APP in history at KS3: where are we now?

UPDATED 9.3.10

As we approach the introduction of APP in history, I thought I might offer a few further thoughts on this topical issue that I raised a few months ago: APP revisited: The 12 important points you need to know, and 8 concerns to consider.

For the original article Some key questions answered & a checklist of questions to consider how effectively you are assessing at KS3 click here

APP in history revisited (NEW 9.3.10)

Readers of Teaching History 137 (December 2009) will have read Jerome Freeman and Jo Philpott’s article which covers many of the important issues and raises a few questions. It also ‘leaks’ examples of the new APP framework for history with its 3 Assessment Foci.

The full article in PDF form is available as a downloadable resource.

What are the main messages? 12 important points you need to know.  For the 8 concerns to consider click here

1. APP should make teachers less reliant on the use of specific assessment tasks and tests.

2. Teachers should draw on a wider range of evidence, including oral work, direct observation of pupils at work and self-assessment. There is also talk of using information from other curriculum areas.

3. The timing of the judgement is crucial. Jerome states that APP guidelines can be applied to make a periodic assessment “when the teacher has enough evidence about what a pupil is able to do independently and in different contexts”. These twin issues of degree of independence and ability to apply are pivotal here and need careful consideration. How many different contexts for example? How much independent work, compared with other work. Elsewhere, Jerome refers to consistency. This presupposes that pupils will have lots of opportunities to apply these skills.

4. The idea of sub-levelling abhorred by many of us has certainly not disappeared. Instead, Jerome writes, “Where appropriate the NC level can be refined into ‘low’, ‘secure’ and ‘high’ within the level”.

5. It is suggested by Jerome that the periodic judgement about levels should be made about twice a year. What happens if your SLT wants it more frequently than that?

6. There is an assumption that there will be “regular collaborative assessment and discussion”. As always, this will be time consuming. When combined with a portfolio that genuinely tackles the issues, this will require considerable department time, especially in the early stages. Will SLT give any non-contact time for this? I think we all know the answer.

7. Most departments will probably start by moderating just a very small sample but will this cover all teachers, all abilities?

8. There are three main assessment foci. But are they to be treated equally? There is far more in AF1 than in AF2, and AF3 is more equivalent to the key processes. Should this pervade all work?

9. The Assessment Focus criteria are not intended to be ‘dumbed down’ into a checklist of pupil speak’ can-do statement, but should instead be used as a professional teaching aid, writes Jo Phillpot.

10. The criteria are designed by teachers with the intention that they are used by teachers in their planning and reflection of pupil learning. They are not designed to replace existing models of progression developed by teachers, writes Jo.

11. You will want to take this opportunity to make the ‘learning journey’ explicit to the pupils, explaining how the current work fits into their broader historical understanding.

12. Given the emphasis on variety of outcomes, you may want to spend longer thinking about what products are fit for purpose. Jo writes that she “now places greater importance on the nature of pupil outcomes and how I am asking pupils to demonstrate their learning”.

Questions and concerns

1. How long will it be before SLT are asking you to create sub-levels based on the 3 Assessment Foci?

2. To what extent will some teachers draw the targets they set for pupils from the crude AF criteria rather than more helpful models of progression they may have developed?

3. Will evidence from other curriculum areas really be worth the effort of collecting it?

4. How effective will internal moderation be? This is not 2 pieces of coursework for 40% of the cohort, but twice-yearly for all KS3 pupils in Y7, 8 and 9 (in a dwindling number of schools!).

5. How different will the outcomes actually be when it comes to moderation?  Will we not simply carry on focusing on marking particular pieces of written work more carefully to criteria and then counter-balance that judgement with our more subjective view of pupil progress based on a wider range of evidence?

6. Who will monitor the balance of work for AF1, 2 and 3?

7. What work will need to be retained? Will a small sample be sufficient?

8. Will SLT support subjects by giving additional protected time for departmental discussion in the early stages at least? There are many more issues to raise here, but let’s keep it positive!!

