the document

Transcription

the document

ECARDA
MICRO EDUMETRICS
Paper 1
This pamphlet includes examples of how
simple micro edumetrics may be used to
indicate aspects of learner achievement and
give clues to the performance of schools.
PETER LACEY
April 2012
ECARDA MicroEdumetrics 1
CONTENTS
Introduction
Attainment micro edumetrics
An all-through scale?
Progress micro edumetrics
National benchmarks
List of contents of illustrations
Illustrations with commentaries
Two pitching and tracking tools
Page 1
EDUMETRICS - The study of education-related measurements.
(Educational statistics)
Introduction
It is assumed that matters of validity and reliability in any form of educational measurement are
understood by the reader. I refer to NFER those who wish to find out more and clarify this essential
pre-knowledge. The validity and reliability of educational statistics (edumetrics) referred to in these
papers are directly related to the validity and reliability of the measures that comprise those
statistics. Thus, at best, edumetrics will indicate rather than define particular relationships and
trends. For example, an edumetric that refers to learner progress over a period of time will bring
with it all the issues related to validity and reliability that are associated with the measures of
attainment at the start and the end of the given period.
For the purpose of distinction, edumetrics that refer to pupil’s and groups of pupils’ attainment and
progress are labelled as ‘micro-edumetrics’. In short, micro-edumetrics’ are about what goes on
inside a school and are helpful in self evaluation and consequent management planning. In contrast,
‘macro-edumetrics’ compare schools with each other and indicate patterns and trends in relation to
geographic areas and types of schools.
This paper considers micro-edumetrics. A separate and related paper on macro edumetrics is
available.
It explains the basis for some of the measures used and selects ‘real’ examples of how these
edumetrics may be used to present and represent data and illustrate features of learning outcomes
in schools.
The illustrations are examples drawn from a wider range of analyses, diagrams, graphs and tables, all
of which have been used by schools working with Ecarda Ltd over the past six years. Some are now
commonplace, but others not.
Together they form part of an essential toolkit that enables schools to identify areas of strength and
to pinpoint areas which may need to be looked at. Most of these illustrations are readily developed
by feeding the school’s pupil-level data into the Ecarda templates. In short Ecarda has created ‘addons’ which create reports from the schools own datasets.
Page 2
Attainment Measures
Beyond the day-to-day informative assessment of pupils’ work, teachers make occasional summative
assessments which indicate what pupils have attained, or where they have reached.
They are assisted in this task by referring to descriptions of typical performance which are presented
as level descriptions for National Curriculum key stages; as grade descriptions for GCSE; and as
stages of development for the Early Years Foundation Stage.
National Curriculum level descriptions are associated with National Curriculum (NC) levels which run
from level 1 up to level 8. A ‘W’ – Working toward, is used to describe attainment below level 1,
whilst ‘EP’ – Exceptional Performance, is used to describe attainment beyond level 8. This scale is
used for pupils working through key stages 1, 2 and 3. Currently, pupils working through Key Stage 1
may attain up to level 3, those working through Key Stage 2 may attain up to level 5, and those
working through Key Stage 3 may attain up to level 8 (with the proviso of EP). National Curriculum
(NC) points are ascribed to each level according to the following convention:
NC level
NC points
W
3
1
9
2
15
3
21
4
27
5
33
6
39
7
45
8
51
A more finely differentiated eight-point scale, known as the P Scale, with its own ‘level’ descriptions,
has been developed in order to recognise and record the attainment of pupils with special needs
who may also be working below National Curriculum Level 1.
The structure of the National Curriculum attainment scales was informed by the recommendations
of the Task Group on Assessment and Testing (TGAT) under the chairmanship of Professor Black who
reported to the then Secretary of State for Education and Science on Christmas Eve 1987. TGAT
recommended a ten-point scale that assumed an average expected progress rate of a level every
two years. At this time it was suggested that the top end of these scales should match and subsume
the GCSE grade measures. In the event, GCSE grades were retained and the National Curriculum
levels (up to level 8) apply to the end of Key Stage 3.
For plotting progress through both Key Stages 3 and 4, typically the English secondary school phase,
it is possible to re-establish the original all through scale. More will be said about this later.
GCSE Grade descriptions are associated with GCSE grades which run from grade G to grade A*. A ‘U’
– Unclassified, is used to describe attainment below grade G. Points, still known as QCA
(Qualification and Curriculum Authority) points are ascribed to each grade according to the following
convention:
GCSE grade
QCA points
U
0
G
16
F
22
E
28
D
34
C
40
B
46
A
52
A*
58
The “distance” between GCSE grades is numerically equivalent to the distance between National
Curriculum levels.
Page 3
In the Early Years Foundation Stage, the stages of development through each of 13 areas of learning
(known as assessment scales) are each ascribed a scale point score ranging from 0 to 9.
Scale Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
There is a risk in working with these different educational attainment points scores that one drifts
away from educational attainment meanings: There is a risk of losing validity. For example, ascribing
to a pupil a NC level 4 in “Shape and Space” carries with it the meaning that the NC level 4 level
description in the attainment target known as Shape and Space (which is one of the four attainment
targets in mathematics) best describes that pupil’s current work in the area of shape and space. This
appears to have meaning. Because of the breadth (or depth) of each level description – one level
each two years, teachers of pupils in Key Stages 1, 2 and 3 moved towards using a three-point
subscale, such as 4C, 4B, 4A so that annual reports to parents could make visible National Curriculum
level changes or progression. Indeed, in Key Stage 1, levels 1C, 1B and 1A became part of the
national reporting arrangements. Though levels were being used beyond the TGAT design brief, the
vocabulary of sub-levels became widespread. Assessors argued that if a pupil’s work matched fully
everything in a particular level description: secure in stated knowledge and showing mastery of
stated skills then that warranted an ‘A’ sublevel. A pupil’s work that showed beginnings of stated
knowledge and understanding with emerging competence and confidence with the stated skills
warranted a ‘C’ sublevel. All evidence between A and C warranted a ‘B’ sublevel. By comparing the
pupil’s work with the level description below and the level description above, and using a range of
assessment tools, teachers’ assessments of pupils’ work have strong features of validity and
reliability.
Inferring from an interpolation of the TGAT design, assessors argued that if expected progress is one
level each two years, then this equates to three sublevels over that period.
