Life after levels

The removal of national curriculum levels at Key Stage 3 has, I am sure, been both the joy and the bane of many KS3 raising standards leaders like me across the country. How to assess, report and show progress at Key Stage 3 has filled my working days for the past two years and I am certain is a topic that we will continue to debate on and disagree on over coffee.

There are a number of different models across the country and many schools even within the same postcode are choosing “their way” of assessing students with some, like ourselves, opting to design new systems. This itself creates interesting conversations when students move between schools and the new school does not use that system or external agencies want the latest data on a particular student and cannot interpret or compare the results to current national statistics.

So, should you hang on with old levels for a few years? Or should you pull back GCSE grades so a Year 7 student is working at a grade E and “clear progress” can be seen, or should you rip it all up and start again?

On a personal note I have really enjoyed working on the model that we have chosen at Nova Hreod Academy. It has been an interesting part of my role designing and leading on a new assessment model from scratch.

In conjunction with our Multi Academy Trust, United Learning, we have moved to a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) model across the whole of Key Stage 3. Faculty leaders have designed their own assessment criteria for crucial parts of their curriculum that a student needs to be able to do. Each faculty leader has then designed their list of KPIs that form the basis of our assessment and reporting.

This type of model has meant that our assessment at KS3 has become incredibly formative. Students are assessed to see whether they have met, partially met or not met a KPI and this information then drives our teaching and learning. All the data is produced onto question level analysis grids for each subject which can then be used to identify whole cohort problems, that then drive faculty meetings that dictate staff training and filters into lessons where topics can be re-taught. 

Following an assessment point, the whole school has a Dedicated Improvement Time week (DIT) and students are given individual performance trackers that show their performance on each KPI for each subject.

People found comfort in levels, for maybe the wrong reason, as you could see one year that a student was a 4 and the following year that student was a 5. The number has gone up so that’s a good thing, right? In all honesty how robust were our internal assessments and how accurate were the grade boundaries we assigned to tests? In addition, as a maths teacher you could have a child study Number topics at level 5 for a term but then find Algebra challenging and work at level 4. So what level goes into SIMs for our Student Progress Report 1 at Christmas? The average 4.5 or the highest they have achieved, which is 5, or whichever number makes my data look better?!

The key thing for me that has made our model work is that it is based primarily on what students can and cannot do, and focuses on teaching those areas again to close the gaps. This is then reported to parents in a very clear and concise way that makes it easier for them to know what their child needs to work on to improve. In turn it makes teachers think about their pedagogy and address how to close those gaps.

The removal of levels has meant there is now no national benchmark at KS3 and the lid on how to assess has been completely lifted off. I for one am looking forward to seeing where the dust will settle.

Benn Griffin