As we begin another school year, I’d like to share some of the key observations and messages that arose from the statutory Key Stage 2 external moderation cycle, with the aim of supporting Year 6 teachers and English Leads as they plan for writing in the year ahead.
It feels as though I say something similar every year, but it remains true and is certainly worth repeating - it is a genuine pleasure to visit so many schools and read such a wide range of pupils' writing. Seeing where children have reached on their primary writing journey is one of the most rewarding parts of my job. From pupils working at pre-Key Stage standards (PKS) through to those awarded Greater Depth Standard (GDS), I encountered writing that reflected enthusiastic, curious and compassionate young people, often inspired by rich, high-quality texts and supported by good teaching and well-crafted curricula.
Throughout the moderation cycle, I laughed, cried (the plight of a vulnerable animal never fails to draw a tear) and found myself genuinely invested in both fictional characters and real-world issues. Time and again, pupils demonstrated creativity, empathy and a growing awareness of the world around them through their writing.
As always, there were patterns, observations and reflections that emerged across the moderation visits. Sharing these can be helpful as schools consider their approach to writing and curriculum planning for the year ahead.
Of course, these conversations are never solely limited to Year 6 teams. The assessment of Key Stage 2 writing standards is the culmination of teaching and learning across the whole of EYFS, Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2. During last year's moderation visits, this was reiterated by numerous discussions about the security of the core elements of writing: foundational skills established and embedded in Nursery and Reception; punctuation, grammar and spelling taught in Key Stage 1; curriculum knowledge developed throughout lower Key Stage 2; and, perhaps most importantly, the reading journey that underpins every child's development as a writer.
With that in mind, let's explore some of the key messages from the 2025/26 moderation cycle. It is a long read, so grab yourself a mug of something lovely and get comfortable. If you are short on time, and want to skip to the sections most relevant to you, here is a list of what is included:
- Developing fluency in core writing knowledge
- Reducing cognitive load to support writing
- Understanding the Pre-Key Stage standards
- Securing Working Towards the Expected Standard
- Providing opportunities to demonstrate integrated dialogue
- Supporting pupils to achieve the Greater Depth Standard
- Planning ahead for writing evidence to support teacher assessment
- Making the most of writing examples
- The value of moderation for assessment and teaching
Developing fluency in core writing knowledge
Fluency - or security to the point of automaticity - in the core elements of writing is essential if pupils are to engage successfully with the more complex demands of upper Key Stage 2 (KS2) and make conscious choices about purpose, audience and effect. This continues to be an area of focus in many schools and was a frequent theme throughout the moderation cycle.
As mentioned earlier, some pupils are held back by insecure understanding of fundamental aspects of writing, such as sentence construction, grammar or spelling. For others, the knowledge is present but has not yet become automatic. Their application of key punctuation and demarcation suggests that they are still having to think consciously about what to use and when it is needed, or wholly rely on scaffolds, reminders and prompts to check their work rather than building more independence and becoming less reliant on these over time. This can make it difficult for pupils to devote their attention fully to the craft of writing and the choices that shape meaning for a reader.
Many schools are responding to this challenge by considering the role of low-stakes assessment in building fluency as included in our work with schools on formative strategies and our responsive teaching training. During moderation visits, we saw examples where schools had embedded retrieval and fluency practice into writing lessons across KS2 classes. These short activities provided opportunities to revisit and reinforce previously taught knowledge while also preparing pupils for the writing that would follow in the lesson. This might involve a SPaG-style multiple-choice question at the start of the lesson, a quick punctuation task based on a model paragraph, or a short editing exercise. The specific activity matters less than the consistency with which core knowledge is revisited and practised. Fluency is rarely developed through a single strategy; rather, it is built through regular, purposeful opportunities to recall, apply and strengthen learning over time.
Importantly, developing fluency is not something that can be addressed in Year 6 alone. It is a whole-school conversation about securing the foundational knowledge and skills that pupils need as writers. The confidence and automaticity required at the end of KS2 are built gradually, lesson by lesson and year by year, throughout a child's journey through primary school. Our Primary English team are currently developing a programme of support for building fluency in writing, so keep eyes peeled for announcements and further information.
