I read the volume of anti-APP threads on the TES forums, I listen to the comments of my secondary colleagues and I speak to friends who teach in the primary phase. On top of this I’ve checked out the growing software industry making APP tracking products and I’ve spoken to colleagues who are responsible for moving APP forward.
Yes APP arose from the need for consistent assessment data between schools and more importantly to fix the discrepancy between primary and secondary NC levels (I’ve yet to find a secondary teacher who uses primary science levels as a reliable baseline!). Yes APP came from the National Strategies team but the bank of APP statements represent a very useful resource for AfL – after all what is the point in having accurate and reliable assessment data and doing nothing with it?
As a leader of APP practice within the authority I’ve given a lot of thought to the subject. The points below summarise my thinking about APP
What APP is:
- An assessment system that allows for consistency between teachers, between schools and between key stages
- An opportunity for AfL linked to meaningful (sort of) criteria
- Customisable to suit the needs of you, your school and your learners.
- An opportunity to gather reliable formative assessment data for every learner
What APP isn’t:
- Statutory – no one can tell you what you MUST do
- Hours of trawling through students’ work and books
- Something that need increase our workload
- A tick-list of what a student has or hasn’t achieved (software companies take note)
- Just another type of summative assessment
- Perfect!
I teach in a special school where teacher assessment has been for norm for years. APP is nothing new to us – we’ve been following a very similar process for years, finding new ways to make assessment work. I know APP isn’t perfect, but it occurs to me that a lot of teachers seem to be getting into a flap about nothing – APP will be what you make it!
Click on the APP tag to read my other posts about APP
My opinions are based on my experiences of using the Science APP framework. Whilst I’ve looked at APP materials for other subjects I haven’t used them with students.
Consistent! How can it be consistent when there is no moderation between schools! Even in the old system I went to many meetings where people would argue what was level 5 or 6!
Customisable, another way of saying you do it ALL yourself
It most certanly IS a tick list, how else are you going to be able to report to the pupil about where they are unless you have a rcord of what they have achieved, how do you record what they achieved centrally… in a tick list
Most aggravating is the lack of practical skill assessment. If we are going to get given 20 things to focus on shouldn't one of them be to do with manipulation of equipment!
Agreed there should be moderation between schools and yet again this is an area where special schools lead the way. Nottinghamshire special schools have been moderating between themselves for years – perhaps mainstream schools should look this way for good practice.
I disagree with tick lists – of the schools I know in my LA well (and I do get about a bit!) none are keeping tick lists. We've never needed tick lists before to report back and tick lists are a step back to the National Curriculum of 1998. You won't be asked to report tick lists at the end of key stage, nor will parents want to see a list of 200 things their child can do in science. All you will need to record is a level surely? It's more important that this assessment is used in a formative way that will improve learning for the individuals – how will they learn from having a tick list of things they can already do?
I agree that APP isn't perfect – and it isn't statutory. If your department wanted to add descriptors for manipulation of equipment there is no reason you couldn't! I would suspect that most departments don't feel strongly enough about this to add them
APP is an opportunity – make of it what you will. It will be interested to see in a couple of years time the differences between schools that have embraced it well, and those that have begrudgingly paid lip service to it (or used it purely for summative assessment). I don't claim it's perfect but surely it's better and more consistent than what we had?
Well said. I completely agree. As an AST working with a variety of different school and teachers and I still seem to spend a great deal of my time explaining that APP is a too. It not only informs assessment but can help with planning lessons focussing on the learning of pupils. I have found that my teaching has become more dynamic and imaginative and that marking is now a useful experience for both my students and me.
Maybe “ticklist” isn't the best term but on the two level recording sheets what do we do… “tick off” what they achieved and tell them what they need to do to get to the next level. Yes, we may just have to report a level but seen as no-one has actually told us in what way we will be expected to report when the current year 8 reach the end of year 9 how can we be sure?
Maybe I'm being naive but aren't teachers supposed to look at the skills a child has and give them guidance on how to improve? Do we really need a sheet telling us what the next level up is. How about a tool that focuses on the kids enjoying science, encouraging them to become interested for sciences own sake and not just because they need to get to the next level? Do we really need to note down our SEAL objective and PLTs for every lesson… can't we as profesionals be trusted to try to do the best for each child we teach… ARGH
I think I am mostly upset about the lack of science in the science curriculum and new ofsted criteria.
My degree is Biology and psychology so I appreciate how intertwinned all the academic disciplines are but I became a science teacher as I wanted to share my passion for the inner workings of body and mysteries of the plant world. Something I hope I still manage to do despite being bogged down by the paperwork each curricular “shuffle” brings. We are doing our kids no favours with the dumbed down versions of everything in the curriculum at the moment. I am teaching my year 8's more or less the same as my year 10's and they get it thats how simple the new GCSE stuff is… and my 8's are not that special. By the time they get to year 10 they are BORED, then unprepared for A'level if they do chose to continue and as for degree…
OFSTED now judge lessons by the amount a pupil learns, if they aren't percieved to have made progress in the 30 minute window of the observation : fail. This happened to a friend of mine. The pupils were making pod casts- to be shared later-, during the time she was observed the pupils were making the recordings. All was well… during feedback because they had not learnt any new science during those 30 mins she was unsatisfactory! She did get a good on ICT progress so Satisfactory overall. Its a complete joke!
LET TEACHERS TEACH.
I agree that good teachers know the next steps, and that students taught by a good teacher will make progress. APP is an attempt to standardise assessment and make sure all schools move together. I see some teachers that don't consider formative assessment and 'pupil progression', and this is one of the drivers for introducing APP . Time will tell if it has been an effective tool. I didn't write APP and wasn't involved in its conception. I do know that special schools have always worked in a similar way using their own recording systems, which is perhaps why those of us in special education are least phased by the introduction of APP.
I agree that the curriculum lacks fun and detail, but at least with the KS3 curriculum you have an opportunity to put some of that back. The only schools that will achieve that though are the ones that write their own schemes of learning, not those that buy in published schemes and then follow them blindly. There does need to be more emphasis on skills over content because the world is changing – and our students are increasingly going to compete in a global economy. A big problem with KS4 is the exam boards – and the amount of time spent repeating content from KS3. Lack of practical topics and lack of depth does turn students off – I agree and I see that school after school. Unfortunately I don't make the system, I simply work and advise within it. I try to make the most of what we have.
(And I think we all know that the new OFSTED framework isn't perfect, a quick flick through the TES shows the level of discontent it has provoked!)
Pingback: Fiendishlyclever » Using off the shelf APP materials with students with SEN – my experiences