The Headteacher's Blog
Welcome to Lydgate Junior School.
We aim to ensure that all children receive a high quality, enjoyable and exciting education.
We feel that our school is a true reflection of the community we serve. Lydgate children are well motivated and come from a range of social and cultural backgrounds. Within the school community we appreciate the richness of experience that the children bring to school. This enhances the learning experiences of everyone and it also gives all pupils the opportunity to develop respect and tolerance for each other by working and playing together. We want your child's time at Lydgate to be memorable for the right reasons - that is, a happy, fulfilling and successful period of his/her childhood.
Welcome to Year 3!
The Y3 teachers are Mrs Dutton & Mrs de Brouwer (3D/dB), Miss Hayden (3RH), Mrs Holden (3SH) and Miss Wall (3AW). We have several Teaching Assistants who work with Y3 children at different times through the week: Miss Mahon, Mr Bartholomew, Mrs Dawes and Miss Kania.
We will use this blog to keep you up-to-date with all the exciting things that we do in Year 3, share some of the things that the children learn and show you some of their fantastic work. We hope you enjoy reading it!
The Y3 team.
Welcome to the Year 5 Blog page.
The Year 5 teaching team consists of: Mrs Loosley (5NL), Miss Cunningham (5EC), Mrs Ridsdale and Mrs Webb (5W/R) and Mr Bradshaw (5BB). The children are also supported by our teaching assistants: Mr Swain, Mr Jenkinson, Mrs Hornsey and Mrs Allen. We have help from Mr Jones, Miss Lee, Ms Grimsley and Ms Reasbeck too. What a fantastic team!
Our PE days are Tuesday (indoor) and Wednesday (outdoor): the children need to wear their PE kits for school on those days.
Spellings are sent home every Monday, to learn ready for a spelling dictation each Friday.
Homework books (maths and SPaG) will be sent home once a week - the days will be decided by the class teachers who will let their classes know. They will have a whole week to complete the homework tasks.
In our weekly blogs, the children will share some of the things they have been doing at school. Check in each weekend for the latest Y5 news!
The Year 5 Team
We are the children in Y6 at Lydgate Junior School. There are 120 of us and our teachers are: Mrs Shaw and Mrs Watkinson (Y6S/W); Mrs Rougvie and Mrs Jones (Y6R/J); Mrs Phillips (Y6CP); and Miss Norris (Y6HN). Also teaching in Year 6 are: Miss Lee (Thursday in Y6R/J); Mrs Farrell (Thursday in Y6HN); Mrs Grimsley (Thursday in Y6CP); and Mr Jones (Thursday inY6S/W).We are also very lucky to be helped by Mrs Hill, Mrs Mulqueen and Mr Gartrell. We use this space to share all of the great things that are happening in our classrooms. Join us each week on our learning journey....
We were looking at some end-point data from one of the spelling interventions we run. (To be sure that each intervention works we measure on the way in and on the way out.) It is a twelve-week programme, targeted at children who have a ‘spelling age’ significantly behind their chronological age.
The basic theory for a successful, effective, well-delivered SEND programme is that it should produce twice the normal rate of progress. So over the twelve weeks we hope / expect / want to see 6 months progress in spelling age (or reading age if it’s a reading programme), otherwise we start asking other questions: wrong intervention, wrong children, inaccurate measure, other factors, implemented as intended?
What the data has led me to is some personal professional (statistics) learning: I need to better understand ‘outliers’, how to define them, and when it is appropriate to remove them from a set of scores.
It is fairly easy to see how it would be hasty to base a judgement about the success of a programme on the progress or otherwise of a single participant. Likewise a single test might be too narrow to justify a confident statement of progress for the participant. To judge the programme / intervention itself we want to aggregate and average the progress scores from a decent sized group.
And this is what brought me to identifying my own learning need. Tests scores (using the same test in and out) showed a range, as we’d expect, of levels of progress. We calculated the number of months gained for each child in the programme, some with disbelief – not in the child but in the scale (and sometimes direction) of the scores. The lowest progress scores was minus 8 months, suggesting the child had lost eight months off their ‘spelling age’ in the three month period. The greatest progress was an apparent gain of two years and 10 months, or plus 34 months!
The majority were grouped between 1 month and 9 months, so that plus 34 looks extraordinary / unlikely / inexplicable. It matters because it puts over two months gain per pupil on the mean average. I needed to learn whether and how to discount it (and then what we would report to parents about this child’s progress if we disbelieved the test score).
'Mathwords', sort of helpfully, defines an outlier as: A data point that is distinctly separate from the rest of the data. One definition of outlier is any data point more than 1.5 interquartile ranges (IQRs) below the first quartile or above the third quartile.
So now I need to work out how to calculate the quartiles for the set of data, and the inter quartile range.
There is no hard and fast advice on whether to remove (and report) the outlier(s) as they may be the most interesting and significant data in the whole set!
We will continue to question it all, I think.
You’ll probably end up somewhere else.
We all deal with a whole lot of data in our work these days, teaching being no different from any other profession. This week, during the half term holidays, more data was released from the end of Key Stage 1 and 2 tests held back in May 2017. We have started picking through it all, to see if it changes our view on the world, or seriously our analysis of past performance and therefore focus points for this year.
