Inspector Coptoor wrote: » It is NO different to the first set of guidlines from my reading of it Step 1 - give every student in your class a mark based on past data but not limited to past data and professional judgement on how the Student would have done in June. Step 2 - rank the students in your class from 1-24 or whatever Step 3 - sit down with the other teachers of the other LC classes in your subject and rank them from 1-72 or whatever Step 4 - Principal signs off
jayo76 wrote: » According to the document is the ranking by each individual class within a subject and not across the whole year group? So 1-24 for each of 3 groups as opposed to 1-72?
jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: » Form A and Form B relevant to the teacher, that's it as far as I can see. The criteria to be applied by each teacher is broad enuf. You can use past school results, if you wish, but if you think they're not relevant (new teacher, better student cohort, you can ignore etc) Professional judgement is key with some evidence to support it.
Bobtheman wrote: » Give your students benefit of the doubt. Because we all know this system will vary wildly from school to school. Prisoners dilemma my friend. Are mock results excluded ??
Nalani Hissing Appetizer wrote: » You make a valid point, no doubt. I’m a great man for correcting and giving written feedback , but utterly hopeless at keeping ‘records’ of this. The word that keeps being repeated in the new guidelines is EVIDENCE. The only ‘evidence’ I have are the 3 House exams and the pre - exams on the school’s VSware system. I don’t see much wriggle room in how I can deviate from the recorded evidence . ie. the results. My mocks were marked far too generously and erratically by a friend of a friend.This has caused a headache for me now. Dad: What did ya get in the pre ? Daughter : 77% Dad : And he gave ya a bloody H4?? I don’t see anything in these guidelines that allow us a measure of professional judgment. It cleverly ‘suggests’ we do, but on closer inspection, we don’t. It’s about the tangible evidence. To address your inflation argument, I will refer to an actual example of a student I have. Christmas 18 - 61% Summer. 19 - 58% Christmas. 19 - 56% Pre Exam. - 64% I can’t ( as much as I’d like to ) give this girl a H3. There is no evidence’ to suggest she is capable of it, or deserves it. It’s a bit of a mess.
km79 wrote: » I will have to make at least two round trips of an hour and a half to the school due to not being able to complete these digitally FFS
Blondini wrote: » Really, that's your problem with all this. FFS.
jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: » Mock results can be disregarded as unreliable if you want or as a small part of continued student performance
jprender wrote: » Surely in this example the student gets at most a H4 ?? Maybe I’m missing something, but why would a H3 even be considered ?
Blondini wrote: » I'm worried about the term 'evidence. Are mere results recorded in my teachers journal evidence without the students accompanying scripts?
Blondini wrote: » I'm worried about the term 'evidence'. Are mere results recorded in my teachers journal 'evidence' without the students accompanying scripts?
mirrorwall14 wrote: » For sixth year most of my work is commented on their Manuscripts/handouts and handed straight back. I don’t have Written records much beyond the three sets of vsware reports this year And I didn’t teach the group last year. Who knows
rainbowtrout wrote: » Because students typically improve from their mocks. Some don't but the majority manage to get their arses in gear and improve between February and June. So it is conceivable that this student might pull out a H3 on the day.
jprender wrote: » Surely that would be a huge improvement considering the mocks were marked too easy. Before the mocks, they were on a downward trend and were on a high H5. In my opinion, a H3 is not achievable based on “evidence”.
km79 wrote: » Sigh after hours Why did I bother
Chaya Fresh Shoehorn wrote: » What subject do you teach?
