Y7 Baseline thinking in Art and Design - 2016
This guidance has been drafted for subject leaders and teachers of art and design in secondary schools. It sets out the context to the setting of GCSE target grades in art and design and makes the case for adding benchmarking information on ability and experience, to inform cohort profiling and the setting of targets based on the changing ability profile of students on intake. Subject leaders will need to negotiate how subject-specific assessments might be used to inform targets, or at the very least, be used to redefine curriculum planning, challenge and expectations within the department.
Why do you need baseline evidence? According to The National Society for Education in Art and Design Survey Report 2015-16i pupils are entering into secondary schools with falling standards of art and design skills and subject knowledge when compared with previous cohorts over the last decade. There are several reasons why this is proving to be an increasing problem in art and design at the moment. Firstly, this is because some primary schools no longer are able to promote a broad and balanced curriculum, based on the concept of an ‘entitlement’ to a wide ranging and rigorous art, craft and design curriculum, and consistent with provision in the past. Secondly, primary schools are under increasing pressure to meet targets in reading, writing and maths and many have had to cut the time spent on foundation subjects in years 5 and 6, particularly where they are judged not to be ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted. In addition, there has been a very significant reduction in subject-specialist CPD and in Initial Teacher Training, which is coupled with falling levels of teacher specialist art and design skills, and the perception of art and design as being a low priority, when compared to EBacc subjects. All of these factors contribute to the current situation where we no longer see pupils entering year 7 with the depth of art and design skills, knowledge and confidence that we are familiar with, even when compared with just a few years ago. As schools continue to refine their systems of assessment without levels (AWL), art and design departments need to ensure that the standards of their incoming cohorts are clearly defined year on year and that targets are realistic. It is very important that we do this for four reasons. These are: 1.
to determine a baseline for each year on entry and enable comparison by ability of these cohorts from year to year and provide an accurate assessment point from which to measure progress;
2.
to enable the scheme of work to be modified in line with the identified strengths and deficiencies of the cohort, informing the priorities for learning;
3.
to enable your baseline to be aligned with an ‘average’ profile so that compensatory actions can be taken to address the learning needs of individuals, class groups and the cohort;
4.
to inform negotiations with your data manager to ensure predictions for KS3 and KS4 key data points and the GCSE target grade is realistic for the individuals that make up the profile of your intake.
If your school data manager chooses to use KS2 Reading, Writing and Maths assessment data as the only baseline for all subject progress measures, this could contribute to an inaccurate baseline which might be between 1 and 2 ‘old National Curriculum Levels’ above the actual student baseline on entry in their art, craft and design skills, knowledge and very importantly, their attitudes to the subject (based on their upper juniors experience). It is worth noting, with less breadth of learning in key stage 2, we are witnessing falling levels of confidence in some subjects alongside the reduction in knowledge and skills. I should state here for the record, FFT probability predictors have historically been reasonably accurate as an average indicator, but times have changed and as I will explain later in this paper, we are no longer comparing like with like.
1
NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
Using only core subject data as a baseline, will set a progress measure based on the KS2 national curriculum test data towards the probability of achievement of a specific GCSE target grade. This assumes your cohort broadly share a national average cohort profile and this infers a steady ‘flightpath’ assessment profile for each student, through key stage 3 and GCSE study, towards a final examination grade. This does not set a key stage 3 target. This is only generated by a data or standards manager within a school as a marker of GCSE progress, overall. The national average profile makes many assumptions about your intake at key stage 3. It makes the assumption that: •
your student cohort on intake are broadly representative of a national profile of experience, skills, ability and interest in the subject;
•
your student cohort received an entitlement of learning in art and design, consistent with others across the UK;
•
your student cohort will receive a similar Key Stage 3 experience, consistent with a typical average curriculum entitlement provision (x hours per week and not part of a subject carousel or partial provision), equal in quality to others across the UK;
•
your feeder schools are broadly successful, because the majority of them are judged good or better by Ofsted. NB. Even if feeder schools are recently out of an Ofsted category, they may have reduced the time spent teaching some non-core subjects to increase their emphasis on core standards (typically this group would include art and design).
If your Year 7 intake are not representative of a typical national profile and have not had a good primary art and design experience, developing a respect for and interest in the subject, or do not enter with a typical profile of creative subject skills, then it is less likely that they will be able to achieve in line with probability predictions.