It is a simple exercise to relate these National Curriculum sublevels to National Curriculum points
scores:
NC level
NC points
W2
W
3
W+
5
1C
7
1B
9
1A
11
2C
13
2B
15
2A
17
NC level
NC points
3C
19
3B
21
3A
23
4C
25
4B
27
4A
29
5C
31
5B
33
5A
35
NC level
NC points
6C
37
6B
39
6A
41
7C
43
7B
45
7A
47
8C
49
8B
51
8A
53
It is also possible to mirror this on the grade scale for GCSE, for example, describing a student’s
current attainment as a tentative, average or very secure grade C.
Whilst the GCSE grade descriptions refer specifically to attainment in a subject, the National
Curriculum level descriptions sometimes refer to strands of a subject. For example, English has level
descriptions in the three attainment targets of: speaking and listening; reading; and writing.
Mathematics has level descriptions in the four attainment targets of: using and applying
Page 4
mathematics; number and algebra; shape, space and measures; and statistics. In Foundation Stage
there are thirteen distinct assessment scales which are variously brought together to describe
attainment in a particular areas of development – proto-subjects.
It is the bringing together of these strands that uses the different points score scales. For example,
attainment in mathematics is represented by a combination of attainment in the constituent
attainment target scales, and likewise English. Where tests are used as the only measure of
attainment in a subject, then the weighting of attainment on the constituent attainment target
scales may not be equal. Thus, for example, a level 4 in science does not have a singular meaning.
That said, aggregation of attainment points scores within and across subjects is commonplace.
Some examples of what may be called attainment edumetrics are set out below:
a) At the end of Foundation Stage, a child may be ascribed an average scale point score
representing attainment across all or groups of the thirteen assessment scales
b) At the end of a Key Stage 1, a child may be ascribed an average point score representing
attainment across Reading, Writing and Mathematics;
c) At the end of Key Stage 2, a pupil may be ascribed an average point score representing
attainment across English and Mathematics;
d) At the end of Key Stage 3, a student may ascribed an average point score representing
attainment across English, Mathematics and Science;
e) At the end of Key Stage 4, a student may be ascribed an average point score representing
attainment across his or her best eight subjects;
f) At the end of all key stages, a class or cohort average point score may be calculated within or
across subjects (or assessment scales) – these may be broken down by gender, age or any
other group characteristic.
There is an increasing tendency to produce these attainment micro edumetrics annually.
Attainment edumetrics, plotted over time and benchmarked against national comparators provide
useful information on institutional performance.
Before leaving this brief consideration of attainment measures, it needs to be affirmed that numbercoded reports on attainment carry little meaning. A report which states that George is a confident
and enthusiastic reader, who worked with a group of his friends to translate a chapter from his
favourite book of the term into a short play that was performed to the class, is meaning rich.
“Reading 4A” (or 29 points) carries little meaning as a report, but may be very useful as a record.
Page 5
An all-through scale?
Tracking attainment through a secondary school (11 – 16) could be inhibited by having two
attainment scales. Pupils enter Year 7 having recently completed their end of Key Stage 2
assessments which are measured on the National Curriculum level scale, which may be translated
into National Curriculum points. Using marks from the Year 6 assessments, it is commonplace to
derive finely differentiated levels and/or points to facilitate the calculation of value added measures
over both Key Stages 3 and 4 five years hence.
Typically, attainment in the first two or three years in the secondary school (Key Stage 3) is
measured on the same National Curriculum scale, albeit with reference to a different National
Curriculum programme of study. However, attainment at the end of Key Stage 4 is measured on the
GCSE grade scale which relates to QCA points.
The two scales are explained in the section above.
Given that the original National Curriculum design for 5 to 16 year olds was informed by the TGAT
recommendation for a ten-level National Curriculum, also mentioned in the previous section, it is
possible to reconstruct this scale alongside the GCSE grade scale with its associated QCA points
score. The diagram on the next page shows this reconstruction with the inferred equivalences.
Incorporated into the diagram for reference and interest, are the 2011 national attainment
measures.
Clearly, the lower end of the GCSE grade scale has little relationship with its equivalences on the
National Curriculum scale because each refers to its own National Curriculum key stage related
programme of study, nevertheless the diagram provides an interesting comparison.
Indeed, nationally published secondary school statistics on value added and proportions of students
making ‘expected’ progress are based on assumed reconstructions of a Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4
all-through scale.
The next section looks in more detail at progress measures and the diagram below will reappear in a
form that may be used to pitch and track progress.
Page 6
The National Curriculum scale set alongside the GCSE scale
Page 7
Progress Measures
The usefulness of the different points scales is more evident when looking at progress, rather than at
attainment. Many argue that progress is a ‘closer’ measure of success than attainment: The distance
covered over a given time period reflects more closely personal achievement than the point
reached. The distance covered may more closely reflect the impact of the school on learning.
Clearly, both measures have value – the former intrinsic and the latter extrinsic. The difference is
akin to the Economics notions of value in use and value in exchange.
An inference from the TGAT design would be that the expected progress of a level every two years
equates to progress of six points over two years, which in turn equates to three points per year. This
can be taken further to a point a term but perhaps this is the stage of reductio ad absurdum.
If progress is the distance travelled over a period, then attainment measures indicate the start and
end positions for that period. Attainment expressed quantitatively allows a simple subtraction to
arrive at a measure of progress. A helpful progress edumetric unit is “points per year”. This is
readily calculable, as are the national comparators.
When applied to a single person a quantitative measure of progress carries little meaning. Knowing
that a pupil started the year as a tentative reader but two terms later can read fluently and with
understanding is more helpful than knowing that pupil made so many points progress. However,
when dealing with groups of pupils these progress edumetrics can take on significant meanings.
The page immediately following this one shows the current national outcome measures of progress.
National cohort data is matched so that, for example in relation to progress over Key Stage 2, 2011
Key Stage 2 attainment outturn measures are compared with 2007 Key Stage 1 outturn measures
Further pages of charts and tables across Foundation Stage and Key Stages 1 to 4, preceded by a list
of contents, illustrate different presentations of attainment and progress edumetrics. They use real
data from schools which has been made anonymous. Each key stage collection of illustration is
preceded with a commentary.
These illustrations are typically examples drawn from suites of related presentations.