Reducing cognitive load to support writing
As discussed above, many pupils find it difficult to develop increasingly effective writing because they are juggling a significant cognitive load. If a pupil is still grappling with the fundamentals of writing, while simultaneously working with unfamiliar curriculum content, a new text type, ambitious vocabulary and the creative demands of composition, it is easy to see how the quality of their writing can be affected. Securing fluency in the foundational aspects of writing is an important part of reducing cognitive load, but it is only one part of the picture.
Throughout the moderation cycle, we saw examples of schools using rich, high-quality texts as an effective way to support pupils in this area. Powerful texts do more than simply engage and inspire; they also provide pupils with language, structures, ideas and models that they can draw upon in their own writing. This reduces some of the cognitive burden involved in generating content from scratch and allows pupils to devote more of their attention to the effect they wish to create and the writing skills they are applying. The impact of a text that has genuinely captured pupils' interest is often evident in the quality and confidence of the writing it inspires.
Some schools capitalised on this particularly effectively. Rather than moving rapidly from one stimulus to another, they invested deeply in a single high-quality text - sometimes even a much-loved class reader - and used it as the basis for multiple writing outcomes. Having spent time immersing pupils in the text and developing a secure understanding of its content, themes and characters, teachers were then able to use that shared knowledge as a launching point for writing for a range of different purposes and audiences. Since pupils were not simultaneously trying to understand unfamiliar content, they were better able to focus on the demands of the writing itself and the impact they wanted their work to have on the reader.
A similar approach was evident in non-fiction writing. In some schools, pupils drew on learning from science or foundation subjects to inform their writing. As they were writing from a position of growing expertise, rather than wrestling with new subject knowledge at the same time as the demands of composition, they were often able to write with greater confidence, clarity and precision.
Of course, reducing cognitive load is a much bigger topic than we can fully explore here: it is also about the way we structure and scaffold the writing process itself. Carefully designed supports can help pupils focus their attention on particular aspects of writing without becoming overwhelmed by trying to manage everything at once. As pupils develop greater confidence, fluency and independence, these scaffolds should gradually be removed. Ultimately, the goal is not to reduce challenge, but to ensure that pupils' cognitive effort is directed towards the learning and writing decisions that matter most. When it comes to our teacher assessment judgements, we need to consider what was or wasn’t independent and see what the pupil has secured, with the aim of reducing or scaling back scaffolds as we move through the year to ascertain an accurate end of key stage standard in line with the Teacher Assessment Guidance on independence (section 6.2).
Understanding the Pre-Key Stage standards
Over recent years, there has been an increasing focus on the pre-Key Stage (PKS) standards, and, through our moderation discussions, we have seen a growing understanding of both their requirements and their thoughtful application. It has been encouraging to see schools engaging more closely with the detail of the standards and considering carefully the standard that best fits a pupil’s writing.
There can sometimes be a resistance to considering the use of PKS standards, perhaps due to the notion that PK6 is broadly aligned with the expected standard at Key Stage 1. When looking at a Year 6 pupil's work, it is clear that they have moved well beyond Key Stage 1 in terms of their vocabulary, experiences, content knowledge and maturity, and, importantly, as individuals. On the surface, therefore, the comparison can feel uncomfortable or even misleading. However, it is helpful to look beyond that association and focus on the actual characteristics of the standard. In writing terms, PK6 describes writing that is coherent and generally comprehensible, but which may be characterised by simpler sentence construction, little variation in grammatical structures, conjunctions that are predominantly coordinating, and punctuation that is basic but largely accurate. This is not weak or unreadable writing - far from it. Many pupils working at PK6 are able to communicate their ideas clearly, even if they have not yet secured all of the requirements needed to achieve Working Towards the Expected Standard (WTS).
Spending time becoming familiar with the PKS standards and reflecting on what they look like in practice can support greater accuracy in teacher assessment overall. The category of ‘below’ encompasses a wide range of attainment, and each PKS standard describes a distinct stage in a pupil's development as a writer. Taking the time to understand those distinctions can help ensure that assessment judgements and subsequent teaching adaptations and interventions are based on the evidence presented in the writing.