How might you gather your baseline evidence: An Audit template to support subject thinking Benchmark assessments on entry (or across the first term) may include the following evidence: ü Intake data (the SATs profile on entry) ü Homework tasks (specific homework assignments set to test practical and academic knowledge and skills) ü Specific project tasks (key tasks within early autumn project assignments) ü Technical or creative assessment tasks (including specific technical tests in lessons to evaluate subject knowledge, skills and understanding)
ü Summary project outcome assessments (measured against a ‘national standards’ expectation); ü Attitude and effort progress assessments ü Any subject-based transition information or evidence (ie KS2 sketchbook or a transition project) Establishing a Year 7 Benchmark By structuring the autumn term learning programme around a sequence of key learning activities and small assessments, teachers can build an accurate profile of the skills, knowledge and understanding students have and from this, what then might need to be modified in the scheme of work to better target lower than expected standards. Typically, these assessments gather information on the following areas of experience: 1.
Drawing: The ability to draw accurately and expressively from observation, imagination and understanding to analyse and record, to communicate and express ideas and to inform design;
2
NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
2.
Design and investigation: The ability to use a sketchbook or visual journal approach to organise, develop, improve and present ideas through investigation, exploration and experimentation. The ability to research and use sources of evidence to inform their imagination, creative actions and design stages, including changes in their work, resulting in improvements in their ideas and designs for making and creating outcomes;
3.
Control mark and tonal value: The ability to use marks expressively and shading techniques to decorate and represent three-dimensions, form and space, with some knowledge of perspective and surface qualities;
4.
Knowledge of artists, craftspeople, designers and architects: The ability to look at, analyse, interpret and respond to works of art, craft, design and architecture to inform their own designs. Use of annotation and the recording of ideas and evaluations expressed in a simple written form;
5.
Creativity: The ability to speak confidently expressing opinions and ideas, demonstrating an ability to interpret and synthesise from different sources/stimuli to create new and original outcomes. Working within defined creative boundaries, selecting and controlling media with understanding and some confidence;
6.
Colour and paint: The ability to mix and use colour with knowledge, understanding and control of primary, secondary and tertiary, warm, cool and complimentary colours. Be able to select brushes and tools for painting to create surface effects with paint and create expressive marks.
It is not possible to assess everything in just one term. Textiles, photography or digital processes will be less of a priority than establishing the standards of drawing, observation, recording skills and ability to design using a sketchbook. Some schools manage to include a short 3D activity in their assessment profile to ensure students use 3D materials with some confidence and skill. Other schools make an assessment of knowledge of artists and designers, with a verbal, written or homework assignment.
How might you gather your baseline evidence? A scaffold to support subject thinking using the NSEAD Art, Craft and Design Planning and Assessment Framework (2014). Start with the red text in the left hand column in the year 7 Grid (defined as ‘below the expectation’). Read and consider whether this would validate a measure of Knowledge, Skills and Understanding when gathering some of this evidence. These statements are for a year, so you will need to select those which are the most relevant and with an urgency to be defined within the Autumn Term. The following is offered as guidance for department discussion and is not a template. See http://www.nsead.org/curriculum-resources/assessment_and_progression.aspx
Key questions to help you plan for benchmarking: 1.
How many feeder schools do you have?
n
What would you list as the essential knowledge needed for autumn Y7?
n
What would you list as e.g. familiar and confident in specific processes or techniques, basic the essential evidence of steps or stages in drawing and design planning; the importance of understanding needed for working safely; different forms of composition. autumn Y7? What would you list as e.g. quality of creative and technical skills of observational drawing, the essential skills control or accuracy of line, scale, proportion, shading technique; a needed for autumn Y7? sequence of design actions; take a photo or manipulate an image etc. What do you know about the pattern of evidence of strengths and weaknesses in pupil knowledge, skills and understanding, coming from major ‘feeder’ schools? By what date do you have to submit your first measure of assessment, onto the school systems? Is this currently accurate?
n
2.
3.
e.g. what is the difference between a 2h pencil and a 4b; listing of primary, secondary and tertiary colours; what range of media have been used and how would they grade their skills?
3
NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
4.
Do you as a team carry out any Y7 assessments and moderation in the Autumn Term? When? How many? Is your existing scheme of work for the autumn, suitably diagnostic? For example:
5.
Yes/No
Do they know or can they demonstrate: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h)
Possible actions to enable this to be taught/ assessed:
the essential strengths in drawing needed to begin Y7? the essential strengths in designing, needed to begin Y7? the expected breadth and depth of knowledge needed to begin Y7? knowledge about artists, craftspeople or designers you consider as essential or adequate? an understanding of how to look, analyse and simply interpret from an artwork? an understanding of how to select and use/apply what they learn from looking? evidence of (what you define) as essential 3D, making or constructing skills needed for Y7? evidence of (what you define) as essential 2D techniques and media skills e.g. collage, print or painting?