Page 8
National Progress Rates (August 2011)
QCA APS
(best 8)
QCA APS
per
subject
NC APS
per
subject
336.6
42.1
47.1
27.3
19.8
3.96
EM weighted
EM
KS3 (Y9) 2011
KS2 (Y6) 2008
Distance travelled through KS3
points per year
36.2
27.4
8.8
2.93
EMS
EM
KS2 (Y6) 2011
KS1 (Y2) 2007
Distance travelled through KS2
points per year
27.5
15.4
12.1
3.03
EM
RWM
KS1 (Y2) 2011
FS2 (Y0) 2009
"Distance" travelled through FS2*
15.3
6.6
8.7
RWM
End of
KS4 (Y11) 2011
KS2 (Y6) 2006
Distance travelled through KS3 + 4
points per year
mean FSP score
* FSP scores are on a different scale so the figure has no validity but
it can be a useful indicator for comparing year-on-year or different
schools.
ECARDAPage
Ltd92012
LIST OF CONTENTS OF ILLUSTRATIONS
FOUNDATION STAGE 2
ATTAINMENT
1
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT OVERALL ‘ATTAINMENT’ AT THE END OF FOUNDATION STAGE 2
2
TABLES SHOWING HOW THE SCHOOL COMPARES WITH NATIONAL
3
COMPOSITE DIAGRAM SHOWING END OF YEAR ATTAINMENT
PROGRESS
4
TABLES SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH FOUNDATION STAGE 2
5
DIAGRAM SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH FOUNDATION STAGE 2
ATTAINMENT & PROGRESS
6
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH FOUNDATION STAGE 2 RELATIVE TO ATTAINMENT AT ITS END
KEY STAGE 1
ATTAINMENT
7
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT OVERALL ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 1
8
GRAPH SHOWING SUBJECT ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 1
9
TABLE SHOWING SUBJECT ATTAINMENT AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 1 PRESENTED BY GENDER
PROGRESS
10
TABLE SHOWING COHORT PROGRESS THROUGH KEY STAGE 1
11
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS OF THROUGH KEY STAGE 1 RELATIVE TO ATTAINMENT AT ITS END
KEY STAGE 2
ATTAINMENT
12
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 2
13
14
TABLE SHOWING SUBJECT ATTAINMENT PRESENTED BY GENDER
Page 10
KEY STAGE 2
PROGRESS
15
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS OF COHORTS PASSING THROUGH KEY STAGE 2 OVER TIME
16
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF GROUPS OF PUPILS THROUGH KEY STAGE 2
17
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF PUPILS THROUGH KEY STAGE 2 IN DIFFERENT SUBJECTS
18
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF GROUPS OF PUPILS IN A YEAR GROUP OVER TWO TERMS
19
TABLE SUMMARISING ACHIEVEMENT AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 2
KEY STAGE 3
ATTAINMENT
20
21
22
PROGRESS
23
KEY STAGE 4
ATTAINMENT
24
25
26
SUMMARY TABLE SHOWING ATTAINMENT PRESENTED BY SUBJECT
PROGRESS
27
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS OF COHORTS PASSING THROUGH KEY STAGES 3 & 4 OVER TIME
28
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF PRIOR ATTAINMENT GROUPS THROUGH KEY STAGES 3 & 4 OVER TIME
29
TABLE SHOWING COMPARATIVE PROGRESS OF PRIOR ATTAINMENT GROUPS THROUGH KEY STAGES 3
&4
Page 11
ILLUSTRATION 1
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT OVERALL ‘ATTAINMENT AT THE END OF FOUNDATION STAGE 2
(FS2 ATT)
By setting the school’s score over time on the same chart as national the school can see its own
progress over time and compare this to the national picture.
ILLUSTRATION 2
TABLES SHOWING HOW THE SCHOOL COMPARES WITH NATIONAL (FS2 ATT)
Scale point 6 is taken as an expectation or benchmark as this is used nationally. The tables show a
breakdown by gender. Significant differences are made visible. The last two columns look at the
‘gender differences’ and compare these with national.
ILLUSTRATION 3
COMPOSITE DIAGRAM SHOWING END OF YEAR ATTAINMENT (FS2 ATT)
The year group average for each assessment scale is calculated and displayed on a spider chart.
There is a web for each of girls and boys. Significant features are made visible.
Page 12
Illustration 1
Mean Foundation Stage Profile score
90
88
Points
86
school
84
national
82
80
78
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Page 13
Illustration 2
Foundation Stage 2: Analysis of 6+ points (2011)
Linking Sounds & Letters
Scale Point
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total
6+
%6+ sch
%6+ (nat)
F
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
2
0
1
1
7
9
16
7
4
11
1
1
2
18
15
83.3
82
19
15
78.9
72
37
30
81.1
77
M
Total
g-diff (sch)
g-diff (nat)
4.4
10.0
g-diff (sch)
g-diff (nat)
15.2
10.0
g-diff (sch)
g-diff (nat)
9.6
19.0
g-diff (sch)
g-diff (nat)
-6.4
5.0
g-diff (sch)
g-diff (nat)
9.6
9.0
g-diff (sch)
g-diff (nat)
3.8
11.0
Reading
Scale Point
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total
6+
%6+ sch
%6+ (nat)
F
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
2
3
5
3
8
6
9
15
4
1
5
1
1
2
18
16
88.9
79
19
14
73.7
69
37
30
81.1
74
M
Total
Writing
Scale Point
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total
6+
%6+ sch
%6+ (nat)
F
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
2
3
2
1
3
6
8
14
6
5
11
3
1
4
0
0
0
18
15
83.3
75
19
14
73.7
56
37
29
78.4
65
M
Total
Calculating
Scale Point
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total
6+
%6+ sch
%6+ (nat)*
F
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
3
2
5
3
2
5
6
8
14
4
5
9
1
1
2
18
14
77.8
78
19
16
84.2
73
37
30
81.1
76
M
Total
1
Social Development
Scale Point
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total
6+
%6+ sch
%6+ (nat)
F
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
8
13
8
21
2
5
7
0
1
1
0
0
0
18
15
83.3
90
19
14
73.7
81
37
29
78.4
86
M
Total
Emotional Development
Scale Point
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total
6+
%6+ sch
%6+ (nat)
F
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
3
3
5
2
7
1
1
2
8
7
15
4
5
9
0
0
0
18
13
72.2
87
19
13
68.4
76
37
26
70.3
81
M
Total
Page 14
Foundation Stage 2 Attainment by gender (2011)
Illustration 3
DA
8.0
CD
SD
7.0
6.0
5.0
PD
ED
4.0
3.0
2.0
KUW
LCT
1.0
girls
0.0
boys
SSM
LSL
C
R
NLC
W
Page 15
ILLUSTRATION 4
TABLES SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH FOUNDATION STAGE 2 (FS2 PROG)
These tables take ‘still photographs’ of average scale point scores in each of the thirteen assessment
scales. These ‘photographs’ are taken at four points during the year: September (as baseline),
December (end of term 1), March (end of term 2) and June (end of year). Teachers enter these data
at these times. An Ecarda FS2 attainment template exists for these figures to be calculated
automatically from a pupil-level entry sheet.
