Language and Literacy Levels Module 1.4 Internal Moderation September 2014

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide Internal Moderation The purposes of internal moderation are to: to confirm the accuracy of assigned levels with colleagues to develop consistency of assigned levels across the school to develop consistency between assigned Levels and other data sets eg. NAPLaN, school grades, previous Levels etc to develop consistency across schools (NB. In some cases, this process may extend across a Partnership)

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide Benefits of Internal Moderation Assigning accurate and consistent Levels: ensures that the correct amount of funding will be paid to schools means schools are confident with their Levels data enables schools to monitor EALD student progress

Building Accuracy and Consistency To build accuracy and consistency: inexperienced teachers should work with a partner who is experienced in assigning Levels refer to the R- 7 or Years Moderated Evidence decide on some benchmarks (eg. agreeing that one set of evidence is at Level 3, another at level 6 and another at Level 9) and then compare other sets of evidence to these.

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide Internal Moderation processes Option 1 - all staff assign Levels when Levels have been assigned, groups of teachers share their copies of one set of evidence and discuss the accuracy of the assigned Level this process and the discussion helps establish common understandings of consistency i.e. one teacher’s Level 4 is if the same standard as another teacher’s Level 4

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide Option 2 – a panel assigns Levels when Levels have been assigned, panel members place texts in piles of same assigned Level (eg. all Level 6s together, all Level 7s together, all Level 8s together etc) after enough texts have been added to a pile, a teacher with more experience scans through the pile and gives feedback to the teacher who assigned the Level if he/she thinks it is inaccurate

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide Option 3 – an individual EALD teacher/ teacher/school leader undertakes moderation teacher is reliant upon own experience and Moderated Evidence this is not the preferred option in schools with more than a few EALD students because: o there is no or little opportunity for professional discussion to confirm the accuracy of assigned Levels o knowledge of language remains with one staff member and is not shared with others

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide After Assigning Levels Compare Levels data to other data sets o e.g. Are Year 3, 5, 7 and 9 students’ Levels similar to their NAPLaN writing results? o e.g. Are subject English grades similar to Levels? If they are different, this may need to be explored The reason/s for the difference may be valid (e.g. student has recently had a long term absence) If one of the reasons is the accuracy of the Levels then this should be addressed in the school’s planning for next year’s assigning of Levels (e.g. greater use of Moderated Evidence, a panel instead of a individual, further training about the Levels)

Faculty of Edit this on the Slide MasterThe University of Adelaide The Next Step After discussing the possible reasons for any variations between different Levels and other data sets and making any necessary adjustments to the school’s internal moderation process, what are the implications for future planning and teaching?