Other key questions to inform your baseline planning ■
What sort of short tasks would best help you identify and measure student knowledge and strengths and also identify areas of development need?
■
How regularly should teachers assess?
■
What other assessment might be included?
■
Do you still intend to use Levels? When and how should you shift to age-related expectations criteria?
■
What do you learn from the written and creative assessments you already carry out?
■
What do other similar subjects in your school do (PE, Music, DT, Drama)?
■
Is it worth sharing your baseline with the other Arts, DT or PE? Or, working on this together?
■
How would you construct your profile data and who do you discuss this with?
■
How do you include your baseline data onto the school data management system? And, how do you explore getting your baseline accepted alongside other systems or instead of other probability predictions?
Teachers might also define a baseline measure by further developing and using the statements below as a set of baseline characteristics. Alternatively, you could use some of the following, or link several of these into several short tasks. Students entering year 7 in art, craft and design should be able to:
■
know the visual elements of line, shape, tone, colour, pattern, surface/texture and form, evident by…
■
use some of these visual elements to describe/record, investigate/analyse, interpret/develop, evident by…
4
NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
■
articulate or synthesise their knowledge, understanding and in practice evident in their sketchbook by…
■
design and generate ideas, concepts, solutions in response to a simple brief, evident by…
■
be able to sketch an idea e.g. think and draw three-dimensionally, explore surface pattern, make several modifications to a composition and progress an idea through design stages, all evident in sketchbook by…
■
select, test, experiment or investigate use of materials and processes, evident in sketchbook by…
■
use a sketchbook to gather appropriate evidence, record from observation, imagination and design for a purpose, improving and developing ideas through stages, to enable selection of best options, evident by…
■
show working and learning characteristics that can be defined as imaginative, creative, expressive, resilient, resourceful, and work purposefully, evident by….
■
work informed by one or more (select from list) of the critical, contextual, historical, conceptual, spiritual, moral, social, cultural dimensions, evident by…
■
understand the artist, craftsperson or a designer's relationship with audiences, clients, markets, consumers, evident by…
The year 7 course should be experimental, confidence building and the start of a process of formatively assessing the learning needs. Some additional helpful guidance on standards and levels Levels continued to be used in Reading, Writing and Mathematics until September 2015 and some schools are phasing their move to assessment without levels (AWL) over 2016. ■
There is broad agreement on the principles of how assessment without levels will work in schools, although there are variations in the detail of implementation in different schools.
■
There are no nationally commissioned models for assessment without levels. Instead, the DfE have encouraged NAHT, Subject Associations, the Expert Subject Advisory Groups, Teaching Schools and educational publishers to produce guidance in many forms. It is the intention of the DfE that no single national model will be promoted as schools have the autonomy to select suitable models, or to develop their own.
■
The DfE and several Subject Expert Groups have made clear that they will not release any single centrally defined replacement for levels.
■
Data recording and tracking systems such as SIMS and Pupil Asset have developed and are continuing to develop the ways in which schools can enter their data and define measures.
Measures and scales o
The NSEAD have released guidance and age related expectations tables to replace levels in art, craft and design in both primary and secondary phases. This was completed with support from the Expert Subject Advisory Group. These are available for download from the NSEAD website. http://www.nsead.org/curriculum-resources/assessment_and_progression.aspx
o
Students are typically expected to make progress at least in line with expectations from the beginning to the end of key stage 3, and to the end of GCSE. Increasingly this progress will need to exceed expectations in order to ensure equivalence to 4 levels of progress. This is not a consistently realistic measure as it depends on whether students entered KS3 on a high or low Level 3, 4 or 5 (ie a, b or c). Progressing 3 levels represents going from a Level 3 at age 11 to a D at GCSE, level 4 to a C and level 5 to an A grade. The problem with this ‘expected levels of progress’ measure, is that it seems fair. However, this depends on the starting point of each student and whether they had e.g. a 4a, 4b or 4c. The likelihood of those on a 4c achieving a C grade is much less than for those who had a 4a. These expectations are widely considered too easy for high ability students and correspondingly too demanding for some much weaker students.
5
NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
o
4b was established in 2015 as the average expectation for Reading, Writing and Mathematics at the end of KS2. It used to be a L4 (4c). This requires a redefinition of the national expected standard in each subject, consistent with entry to KS3 at the average expected standard.