Progress in each assessment scale is taken as the distance between the first and last measures and
this is calculated automatically.
This table presents progress split by gender and relative rankings are displayed automatically.
ILLUSTRATION 5
DIAGRAM SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH FOUNDATION STAGE 2 (FS2 PROG)
This ‘expanding spider-graph’ uses the same data as in the previous illustration and is generated
automatically from the teacher’s input of pupil-level information over the year.
This example, not split by gender, uses the start and end average scale point score in each of the
thirteen assessment scales.
Progress made is graphically evident.
ILLUSTRATION 6
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH FOUNDATION STAGE 2 RELATIVE TO ATTAINMENT AT ITS
END (FS2 ATT + PROG)
This graph uses the same data as in the previous illustration and is generated automatically from the
teacher’s input of pupil-level information over the year.
This example, not split by gender, allows progress and attainment to be disaggregated yet
compared.
It makes evident those assessment scales which refer to more ‘exceptional cases: For example whilst
average attainment in “numbers for labels and counting” (NLC) is relatively high, progress on this
assessment scale is relatively low.
Page 16
Illustration 4
FS2 Average Points Score per Scale
Girls
DA
SD
ED
LCT
LSL
R
W
NLC
C
SSM
KUW
PD
CD
Sep-09
2.3
2.3
1.8
1.4
0.8
1.0
1.4
2.2
0.7
2.3
0.9
1.8
1.2
Dec-09
4.6
4.3
3.6
3.4
3.2
3.1
2.5
4.9
2.4
3.9
4.3
3.8
3.8
Mar-10
6.9
5.6
4.4
6.3
5.3
5.1
5.3
6.3
4.3
5.6
6.5
6.4
5.7
Jun-10
7.3
6.5
6.5
6.9
6.1
6.3
5.6
7.2
6.5
6.1
6.9
7.5
7.5
Progress
5.0
4.2
4.7
5.5
5.3
5.3
4.2
5.0
5.8
3.8
6.0
5.7
6.3
Boys
DA
SD
ED
LCT
LSL
R
W
NLC
C
SSM
KUW
PD
CD
Sep-09
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.3
0.5
0.8
1.2
2.4
0.3
1.8
1.0
1.3
0.7
Dec-09
4.8
4.3
3.8
3.8
3.6
3.4
2.5
4.9
1.8
3.6
4.6
3.8
3.2
Mar-10
6.6
5.8
4.8
5.8
5.5
4.9
4.2
6.3
4.2
5.5
6.5
5.8
5.3
Jun-10
7.8
6.7
6.2
6.9
6.2
5.9
5.6
7.0
6.7
6.1
6.9
6.8
7.1
Progress
6.3
4.9
4.4
5.6
5.7
5.1
4.4
4.6
6.4
4.3
5.9
5.5
6.4
All
DA
SD
ED
LCT
LSL
R
W
NLC
C
SSM
KUW
PD
CD
Sep-09
2.0
2.1
1.8
1.4
0.6
0.9
1.3
2.3
0.5
2.0
1.0
1.6
1.0
Dec-09
4.7
4.3
3.7
3.6
3.4
3.2
2.5
4.9
2.1
3.8
4.4
3.8
3.6
Mar-10
6.8
5.7
4.6
6.0
5.4
5.0
4.8
6.3
4.2
5.5
6.5
6.1
5.5
Jun-10
7.5
6.6
6.4
6.9
6.2
6.1
5.6
7.1
6.6
6.1
6.9
7.2
7.3
Progress
5.5
4.5
4.6
5.5
5.6
5.2
4.3
4.8
6.1
4.1
5.9
5.6
6.3
Page
ECARDA
Ltd172010
FS2 2009-2010
Illustration 5
DA
8.0
CD
SD
7.0
6.0
5.0
PD
ED
4.0
3.0
2.0
KUW
LCT
1.0
end of FS2 Jun 10
0.0
start of FS2 Sep 09
SSM
LSL
C
R
NLC
W
Page
ECARDA
Ltd182010
FS2 2009-2010
Illustration 6
6.5
CD
C
6
Over the year progress (average scale points)
KUW
LSL
PD
5.5
LCT
DA
R
5
NLC
ED
4.5
SD
W
SSM
4
3.5
3
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
End of the year attainment (average scale points)
Page
ECARDA
Ltd192010
ILLUSTRATION 7
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT OVERALL ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 1 (KS1
ATT)
Using the overall cohort average (points score) for attainment in each of reading, writing and
mathematics the school can see trends and comparisons. Other graphs in this Key Stage 1 toolkit
overlay the national comparators.
ILLUSTRATION 8
GRAPH SHOWING SUBJECT ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 1 (KS1 ATT)
This example shows attainment of the cohort over time in writing and presents the data in terms of
the percentage of the cohort who attain level 2B or higher. Other graphs in the toolkit consider,
reading and mathematics, and look at attainment of level 2 or higher.
By putting the comparative national data on the same graph the schools’ trends are made visible.
ILLUSTRATION 9
TABLE SHOWING SUBJECT ATTAINMENT AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 1 PRESENTED BY GENDER
(KS1 ATT)
This example from the toolkit considers Writing. By setting all data alongside the national
comparisons, the columns on the right hand side, which generate automatically, are information
rich. At a glance any significant gender differences are evident as are any variances from national.
