saulhudson

Thanks all for your responses interestingt reading. I think as this is the first year we will have some issues but looking at what people have posted on here it is maybe not that bad. We have sent out sheets to each teaching groups and we'll get changes back so I guess I'll load the assessment model with FFTD and then manually adjust the grade myself. Not a quick thing but once its done it is done. Any more ideas would be great as its nice to get ideas from other schools. Many thanks

I have several friends that work for the Royal Mail in various IT roles and they are also sick of the people within the company who are hell bent on striking and causing chaos. As always it only takes a few bad eggs. From what I can gather this is mainly the Unions and the front line post men and women who are refusing to come back to the depot after a round and actually work the remaining hours they get paid for. *roles eyes*! Not a great situtation but typical of the UK at the moment ... everybody wants to take something from the system.

Hi Pretty common issue I'm sure but as a school we are looking towards using adjusted targets based on FFT and not just raw FFT data for KS4 students. We have tried several times in the past to gather adjusted data from teachers but the process has always failed and we have ultimately gone back to using raw FFT data as a target. I wonder what other schools do and how they gather data. Do you provide FFT to teachers and get them to adjust the figures. Do you do all subjects or just subjects like Music, PE Media studies etc that FFT might struggle with? Do you provide teaching group print outs to staff that that review departmently or approval within leadership etc or do you let teachers just alter freely? Do you allow targets to be adjusted downwards as well as upwards? Furthermore how do you then do analysis on the adjusted data? As a school we use FFT heavily and do lot of analysis against what it says vs what our teachers say and what the students actuallys get in there GCSE's for example. We compare all the usual things % A*-C vs what FFT predicted for the subject and then headline figures for the school % 5 A*-C's inc EM, what FFT said for the student vs what they got etc etc. I can see us running into a lot of problems with adjusted targets as we will still have some requirement for analysis vs raw FFT and also then analysis against adjusted targets. Also is there any worth in reviewing the adjustment setting and how do you compare this against what FFT said in the first place. Obviously CMIS doesn't let you manually adjust the FFT data on the assessment view which is fair enough so the data would have to be loaded into your assessment model which is fine for ePortal and using progress tracker etc but we do so much analysis outside of CMIS reporting and ePortal. I'm also worried about confusing staff by having 2 sets of targets and in various palces (ePortal, CMIS reports etc) they'll see the RAW FFT and in the assessment / progress tracker it will be the adjusted target. Confusing staff can quickly lead to them not using the system as intended in my experience. Really I just wonder how other school handle target setting, how data is gather and sorted and finally how analysis is done at all the assessment entry points and vs the actual results. Thanks for reading