Technically, pupils assessed using the PKS standards do not form part of the moderation sample. However, for pupils who sit close to the boundary between PK6 and WTS, discussions around the PKS standards are often valuable. A secure understanding of both sets of criteria can help teachers arrive at judgements that are accurate, consistent and reflective of a pupil's current stage of development and provide a clear picture of the knowledge and skills that still need to be secured.
Securing working towards the Expected Standard
This idea builds naturally from the previous discussion about the PKS standards. As with all assessment judgements, it is worth returning regularly to the Teacher Assessment Framework (TAF) and exemplification materials to reflect carefully on what is actually required to meet the 'pupil can' statements for WTS.
When we look closely at the requirements for WTS, we see writers who can communicate clearly across a range of purposes and text types. We would expect paragraphs to be used to organise ideas, some descriptive detail to be included and writing to be generally coherent and understandable for the reader. While we may see less control, cohesion and overall effectiveness than at the Expected Standard (EXS), pupils working at WTS should still demonstrate secure application of the fundamentals. This includes accurate basic punctuation, secure demarcation, and reliable spelling of KS1 and lower KS2 statutory words, alongside some words from the Year 5/6 spelling list.
During moderation discussions, it is sometimes evident that pupils who are still working towards security in these foundational elements are trying to manage increasingly sophisticated curriculum content at the same time. There is, of course, great value in exposing pupils to ambitious vocabulary, complex grammatical structures and the wider expectations of upper KS2. However, where fundamental knowledge remains insecure, these additional demands can sometimes make it more difficult for pupils to demonstrate the skills needed to achieve WTS consistently and independently.
This is where formative assessment is particularly important. Day-to-day assessment allows us to identify the precise aspects of writing that are not yet secure and provide targeted opportunities for pupils to practise, revisit and consolidate them. In many ways, this reflects the same principles we apply across the curriculum: identifying gaps, responding to them quickly and ensuring that pupils develop confidence and fluency before additional layers of complexity are introduced. This systematic and forensic use of formative assessment is something we continue to champion through our work on responsive and adaptive teaching, and within our Focus on Formative programme.
This is not a suggestion that we lower expectations or limit pupils' opportunities as writers. Rather, it is a reminder that strong progress is built on secure foundations. We want pupils to engage with ambitious ideas and rich curriculum experiences, but we also want to be confident that the knowledge and skills required for WTS are secure and clearly evidenced in their independent writing. Where gaps in foundational knowledge exist, pupils need opportunities to rehearse, apply and embed that learning, placing them in the strongest position to demonstrate their attainment.
Providing opportunities to demonstrate integrated dialogue
One frequent area of discussion during moderation, and occasionally a reason for additional evidence being requested, relates to the EXS 'pupil can' statement requiring pupils to ‘integrate dialogue in narratives to convey character and advance the action’.
This statement is important because it moves beyond the technical accuracy of punctuating speech (which would be assessed under the punctuation requirements of the TAF) and focuses on how effectively dialogue is used within a narrative. It requires pupils to demonstrate an understanding that dialogue should serve a purpose - revealing something about a character, moving events forward, or both.
One challenge is that not every writing stimulus naturally lends itself to character interaction. Some published schemes may contain relatively few narrative opportunities, while others may focus heavily on setting, atmosphere or the experiences of a single character. In these cases, it is important that we exercise our professional judgement and adapt planning where necessary to ensure pupils are taught this aspect of narrative writing and have opportunities to practice and demonstrate it independently.
It is sensible to provide more than one opportunity across the year for pupils to evidence integrated dialogue. Relying on a single piece of writing can be risky since a pupil may not be successful on that occasion or could be absent resulting in limited evidence.
The way we design writing tasks can also have a significant impact. When pupils are asked to include interaction between characters, some may produce large amounts of direct speech with very little narrative around it. While this may demonstrate accurate speech punctuation, it is unlikely to demonstrate integrated dialogue.
For this reason, it can be useful to explore examples from the STA exemplification materials and standardisation exercises. Comparing examples from WTS, EXS and GDS collections can help pupils recognise how dialogue becomes increasingly purposeful and effective and what the writers are doing to achieve that.