Page 20
Illustration 7
Key Stage1 Subject APS over time
20.0
19.0
18.0
17.0
16.0
Writing APS
15.0
Maths APS
Reading APS
14.0
13.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year
Page 21
Illustration 8
Key Stage1 Writing L2b+ over time
100.0
90.0
80.0
Writing L2b+ (school)
70.0
Writing L2b+ (national)
60.0
50.0
40.0
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year
Page 22
Illustration 9
Someplace Primary
"managing performance to improve outcomes for young people"
Analysis of Key Stage 1 results (subject level report)
SUBJECT:
English - Writing
L4
L3
L2A
L2B/2
L2C
L1
W
Dis
A
FEMALES
Input your female student numbers here
school % outcomes:
National % outcomes:
0.0
0
3
20.0
16
2
13.3
24
3
20.0
29
5
33.3
18
1
6.7
11
1
6.7
2
0.0
0
0.0
0
MALES
Input your male student numbers here
school % outcomes:
0.0
0
5
20.8
8
7
29.2
16
6
25.0
27
3
12.5
23
2
8.3
19
1
4.2
5
0.0
0
0.0
0
ALL
school outcomes:
school % outcomes:
0
0.0
0
8
20.5
12
9
23.1
20
9
23.1
28
8
20.5
21
3
7.7
15
2
5.1
4
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
YEAR:
2011
L2+
L2B+
L3+
15
13
86.7
87
8
53.3
69
3
20.0
16
24
21
87.5
74
18
75.0
51
5
20.8
8
39
34
87.2
81
26
66.7
60
8
20.5
12
females
males
all
-0.3
13.5
6.2
-15.7
24.0
6.7
4.0
12.8
8.5
school
national
diff
21.7
-18.0
-39.7
No. of
entries
school / National differences:
Total points:
Average points per entry:
sch
nat
593 1432
15.2 14.32
diff
0.9
Gender difference (M-F) for 2B+:
National data is taken from DfE SFR26/2010 table 3a
Report designed by ECARDA Ltd 2005
Page 23
ILLUSTRATION 10
TABLE SHOWING COHORT PROGRESS THROUGH KEY STAGE 1 (KS1 PROG)
Calculating a valid measure of progress through Key Stage 1 is tricky.
The basis for and calibration of the Foundation Stage assessment scales used to measure attainment
at occasions through Foundation Stage is different to basis for and calibration of the National
Curriculum scale used to measure attainment through and at the end of Key Stage 1.
The designers of the nine-point Foundation Stage assessment scale suggested that a child
demonstrating behaviours and performance that matches Foundation Stage scale point 9 may be
demonstrating performance similar to that associated with Level 1 on the National Curriculum scale,
which, coincidentally (?) is ascribed 9 National Curriculum points. (see the tables presented in the
introduction to this document)
The ‘average’ scale point score of a child at by the end of Foundation Stage 2 refers to that child’s
performance across the full breadth of 13 assessment scales, whilst the average points score for a
child at the end of Key Stage 1 refers to performance specifically across the attainment targets of
reading, writing and mathematics.
Given the different natures of these two scales it remains possible to find the numerical difference
between them for any given child. By dividing by 2 this will give a ‘points’ per year measure. For a
cohort of children this may be benchmarked with a national comparator.
Whilst this figure does not refer to specific learning gains, it does indicate a sort of progress: a proxy
progress measure if you will.
The pupil-level table is self evident and allows some inferences to be drawn on relative (not
absolute) patters of progress over Key Stage 1. Plotted over time, this edumetric could indicate
trends of improvement (or otherwise) in the quality of provision. It has the possibility of comparing
the progress of groups with the cohort norm.
ILLUSTRATION 11
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS THROUGH KEY STAGE 1 RELATIVE TO ATTAINMENT AT ITS END (KS1
ATT + PROG)
This scattergraph used the same data as the previous table.
This example allows progress and attainment to be disaggregated yet compared.
By showing the points positions relative to the line of best fit, it makes evident those children whose
outcomes may be atypical.
Page 24
Bailey
Daniel
Bailey
Oliver
Barker-Gibbons
Nancy
Barlow
Oliver
Boyce
Lauren
Clubby
Lily
Griffiths
Connor
Guerin
Conal
Isgate
Gemma
Jackman
Abbie
Kennedy
Chloe
Lamb
Charles
Lead
Dylan
Lorne
Millie
Miles-ScottEloise
Moore
Samuel
Pearson
Thomas
Ponsonby
Ethan
Render
Jack
Rimmington Adam
Rowson
Dylan
Sellers
Evie
Shutt
Oscar
Sims
Leah
Smith
Chloe
Smith
Emily
Smith
Paul
Smith
Toby
Townhill
Samuel
Tutty
Lewis
Wallis
Leon
Warner
Ben
Watson
William
White
Harry
Wilkinson
Robbie
Wilson
Abigail
"Distance" travelled
Judy
KS1 APS
Olivia
Albattal
FSP Mean scale point
score
Adams
Illustration 10
Gen
Surname
Forename
KEY STAGE 1 PROGRESS
F
F
M
M
F
M
F
F
M
M
F
F
F
M
M
F
F
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
M
F
F
F
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
5.8
8.2
2.5
3.7
6.9
7.2
7.2
7.8
8.2
6.1
7.5
6.8
6.2
7.4
6.6
7.2
3.9
6.2
7.0
6.2
7.2
8.1
4.5
5.8
6.3
5.1
3.4
4.5
2.8
5.5
7.0
6.8
6.2
7.6
6.5
7.3
7.4
7.5
18.3
21.0
10.3
5.0
15.0
21.0
16.3
19.7
21.0
14.3
21.0
13.7
13.0
18.3
21.0
18.3
10.3
17.7
19.7
15.7
17.7
21.0
18.3
13.7
19.7
11.7
7.0
11.7
13.0
13.7
16.3
19.7
15.0
21.0
17.0
17.0
13.7
14.3
12.5
12.8
7.9
1.3
8.1
13.8
9.1
11.8
12.8
8.3
13.5
6.8
6.8
10.9
14.4
11.2
6.4
11.4
12.7
9.4
10.4
12.9
13.8
7.8
13.4
6.6
3.6
7.1
10.2
8.2
9.3
12.8
8.8
13.4
10.5
9.7
6.3
6.9
1
3
2A
2B
2C
W
Mean All
Mean Male
Mean Female
9.8
10.6
8.7
National
8.7
8.5
9
ECARDA Ltd 2011
Page 25
25.0
Illustration 11
Key Stage 1 Progress
20.0
KS1 APS
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
FS2 ASPS
Page
ECARDA
Ltd262011
ILLUSTRATION 12
GRAPH SHOWING ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 2 (KS2 ATT)
This graph considers the percentage of the cohort who attains level 4 or higher over time in both
English and mathematics. Trends and comparisons are made visible. Other graphs in this Key Stage
2 toolkit overlay the national comparators whilst others use average points scores as their
edumetric.