Some key questions answered & a checklist of questions to consider how effectively you are assessing at KS3

Q1. What is APP? An old idea with a new name?

A1. It is badged as the new national approach to assessment that equips teachers to:

• make periodic judgements on pupils’ progress,
• fine tune their understanding of learners’ needs, and
• tailor their planning and teaching accordingly

Comment: I would not call that ‘new’, would you? Aren’t we doing this already when we assess formatively and summatively? If not, what has all the millions spent on AfL been for? I see the whole APP as an attempt to rationalise what is already there and to bring consistency across subjects.

Q 2. What will APP history materials consist of?

A2. There will be:

 • guidelines for assessing pupils’ work related to national curriculum levels
• standards files that offer annotated collections of pupils’ day-to-day work that exemplify national standards • a handbook to help teachers use the materials and implement the approach.

Comment: Your initial reaction is probably ‘Not more guidelines!’. We have been assessing pupils’ work using national level descriptions (or variants thereof) for over a decade now. I know we have now got new levels which are slightly different, but I think the real reason why we need these is that the old advice was either ignored completely or found to be of limited value. The website ‘nc.action’ was always lauded as the answer to making final end-of-key-stage judgements, but in reality the work displayed there failed to offer the clarity teachers needed. It was always an impossible ‘ask’ anyway, as so much depended on context and the amount of support students were given. Perhaps the new samples will be different. I wonder how the distinction will be made between making formative judgements and then end of key stage judgements? For schools with a 2 –year KS3, in particular, this will be very interesting.

Q3. Will this mean more work?

A3. The APP approach is said to be straightforward. Teachers are expected to periodically review evidence of their pupils’ work using assessment guidelines and then build a profile of their achievements. Their publicity quotes teachers who say “Far from adding another layer of assessment, APP helps to rationalise the current system and focuses planning, teaching and assessment". So there you have it!

Comment: I have yet to find a history department that does not periodically assess. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that in some history departments pupils are over-assessed. The haunting spectre of the next assessment looms large as soon as the last was completed. Periodic assessment does not mean showpiece assessment tasks which take ages to mark. Those are simply not fit for purpose and seriously eat into dwindling teaching time. Short, tightly focused, diagnostic tasks are much more likely to tell you what you need to know especially if coupled with evidence from, as QCA suggest: day-to-day interactions, observations, on-going assessment (whatever that means).

Critically, QCA do acknowledge that judgements should draw on a wide range of evidence that shows what learners can do independently (my emphasis). Far too many assessments are over-prepared in my view and do not give scope for independent thinking. This has been an unfortunate by-product of AfL.

Q.4 So why haven’t we got the material NOW?

A4. The guidelines and handbook are being piloted in schools, which is always a healthy sign. The date they are tentatively suggesting for release of material is mid-2010.

Comment: You may decide that you need to do some work of your own in advance of that. A year is a long time to wait. But please don’t spend too much time re-creating the levels and sub-levels which QCA will do for you.

Q5. How can I find out more?

A5. QCA has published a factsheet called APP: assessment at the heart of teaching and learning. Click here.

Comment: The devil is in the detail. You may have to wait for a few months to see what the draft level descriptors look like. The Primary Group will be producing these for levels 1-3 by September 2009.

Q6. Should I be worried about this?

A6. No. There will be nothing to fear if you already have in place: a. a system for teaching and assessing all the various strands of the attainment target b. planning which helps you to pitch work with the right level of challenge c. a system for formative and diagnostic assessment as well as summative assessment (end of unit tests) d. a way of comparing your standards with national expectations.

Comment: There is no absolute guarantee that the QCA’s APP material will necessarily be any better than yours. So work on your own understanding of progression which can then be compared with the statutory levels, but only when it is a legal requirement.

To find out how effectively you are assessing at KS3 go through the checklist available in the downloadable resource section.