The reviewing and editing process can provide further opportunities for pupils to reflect on the effectiveness of the dialogue they have written. Self-reflection questions such as the following can support pupils to develop a more considered and purposeful approach:
- Could my characters say less while still allowing the reader to understand what is happening?
- What could be implied through narrative description or reported speech rather than spoken directly?
- Does each piece of dialogue serve a purpose? Does it reveal character, provide information or advance the action?
- What am I writing around the dialogue, and how does that affect its overall impact?
Our goal is that pupils can use dialogue as a deliberate narrative tool in their writing, so it is worth reflecting on how we build understanding and experience with this tool so they develop the control needed for EXS.
Supporting pupils to achieve the Greater Depth Standard
GDS is undoubtedly a very high bar for ten and eleven year-old writers, however, each year, we see examples of writing that are highly controlled, ambitious and effective, demonstrating that the standard is achievable for some pupils. Alongside this, we often encounter pupils who come remarkably close - technically secure writers who are perhaps only a small distance away from demonstrating the full set of GDS 'pupil can' statements. These cases often prompt valuable professional discussions about whether anything might have supported them to make that final step.
In moderation conversations, teachers frequently speak about the realities of stretched time and resources. Understandably and appropriately, schools' primary focus is on ensuring that as many pupils as possible securely achieve EXS, given the importance of pupils leaving primary school having successfully accessed and completed the KS2 programme of study. In this context, GDS can sometimes become something that is hoped for rather than strategically planned into the curriculum. We also encounter a degree of hesitation around awarding GDS. When compared against the exemplification materials, the threshold can feel intimidatingly high, so many teachers naturally approach it with caution.
What is important to remember is that achieving GDS is rarely the result of chance. Of course, some pupils arrive in Year 6 as voracious readers, having been exposed to a rich and varied range of texts, language structures and levels of formality and can seemingly apply this into their writing without instruction. However, many pupils who ultimately achieve GDS do so because the specific knowledge, skills and characteristics of the standard have been explicitly taught, modelled and discussed. Like any aspect of writing, GDS skills develop through careful teaching and deliberate practice.
Indeed, most writers will not automatically meet the requirements for GDS simply because they are the best writers in the class or display confidence in their writing, without GDS content being specifically explored. The exemplification materials provide useful reminders of this. The ‘Leigh’ collection, for example, is particularly helpful in illustrating what a highly secure EXS writer can look like. Many schools will recognise pupils whose writing is of a similar quality, or perhaps even stronger in some respects, yet who are not consistently demonstrating the requirements of the GDS 'pupil can' statements.
For this reason, it is important that we develop a clear understanding of what each GDS statement actually means in practice. What does 'assured and conscious control' look like in a piece of writing? How does a writer 'manipulate grammar and vocabulary' for effect rather than simply using ambitious language or complex structures? These are questions worth exploring with colleagues and our class.
As expected, reading has an important role to play here. For pupils who show strong writing potential but have a relatively narrow reading diet, it may be beneficial to broaden their exposure to different authors, genres, forms and levels of formality – something worth pursuing from earlier in KS2. Additional models, texts and exemplars can provide valuable opportunities for pupils to analyse how writers achieve particular effects, impact and how language choices shift according to audience and purpose. It can also be helpful to draw not only on published texts but on the extensive archive of STA standardisation and exemplification materials. Helpfully, advisers in Devon have archived these exercises so everyone can make use of them – they can be found here. These collections allow pupils to examine writing produced by their peers and explore what makes it effective.
Importantly, supporting pupils towards GDS does not always require separate intervention groups or additional writing sessions. Many of the approaches that help pupils develop as writers can be embedded within high-quality whole-class teaching. Analysing authorial choices, evaluating the effectiveness of writing, experimenting with techniques and discussing the impact of language and grammatical decisions are activities that benefit all pupils. Timely adaptations, targeted questioning and carefully chosen success criteria can then help individual pupils focus on the specific aspects most likely to move their writing towards GDS.
For schools wishing to explore this area further, these themes are considered in greater detail within the Success in Year 6: Writing and Moderation training, where approaches to securing high-quality writing outcomes across all standards, including GDS, are discussed. Schools may also wish to draw on bespoke support from the Primary English team if developing GDS writers is a particular focus.