ILLUSTRATION 13
This example shows attainment of the cohort over time in English and presents the data in terms of
the percentage of the cohort who attain level 5 or higher. Other graphs in the toolkit consider,
reading and mathematics, and look at attainment of level 4 or higher.
ILLUSTRATION 14
TABLE SHOWING SUBJECT ATTAINMENT PRESENTED BY GENDER (KS2 ATT)
This example from the toolkit considers Writing. By setting all data alongside the national
Page 27
Key Stage 2 Level 4+ by subject over time
Illustration 12
100
95
90
85
English L4+
80
Maths L4+
75
70
65
60
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year
Page 28
Key Stage 2 English L5 over time
Illustration 13
60
55
50
45
40
English L5 (school)
35
English L5 (national)
30
25
20
15
10
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year
Page 29
Someplace Primary
Illustration 14
SUBJECT:
English - Writing
L5
L4
FEMALES
school % outcomes:
9
37.5
25
MALES
school % outcomes:
ALL
school outcomes:
school % outcomes:
YEAR:
2011
L3-
L4+
L5
24
5
20.8
19
19
79.2
82
9
37.5
25
24
7
29.2
32
17
70.8
68
6
25.0
15
48
12
25.0
25
36
75.0
75
15
31.3
20
females
males
all
1.8
-2.8
0.0
-2.8
2.8
0.0
12.5
10.0
11.3
Gender difference (M-F) for 4+:
school
national
diff
-8.3
-14.0
-5.7
B
A
0
0.0
1
1
4.2
3
0.0
0
0
0.0
1
4.2
2
0
0.0
5
0.0
1
0
0.0
0
1
2.1
1
1
2.1
4
0
0.0
0
L3
L2
10
41.7
57
4
16.7
15 .
0
0.0
6
25.0
15
11
45.8
53
6
25.0
24 .
15
31.3
20
21
43.8
55
10
20.8
20
N
No. of
entries
sch
Total points: 1302
Average points per entry: 27.1
nat
2640
.
26.4
diff
0.7
2011 National data is taken from DfE SFR18-2011 table 4
Page 30
ILLUSTRATION 15
(KS2 PROG)
By using matched data for each child it is possible to calculate how far they have travelled using their
Key Stage 1 average points score as their start position and their Key Stage 2 average points score as
their end position. The average distance for a cohort is presented as the arithmetic mean. A division
by four produces the points per year edumetric.
By setting this line against the national comparator, a picture of the school’s performance is evident.
Since publication, both school and national figures have been adjusted to take into account an
‘overall’ Key Stage 2 average points score which is based only on English and mathematics.
ILLUSTRATION 16
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF GROUPS OF PUPILS THROUGH KEY STAGE 2 (KS2 PROG)
This table is based on the same 2011 data used in part of the previous graph. The data has been
disaggregated to show the progress (points-per-year) score for particular groups of pupils.
Calculating these edumetrics year by year makes visible the extent to which ‘gaps’ may be
narrowing.
ILLUSTRATION 17
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF PUPILS THROUGH KEY STAGE 2 IN DIFFERENT SUBJECTS
(KS2 PROG)
In this “active” composite table the blue sections only are completed annually by class teachers. The
figures on the right hand side calculate automatically and allow annual progress rates (points per
year) to be compared across subjects and year groups. The lower half also calculates automatically
giving, for each subject and year, the proportion of children who make 4 points per year (the
“pitched” rate of progress set by this particular school).
ILLUSTRATION 18
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF GROUPS OF PUPILS IN A YEAR GROUP OVER TWO TERMS
(KS2 PROG)
In this “active” table teachers insert from their records the current average points scores for each
group of pupils. Progress since the year start is calculated automatically. Automatics colour
formatting on each of the attainment and progress columns identifies variations from national
expectations and norms.
These tables are produced for each of Years 1 to 6 for each term.
Page 31
ILLUSTRATION 19
TABLE SUMMARISING ACHIEVEMENT AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 2 (KS2 ATT + PROG)
In this illustration the term ‘achievement’ is used in the sense of combining attainment with
progress.
This single page provides a picture of both attainment and progress over time and compared with
national. Data on males and females are presented separately and combined.
On this table measures of attainment are expressed as proportions of pupils who attain above levels
4 and 5 respectively. Unlike average points scores, this measure of attainment does not, by
definition, include the attainment of every pupil but it is a commonly used national benchmark.
On this table measures of progress are expressed as the proportions of pupils who make at least two
levels of progress over Key Stage 2. This edumetric is a common national benchmark edumetric
though it is a blunt measure. For example, a pupil who progresses from level 2C at the end of Key
Stage 1 to level ‘4A’ at the end of Key Stage 2 would be counted as having made two levels progress;
a pupil who progresses from level 2A at the end of Key Stage 1 to level ‘4C’ at the end of Key Stage 2
would be included in the same count, though one could have made nearly a level more in progress
than the other. Whilst this may be as accurate as the measure permits at an individual pupil level,
average points scores provide a more detailed picture when looking at cohort-wide progress.
That said this nationally benchmarked one-page summary can be helpful in communicating the
overall achievement of pupils in a school.
