As of September this year, the cohort of children entering Year 6 will have -in theory- fully accessed the ‘not so now’ New Curriculum. Although learning from these programmes of study may have been more limited during their Year 3, for the past couple of years we can assume that this cohort has been working towards the writing content of both Lower and Upper Key Stage 2. With its focus on knowledge, clear progression and the principle of ‘mastery’, the National Curriculum was introduced with solid aims and principles, particularly for English and mathematics. However, the reality is that no matter how good the curriculum principles and content are, the curriculum invariably becomes the product of the assessment system it is judged by. In relation to the interim standards for writing, this would appear to be the case for a few aspects. Some statements within the three standards for the end of key stage 2 judgements can be easily cross-referenced to the curriculum, whilst others are much more implicit.
In light of the moderations that I was involved in across several authorities during 2017 and the regular moderation opportunities that I attend through training, here are some thoughts regarding just a few of the key strengths and areas to be mindful of going forward.
The focus on the Greater Depth statements during the STA moderator training and the subsequent sharing of the materials via local authorities definitely had an impact on both teachers and moderators. Evidencing the ‘managing shifts between levels of formality’ statement from the Interim framework certainly became something of a ‘buzz’ phrase. I read many journalistic pieces which clearly demonstrated the child’s ability to shift between levels of formality, and yet this is a case in point for the assessment driving the curriculum. Appreciating and conveying different levels of formality is implied within the programme of study, however it possibly wasn’t addressed in quite the same way until it was flagged through the STA moderator training earlier this year. But what of the other strengths this year? There were many, but certainly worth mentioning is that this year there was greater evidence of passive verbs to demonstrate the statement ‘using passive and modal verbs mostly appropriately’. This also helped to support another of the statements within the Expected standard: reflect the level of formality required mostly correctly. Clearly there had been more focused teaching on the passive voice and teachers showed a much greater awareness of text types that this could be used in. Grammar overall seemed more embedded, and its application less contrived than when the standards were introduced last year.
In terms of the less successful elements, there still seemed a degree of confusion in understanding the first statement within the Expected standard: creating atmosphere, and integrating dialogue to convey character and advance the action. For this statement, we can reference the national curriculum. Within the Upper KS2 programme of study for writing composition, the wording is practically identical to the assessment statement: in narrative, describing settings, character and atmosphere and integrating dialogue to convey character and advance the action. As a statement within the curriculum, this forms a progression from the introduction of dialogue and punctuating direct speech at Lower KS2. Therefore, when working at the Expected standard by the end of the key stage, the inclusion of dialogue has to have purpose within the overall piece.
It is also worth reminding ourselves what the word dialogue means: Dialogue is communication or discussion between people or groups of people (taken from Collins dictionary)
Dialogue needs to be an exchange between characters and is not simply the inclusion of speech marks within a narrative. I read lots of superb narratives and the range of stimulus for writing was truly inspiring. However, when trying to find examples of ‘integrated dialogue to advance the action’, at times it was extremely difficult to identify the use and purpose of dialogue. For example, I read many different stories based on the short film Alma where the ‘dialogue’ was incorrectly cited as Alma’s thoughts rather than an exchange between characters.
Another statement within the Expected standard that had mixed understanding relates to the requirement that children are secure in ‘using a range of cohesive devices’. Again, we can link straight back to the curriculum. The cohesive devices (as stated in Appendix 2 National Curriculum) refers to words used to show how the different parts of a text fit together so that they create cohesion. ‘Cohesive devices’ refers to the use of determiners, pronouns, conjunctions, adverbials and ellipsis -although this needs to be used sparingly to create impact! The standard states that cohesive devices need to be used both within and across sentences and paragraphs. In most writing cohesion was clear from paragraph to paragraph, but not always as evident within paragraphs. Food for thought and hopefully something to think about for the coming year if the standards remain similar.
As we await to see what will become of the Interim framework going forward, it is worth remembering that the Exemplification materials that accompanied the framework can still be useful teaching and learning tools. The unannotated writing samples can be useful for children to discuss and deconstruct, and the annotated versions can be useful to support teacher subject knowledge.