A table showing old levels, alongside existing and new (2017) GCSE grades Old NC Level and GCSE equivalence using 3 and 4 Levels of Progress
KS2 Level
End of KS3 Level
3 Levels of 4 levels of progress progress to GCSE to GCSE Making Expected progress
GCSE Grading (in 2017)
Making more than Expected progress
2a
4a
D
C
3c
5c
D
C
3b
5b
D
C
3a
5a
C
B
GCSE Grade & point scores (up to 2017)
New GCSE Grade
GCSE Grade
Point score
9 8 7 6 5 4
A*
58
A
52
B
46
C
40
3
D
34
E
28
F
22
G U
16
4c
6c
C
B
4b
6b
C
B
4a
6a
B
A
5c
7c
B
A
5b
7b
B
A
1 U
5a
7a
A
A*
8c
A
A*
8b
A
A*
8a
A*
A*
2
The new language of Assessment without Levels Schools will develop their own language, but a variety of models are in the public domain and mostly they explore a 3, 4, 5 or 7 ‘band’ or KPI statement range. There are also some schools who have developed or adopted a 10 number or statement model. These statements may include the following: 1
2
Well below the expectation
3
4
Below the expectation
Working towards the expectation
6
7
8
Working beyond the expectation
Meeting the expectation
9
Exceeding the expectation
10
Working well beyond the expectation
Working below the expectation
Working towards the expectation
Working at the expectation
Working above the expectation
Working beyond the expectation
No understanding/ knowledge
Emerging
Securing
Secure
Mastery
Beginning
Sometimes
Clearly & Consistently
Confidently
Expertly & impressively
Less than expected progress
Expected progress
Good progress
Exceptional progress
Beginning
Developing
Embedded
Mastery
Emerging Not yet secure in the end of year expectations
5
Expected Secure in the majority of end of year expectations
6
Exceeding Secure in all or almost all end of year expectations NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
NB. Some schools have added ‘Mastery’ as a term of assessment into their criteria, however, many believe mastery will be seen in different ways within bands of achievement above the expected standard and is not a stage or highest band of achievement in its own right. This ism seen by many as too simplistic an interpretation of mastery. Further thinking on Probability Prediction Schools use a probability predictor to determine the most likely GCSE grade a student will achieve in each subject, based not on the previous ability of each student in Foundation Subjects, but on a ‘national average’ generated by real subject data and previous patterns of progress from similar starting points (SATs). This should be effective and has historically been a good indicator with a high correlation to the outcomes achieved. However, the context around the generation of these probability predictors is changing in response to the different emphasis on time allocations for core subjects in primary schools, with very different Ofsted judgements. It is also being modified by national public perceptions of the relative value of different subjects. Probability predictions for a year 7 cohort are based on GCSE data from the previous year’s year 11 students, contextualised by these same students’ KS2 SAT scores (from 5 years previously). This means that for a student beginning KS3 in September 2016, their SAT score will generate a GCSE grade probability for achievement in 2021, based upon the profile of students who completed their SATs in 2011 (with a similar profile), and who then went on to achieve a GCSE grade in 2016 (which was used to build the reliability confidence of the predictions). This also means that probability predictors are based on data that began 10 years prior to the prediction and under very different educational priorities and circumstances. Why probability predictions may no longer be a reliable measure in some subjects 2011
2016
2019
2011 cohort takes SATs and this is used to set their 2016 GCSE targets
2021
2016 Cohort starts GCSE
2021 GCSE outcome target set by 2016 GCSE cohort
Outcome of 2011 Cohort sets probability predictors for next cohort ie 2016 Cohort starting in Y7
KS2 profile from their KS2 SAT data is set in context by data from cohort 5 years before.
GCSE targets come from probability predictions, set in 2011 using previous cohorts, attainment data.
GCSE targets set in 2016 by previous cohort. KS3 ‘flightpath’ progress indicators generated from the starting point in 2016 to probable GCSE grade.
GCSE targets come from probability predictors set in 2016 by previous cohort, which took SATs in 2011
It should be noted that changes to the emphasis on teaching different subjects in key stage 2 and the reduction in curriculum time in key stages 2 and 3 in some Foundation Subjects, within the last five years, will make some of these probability predictors less reliable than they have been in the past. This will be particularly true when students go on to take GCSE, more out of necessity rather than genuine subject interest, ability and commitment. This is particularly a concern where schools are using these probability predictors to indicate a progress ‘flightpath’ through key stage 3, which is no longer based on a consistent quality of key stage 2 learning experience. i
The National Society for Education in Art and Design Survey Report 2015-16 (p. 11-26), NSEAD, 2016 www.nsead.org/downloads/survey.pdf
7
NSEAD and Ged Gast 2016