Page 32
Points per year over Key Stage 2
Illustration 15
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4
NC points
3.2
3.0
School
national
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year of leaving KS2
Page
ECARDA
Ltd332010
number
average
points per
year
progress
All
48
2.94
Females
24
2.84
Males
24
3.03
Lower entries (<14.5)
14
3.04
Middle entries (14.5 - 17.5)
20
2.88
Higher entries (>17.5)
14
2.92
FSM
11
2.76
SENA
7
2.74
SENP
5
2.63
GR
5
2.80
G&T
3
3.17
Ethnic minorities
2
2.92
SCHOOL 2011 KS2
PROGRESS
Illustration 16
Page
ECARDA
Ltd342010
KS1 KS2 progress
NC Points progress over the year 2010-11
Illustration 17
Insert your data as numbers only in the blue boxes below. All statistics will calculate automatically
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
total gain
gain per
pupil
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
5
0
2
1
2
1
2
6
12
5
3
17
12
13
4
9
10
1
5
4
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
188
182
204
4.7
4.6
5.1
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
total gain
gain per
pupil
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
5
1
4
1
1
14
8
12
8
9
4
7
11
10
3
1
5
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
173
179
193
4.7
4.8
5.2
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
total gain
gain per
pupil
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
1
1
8
4
13
4
5
1
9
6
6
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
70
73
54
3.2
3.3
2.5
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
total gain
gain per
pupil
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
5
13
10
19
2
6
4
12
11
4
1
4
1
3
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
111
109
82
3.4
3.1
2.3
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
total gain
gain per
pupil
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
4
1
1
4
1
3
11
12
3
6
10
27
8
9
1
0
4
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
141
78
111
3.8
2.1
3.0
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4+ NC
Points
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
3%
13%
0%
5%
3%
5%
3%
5%
15%
30%
13%
8%
43%
30%
33%
10%
23%
25%
3%
13%
10%
5%
0%
3%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
90%
78%
80%
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4+ NC
Points
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
3%
14%
3%
11%
3%
3%
38%
22%
32%
22%
24%
11%
19%
30%
27%
8%
3%
14%
0%
5%
8%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
86%
84%
92%
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4+ NC
Points
reading
writing
maths
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
9%
5%
0%
5%
5%
36%
18%
59%
18%
23%
5%
41%
27%
27%
0%
5%
0%
5%
9%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
5%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
45%
45%
27%
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4+ NC
Points
reading
writing
maths
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
6%
3%
3%
3%
14%
39%
29%
54%
6%
17%
11%
36%
31%
11%
3%
11%
3%
9%
3%
3%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
52%
46%
17%
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4+ NC
Points
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
5%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
11%
3%
3%
11%
3%
8%
30%
32%
8%
16%
27%
73%
22%
24%
3%
0%
11%
5%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
81%
24%
35%
Y1
40
40
40
reading
writing
maths
Y2
37
37
37
reading
writing
maths
Y3
22
22
22
reading
writing
maths
Y4
33
35
35
reading
writing
maths
Y5
37
37
37
reading
writing
maths
percentage of pupils
Y1
reading
writing
maths
Y2
reading
writing
maths
Y3
Y4
Y5
reading
writing
maths
ECARDA Ltd
Another management tool from ECARDA Ltd
Pagewww.ecarda.uk
35
End of Y4 Current
APS
APS
Y5
N
KS1 APS
Maths All
41
13.88
21.05
23.49
2.44
Maths boys
20
13.10
20.26
22.80
2.54
Maths girls
21
14.62
21.76
24.14
2.38
Maths FSM
4
7.50
15.00
17.50
2.50
Maths SENA
4
10.50
18.00
21.50
3.50
Maths SENP
5
8.60
17.00
17.80
0.80
Maths SENS
3
9.67
18.33
20.22
1.89
Maths Gypsy Roma
2
6.00
14.00
16.00
2.00
Maths EAL
1
3.00
21.00
23.00
2.00
Maths EM
6
12.00
21.00
23.67
2.67
Maths G&T
1
0.00
0.00
0.00
no entry
Reading all
41
14.12
21.39
23.29
1.90
Reading boys
20
13.40
20.20
22.30
2.10
Reading girls
21
14.81
22.52
24.24
1.72
Expected progress
Reading FSM
4
7.00
13.50
16.00
2.50
over 2 terms
Readin SEN A
4
12.00
19.00
21.00
2.00
is 2 points
Reading SENP
5
6.60
13.40
15.80
2.40
Reading SENS
3
9.67
17.00
18.33
1.33
Reading Gypsy Roma
2
6.00
13.00
14.00
1.00
Reading EAL
1
3.00
19.00
21.00
2.00
Reading EM
6
13.33
21.67
24.00
2.33
Reading G&T
2
20.00
27.00
31.00
4.00
Writing all
41
13.00
19.34
21.39
2.05
Writing boys
20
12.10
17.70
20.00
2.30
Writing girls
21
13.86
20.90
22.71
1.81
Writing FSM
4
6.00
11.50
13.50
2.00
Writing SENA
4
10.50
16.50
19.00
2.50
Writing SENP
5
6.60
11.00
13.80
2.80
Writing SENS
3
8.33
13.67
15.00
1.33
Writing Gypsy Roma
2
6.00
10.00
11.00
1.00
Writing EAL
1
3.00
19.00
23.00
4.00
Writing EM
6
11.67
20.00
22.67
2.67
Writing G&T
3
20.00
28.00
30.00
2.00
>25
<21
≥2.3
<1.7
Progress
Notes
Illustration 18
Page 36
2011
Illustration 19
Someplace Primary Academy 2011 Achievement Summary
ACTUAL
2009
ACTUAL
2010
ACTUAL
2011
NAT'L
2011
All
All
All
94%
61%
93%
94%
56%
94%
99%
62%
99%
82%
35%
80%
English and Maths Level 5+
All
All
35%
93%
42%
91%
39%
94%
21%
74%
English 2 Levels Progress
English Level 5+
English Level 4+
All
All
All
92%
41%
99%
94%
55%
93%
92%
46%
94%
83%
29%
81%
Mathematics 2 Levels Progress
Mathematics Level 5+
Girls
Girls
Girls
91%
59%
89%
95%
50%
96%
98%
55%
98%
82%
33%
80%
Girls
Girls
37%
95%
48%
95%
41%
91%
24%
77%
English Level 5+
English Level 4+
Girls
Girls
Girls
89%
41%
98%
100%
68%
100%
93%
52%
90%
80%
35%
86%
Boys
Boys
Boys
98%
63%
98%
93%
61%
93%
100%
69%
100%
83%
37%
80%
Boys
Boys
37%
95%
36%
86%
38%
98%
19%
72%
English Level 5+
English Level 4+
Boys
Boys
Boys
95%
40%
100%
88%
41%
86%
91%
40%
98%
81%
23%
77%
SUBJECT
Group
Page 37
ILLUSTRATION 20
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 3 (KS3 ATT)
This graph plots the overall attainment of students at the end of their Key Stage 3. The overall
attainment, in this case, is taken as the cohort composite average points score in each of English,
mathematics and science. Trends and comparisons with the national picture are made visible.