Planning ahead for writing evidence to support teacher assessment
Different schemes and curricula take different approaches to building evidence of independent writing. Some build towards a smaller number of extended outcomes, while others provide more frequent opportunities for shorter, focused applications of writing knowledge and others explore writing opportunities across the curriculum. Whatever approach is used, it is worth reviewing the year ahead to consider where opportunities for independent writing occur and whether they provide sufficient scope for pupils to demonstrate the breadth of the TAF.
As we know, writing produced during the spring and summer terms is often the strongest and most secure reflection of pupils' attainment. For that reason, it is helpful to consider whether pupils will have opportunities to produce a balanced range of narrative and non-narrative writing, alongside sustained, complete pieces that allow them to demonstrate the relevant 'pupil can' statements independently.
In some cases, schools may choose to supplement the writing outcomes already planned within their scheme. This could include additional pieces capitalising on enthusiasm around a particular text, or standalone writing opportunities following SATs, such as a persuasive speech, a letter of complaint, a descriptive piece inspired by a carefully chosen stimulus, or an extract from a narrative showing a particular style or technique. These can provide valuable opportunities for pupils to draw upon and showcase the learning they have developed across the year.
At this stage of the year, we have the advantage of being able to plan strategically. Taking some time now to review planned writing opportunities can help ensure that, by the point we come to make teacher assessment judgements in June, pupils have had every opportunity to demonstrate just how far they have progressed as writers.
Making the most of writing examples
A brief reminder of the value of regularly returning to the STA exemplification and standardisation materials. While they are, of course, an important support when making teacher assessment judgements, they are equally useful throughout the year as teaching and formative assessment tools.
As mentioned throughout, the exemplification materials provide a valuable benchmark for what meeting the TAF looks like in practice. They can help teachers identify gaps in pupils' writing, inform feedback and pinpoint areas that may benefit from additional teaching, practice or rehearsal.
Similarly worth repeating, the extensive range of STA standardisation materials offers a rich bank of authentic pupil writing across all three standards. With so many collections available, it is often possible to find examples that align closely with the text types, genres or stimuli being used within a school's curriculum. These can be powerful resources for modelling, discussion, editing activities and exploring what makes writing effective.
One brief observation from moderation is that schools where teachers are highly familiar with these materials tend to make more accurate assessment judgements, and, importantly, are often more confident in explaining precisely why a pupil has, or has not, securely met a particular statement.
The value of moderation for assessment and teaching
Another common feature of schools where assessment judgements were both accurate and confidently made was a commitment to robust internal and external moderation throughout the year. Effective moderation is rarely a quick exercise, and it can be tricky to find times when schools can get together and look in detail at writing evidence. The most valuable moderation focused on understanding precisely what pupils can do, where gaps remain and what the next steps in teaching should be.
It is worth reflecting on whether moderation processes are rigorous enough, not just in Year 6, but across the key stage. While moderation often feels closely linked to summative assessment, it can be equally powerful when used formatively to identify priorities for teaching and support pupils' development as writers over time.
With this in mind, Ben Fuller and I have been trialling a new approach called Support and Tracking Raising Attainment in Writing (STRAW). The process focuses on Year 5 pupils assessed as WTS, identifying specific gaps in knowledge and skills, considering appropriate strategies to address them and then revisiting those pupils in Year 6 to review progress and explore further next steps. The emphasis is on using moderation not simply to arrive at a judgement, but to support the pupil’s writing journey. We would be delighted to discuss the approach further with interested schools - assessment@hfleducation.org.
It was encouraging to see both the Curriculum and Assessment Review and the subsequent White Paper recognise the value of ongoing, high-quality moderation in writing to support teaching as well as assessment accuracy. With this in mind, we will continue to offer Year 6 writing moderation clusters throughout the year (more information and booking via these links - autumn, spring and summer), alongside spring-term school-based moderation support for schools seeking a more bespoke approach to assessment, planning and improving writing outcomes.
At this point, I will draw this lengthy blog to a close. Hopefully there will have been some useful threads for you to consider in relation to your school. If there is anything you would like to discuss further, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Sophie MacNeill
