought processes as a reader.

Reading For Pleasure - Many school plan elaborate initiatives in an attempt to entice children into reading with the hope that this will lead to them choosing to read for pleasure. My reading lessons always contain a time of just reading the class novel for enjoyment - books are the most powerful tool when it comes to getting children to love and enjoy reading. I've written more about it here in my blog post entitled 'On Why I'll Still Be Dressing Up For World Book Day And The Power Of Books'.

Comprehension Activities - I use the various question stem documents which are available to set my questions, and I colour-code each question and put the relevant Reading Roles symbol with them (see below for more on Reading Roles). Many of these comprehension activities will follow my Scaffolding Inference structure (see below) although I do teach other lessons which focus on the other cognitive domains. Examples of these activities can be found here. I have written a whole blog post entitled 'How To Write Good Comprehension Questions' which gives more insight into how I go about setting questions for reading lessons. In at least some lessons there is a focus on particular reading strategies, such as inference-making which I have written about here: Questions To Ask When Teaching Inference-Making.

Reading Roles - help children and staff understand the 8 cognitive domains. Each of the cognitive domains is colour-coded and has a symbol assigned - as mentioned, we use these colours and symbols when designing our comprehension activities. Reading Roles have been used by other teachers in other schools - some of them have written about it here.

Scaffolding Inference - this is something I've designed and developed based on research and findings from last year's SATs. Please see the quick reference guide which outlines this approach. I would say that this is the most effective thing I have done as it focuses on the reading test's three key areas: vocabulary, retrieval and inference. Not only can inference be scaffolded, other reading strategies can too: Scaffolding Structures For Reading Comprehension Skills.

Growing Background Knowledge - this isn't always easy to do as background knowledge can vary so much from child to child. What we do know is that our understanding of a text hinges greatly on what we already know - this might be a knowledge of vocabulary or just a more general knowledge. I have written about possible strategies to take when it comes to building children's background knowledge: 5 Ways To Make Texts With Unfamiliar Contexts More Accessible To Children; Attacking Children's Immunity To Imaginative Literature.

EAL reading activity structure - this is an activity (again, linked to the Reading Roles) which I have designed based on research on how to support EAL learners when accessing new texts.

Pairing non-fiction texts with fiction texts - this increases understanding of both the fiction text and the non-fiction text and has sparked some really deep conversations about moral, ethical and religious issues. I have also written about this for the TES: Why Every Primary School Needs To Embrace Non-Fiction.

We also use these resources in English lessons (with our Talk 4 Writing texts) and topic lessons - much of our work centres around texts so these activities help to ensure children comprehend the information.

The fruit of this approach is that in December over 50% of children in my group taking the 2016 KS2  Reading Test were working at or above average (according to the test's thresholds) after one term of year 6. This is a dramatic increase when compared to my results in last year's END of year results based on the same test.

If there is something you feel I've not covered, please ask and I will edit this to give a fuller picture of my approach. I'm not assuming it to be a silver bullet but am seeing good results after teaching in this way for a term.

If you would like Aidan to work with you on developing reading at your school, please visit his website at https://www.aidansevers.com/services and get in touch via the contact details that can be found there.

Click here to read about how following these approaches impacted on our SATs results.

Further reading about reading from my blog:

Being A Reading Teacher

Reading: 2 Things All Parents and Teachers Must Do

Reading: Attacking Children's Immunity To Imaginative Literature

Reading for Pleasure

Changing Hearts, Minds, Lives and the Future: Reading With Children For Empathy

The Best RE Lesson I Ever Taught (Spoiler: It Was A Reading Lesson)

The Unexplainable Joy of Comparing Books

The More-ness of Reading

The Power Of Books

SATs Results - My Experience and an Optimistic Response

I'm not a stranger to SATs result day nightmares (read about it here), and if it wasn't for my past experiences I dare say today would have been a different experience for me. Our SATs results this year are alarmingly low, not approaching anywhere near the national picture.

We were expecting it really. Under two years ago, our school was placed in special measures and subsequently academised as a result (read a bit more background here). Whilst the academisation has brought about many changes it would seem that there is only so much underachievement, bad behaviour and poor attitude to learning that can be tackled in a short space of time. This year's year 6 cohort have suffered in a school that previously had low expectations and inadequate teaching, along with a whole host of other issues (really, there are many!). We have a large number of SEND children, many on the register due to behavioural needs, who have not had their needs catered to in the past. We knew we'd take a hit.

Coupled with all the changes to primary assessment arrangements this year, we were under no illusions: children who had been taught very little for years and then had been taught a new curriculum for less than two years had a long way to catch up, especially when they had to meet two sets of criteria (the NC objectives and the interim framework objectives) and sit new and more rigorous tests. The word omnishambles has been used to describe the government's operations within education this year; it's not a bad way to describe it. We knew what was coming our way.     

Despite being saddened by what has befallen these particular children, my natural optimism kept on fighting me. After calculating our dire percentages I looked for all those who nearly made the magic 100 mark - there were so many. Then I looked at all who had achieved 100 or over and felt proud of their achievements. I scrutinised the spelling and arithmetic test results and found great successes there. Comparing our SATs scores to our teacher assessment data I found that we had been very accurate in our judgments: even where we had said EXS and a child hadn't achieved the pass mark, they were always very close. This led me to the conclusion that if the SATs results tallied well with our teacher assessment (so, for example, a child with 98/99 scaled score who has been assessed as Year 6 developing) then the phenomenal progress our children have made this year (as shown by our in-house data tracking system) is something worth celebrating.

Yes, I briefly went though the feelings of self-doubt (Did I do enough? Could I have done it better? Is it all my fault?) and my mind has been full of things to try differently next year, but I remain optimistic (perhaps you think I shouldn't). I know that my team and I have done a great job this year - the progress proves it, as do many observations, book scrutinies, pupil progress meetings and external reviews (my phase working at 'Good' 18 months after the school received its 'Inadequate' Ofsted judgement). I know that the kids have worked incredibly hard; they're exhausted, bursting with new skills and abilities and actually, their conduct and learning behaviour has steadily improved - even acknowledged just last week by our MAT's executive principal. These are children who really have learnt so many things that the tests just can't test - we have set them in much better stead for their high schools, and indeed for the rest of their lives. And did I mention that their progress has been ridiculously phenomenal?!

I don't know if you can find the silver linings in your results, but I would urge you to try. There are schools out there who have done exceptionally well his year despite the changes - I intend not to resent them, only to learn from them; for the sake of the children I'm willing to humbly take any advice going and I hope you are too. Perhaps you just need to cling to the fact that our government ministers have stated that these results are non-comparative and that Ofsted should not pay much heed to them (read more about that here).

I know there will be some teachers out there who feel terribly unsupported by their school today, and I sympathise with you - perhaps next year is the time to try to move one to somewhere with leaders who care a bit more or perhaps you need to fight your corner and present the case for why results were low (there is plenty of universal evidence out there). There is definitely a time for mourning too - I'm definitely not saying suck it up and get on with it. 

And I still think we need to be optimistic about the future; maybe next year will be more settled. We'll know the curriculum better and we'll know the height of the expectations (let's face it, that sample reading paper really didn't prepare us for the hardcore-ness of the actual one). I also know I'll be receiving a much more settled year group next year - a group who've also had one more year of new curriculum teaching - that's got to count for something, right? 

If you've experienced poor results then you're not alone - please get in touch, even if just to offload - I really don't claim to have all the answers but am an open (and anonymous) ear.