We already felt unhappy with our 2017 performance in spelling, grammar and arithmetic. Not because they were below average but rather because they were below where we think our pupils at our school should be placed. We know how the other local schools (in S10 and in South west Sheffield, and in Sheffield as a whole) fared, and so have made comparisons.
We were also aware that there is a gap or difference in performance between the pupils that attract Pupil Premium funding (basically those who have some history of Free School Meal entitlement) and the pupils who do not. This gap is pretty much universal (as in, it occurs at most schools), and pretty much obstinately refusing to disappear, but that does not mean we accept it, or refuse to look for further options to reduce or remove the attainment gap between these two groups.
We are, further, aware that the PP group perform better here than the same group nationally, but that is not the measure used to compare performance. It is, after all, reasonable to ask and challenge schools to get those children to the same standards as everyone else.
We had just 13 PP pupils in last year’s Year 6 cohort, each counting as just under 8%. Getting just 3 extra to reach the national expected standard in maths would have us have no attainment gap at all.
We have seen a significant decline in the number and percentage of pupils eligible for Free School Meals and thus attracting Pupil Premium in the last three years. The number on Year 6 this year is even lower, and so the margin, in terms of actual headcount, is smaller and smaller, and each child’s progress becomes even more significant in terms of percentage points of gap.
Also available to schools is a ‘question level’ analysis. This shows how our children did, question by question, compared to the national average. It also throws up oddities, questions and quirks. Why should we have answered a couple of questions 16% poorer than the average? And why 11% better on others? And can we cover the shortfall this year so any question phrased like that, or in that area of study, or using that skill or fact, is answered better, and particularly by PP pupils?
Within school we track pupils’ experience and progress. We know what each has been involved in, and what difference it has made to their performance. We know the success level of each intervention we run. We know how each child stands against our expectations for the year group. We know a good deal about the barriers each child faces.
Where are we trying to reach?
- Spelling scores above average by at least 4%
- Grammar scores ahead of average by at least 4%, and at at least as good as the S10 average
- Arithmetic scores higher generally, and particularly for PP children
- To get all pupils who left Key Stage 1 at a high standard to leave Key Stage 2 the same
- Maths attainment to match our, significantly strong, reading attainment (and progress)scores
- And all the time maintaining the exciting, engaging, enriched curriculum that we offer.
Once we had the destination clear we could set the Sat Nav to plan the best route, given current traffic conditions, and make good time on the journey. The latest data releases have actually only confirmed what we already knew, and were already working on. Anyone who’d like to visit my Office will see a wall of data, charts and graphs that has built up this picture over the last five months. By the end of term we should have a good idea about how much progress we have made already towards these goals. I’ll let you know.
For me it’s ‘guarantee’ and ‘liaise’, and 'diarrhoea' – I always want to put an ‘e’ in the middle of ‘guarantee’ instead of the ‘a’, and I struggle to place both ‘i’ in ‘liaise’. And 'diarrhoea' makes all of us want to use a four-letter word instead. Spellcheck is often of no use.
After you‘ve mastered synthetic phonics there will still be words that don’t work that way. Some have to be learnt using graphemes, knowledge of word roots, families of words, alternative pronunciation / phoneme and so on. We use, as do many schools, handwriting to support the learning of some spelling patterns (it’s known as a ‘hand for spelling’).
The use of mnemonics (‘Oh yUo Lucky Duck’ to remember the pattern ‘ould’ in could, and should, and would) and acronyms is an established method for those ‘tricky words’. However, there is an oft repeated fault or missed opportunity with the majority use of the method. Many a child (and adult) will say, ‘Big Elephants Can Always Understand Small Elephants’ as a way to remember the spelling of ‘because’. The fault, as I see it, of the method is that there is nothing to remind the child that they are using a prompt for the word ‘because’ – they have to know the first letter or ‘sound’.
I think the method is even better and more effective if the mnemonic starts with the word being spelt out – so to remember ‘because’ you might say, ‘BECAUSE Eleven Coats And Umbrellas Seem Effective’ or ‘BECAUSE Elephants Cope And Usually Seem Energetic’. Say the word you want to spell and it starts you going with the mnemonic itself.
I’m not actually sure that it is the mnemonic that is assisting with the learning, but the build-up to it. It needs quite a bit of thinking about to come up with even a silly, if grammatically correct, sentence or phrase. It needs a lot of looking at and checking you have all the right letters in the right order. You have to repeat it a few times to get the phrase down off pat. You have to look again. People ask you to repeat it because it sounds such fun. They have a go and hearing their versions triggers the letter pattern in your head. We generally call this ‘over-learning’ or rote.
Anyway, diarrhoea – ‘DIARRHOEA Is A Really Rather Horrible Openly Evacuating Anus’
Liaise – LIAISE In An Italian Secret Escape
Guarantee – GUARANTEEs Aren’t Usually Read And Never Treat Employees EquallyCan you make some to help remember which / witch goes where / were / wear and whether / weather their / there / they’re is right?