Other graphs in this Key Stage 3 toolkit overlay the national comparators at subject level whilst
others use proportions of students attaining above levels 5 and 6 as their edumetric.
ILLUSTRATION 21
This example drawn from the same toolkit shows attainment of the cohort over time in English and
presents the data in terms of the percentage of the cohort who attain level 6 or higher.
ILLUSTRATION 22
This example from the toolkit considers Mathematics. By setting all data alongside the national
Page 38
Overall APS over time
Illustration 20
36.5
36.0
35.5
35.0
34.5
APS school
APS national
34.0
33.5
33.0
32.5
32.0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Page 39
English L6+ over time
Illustration 21
55.0
50.0
45.0
40.0
English L6+ (school)
English L6+ (national)
Linear (English L6+ (school))
35.0
Linear (English L6+ (national))
30.0
25.0
20.0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
Page 40
Someplace High School
Illustration 22
SUBJECT:
NATIONAL YEAR:
COLLEGE YEAR:
Mathematics Year 9
2008
2009
L8
L7
L6
L5
L4
L3
L2
L1
W
A
Number
eligible
L5+
L6+
L7+
FEMALES
school % outcomes:
15
7.5
7
54
27.0
22
69
34.5
28
44
22.0
23
18
9.0
13
0
0.0
5
0
0.0
1
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
1
200
100.0
100
182
91.0
80
138
69.0
57
69
34.5
29
MALES
school % outcomes:
17
8.7
9
59
30.3
22
63
32.3
26
36
18.5
21
20
10.3
13
0
0.0
6
0
0.0
1
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
1
195
100.0
99
175
89.7
78
139
71.3
57
76
39.0
31
ALL
school outcomes:
school % outcomes:
32
8.1
8
113
28.6
22
132
33.4
27
80
20.3
22
38
9.6
13
0
0.0
5
0
0.0
1
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
1
395
100.0
99
357
90.4
79
277
70.1
57
145
36.7
30
females
males
all
11.0
11.7
11.4
12.0
14.3
13.1
5.5
8.0
6.7
Gender difference (M-F) for 6+:
school
national
2.3
0.0
sch
nat
Total QCA points: 15531 3648
Average QCA points per entry: 39.3 36.5
2009 National data is taken from DCSF SFR30/2009 table 5
ECARDA KS3 template 2005
Page 41
ILLUSTRATION 23
(KS3 PROG)
By using matched data for each student it is possible to calculate how far they have travelled using
their Key Stage 2 average points score as their start position and their Key Stage 3 average points
score as their end position. The average distance for a cohort is presented as the arithmetic mean.
A division by four produces the points per year edumetric.
In this particular example the academy has moved to a two-year Key Stage 3 whilst the national
comparator continues to be based on a three-year Key Stage 3. The use of the unit ‘points per year’
allows comparisons to remain.
Similar graphs may be constructed to illustrate the relative progress made by different groups of
students, for example:


Males and females;
Students for whom the school receives additional funding.
Again similar graphs may be used to illustrate the relative progress made in English, mathematics
and science.
Page 42
Points per year progress over KS3
Illustration 23
4.0
3.5
average points per year
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.0
national
2.5
academy
2.3
2.3
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Page
ECARDA
Ltd432009
ILLUSTRATION 24
GRAPH SHOWING COHORT OVERALL ATTAINMENT OVER TIME AT THE END OF KEY STAGE 4
(KS4 ATT)
This graph presents the percentage of the cohort who attains five or more passes at GCSE grade C or
higher, including English and mathematics over time. Both the school and national figures are
shown. Trends and comparisons are made visible. Other graphs in this Key Stage 4 toolkit use
average points scores as their edumetric. A common measure is the “capped average points score”
which, at student level, calculates the total points value of his/her best eight GCSE results, which
may be divided by eight to find an average points score per subject for that pupil. At a whole school
level, the average of all the students’ “best eight” totals is calculated.
ILLUSTRATION 25
This example from the toolkit considers the subject: Economics. By setting all data alongside the
national comparisons, the columns on the right hand side, which generate automatically, are
information rich. At a glance any significant gender differences are evident as are any variances
from national. The toolkit includes pages for all subjects offered at GCSE. Pages are refreshed
annually, in August, with the latest national data.
ILLUSTRATION 26
SUMMARY TABLE SHOWING ATTAINMENT PRESENTED BY SUBJECT (KS4 ATT)
This table is generated automatically for the set of all the subject specific pages shown above. It
provides a composite picture of attainment in all subjects. Subject comparisons using different
edumetrics are shown in terms of the ‘distance’ from the national comparators: average points
score; the proportion of A+ grades; the gender difference at the proportion of C+ grades; the
proportion of C+ grades; and the proportion of G+ grades.
Significant variations from the national comparators are colour flagged automatically.
Page 44
GCSE 5+ A*-C including English & Maths over time
Illustration 24
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
2004
2005
2006
2007
National
2008
2009
2010
2011
Academy
Page 45
Someplace Academy
Illustration 25
Analysis of GCSE results (subject level report)
SUBJECT:
Economics
A*
FEMALES
School % outcomes:
MALES
School % outcomes:
ALL
School outcomes:
School % outcomes:
B
C
2011
A* - G
A* - C
A* - A
D
E
F
2
10
24
25
11
2.5 12.7 30.4 31.6 13.9
5.2 21.7 33.4 19.6
8.3
5
6.3
5.1
2
2.5
3.5
0
-1.6
0
-1.6
79
79
100.0
98.4
61
77.2
79.9
12
15.2
26.9
7
26
21
18
7.9 29.2 23.6 20.2
24.1 31.6 19.7
9.4
8
9.0
4.5
2
2.2
2.8
4
4.5
1.3
3
3.4
1.6
89
86
96.6
98.4
54
60.7
80.4
7
7.9
29.1
2
17
50
46
29
1.2 10.1 29.8 27.4 17.3
5.1 23.4 32.0 19.7
9.1
13
7.7
4.7
4
2.4
3.0
4
2.4
1.4
3
1.8
1.6
168
165
98.2
98.4
115
68.5
80.2
19
11.3
28.5
1.6
-1.8
-0.2
-2.7
-19.7
-11.7
-11.7
-21.2
-17.2
school
national
diff
-16.5
0.5
-17.0
0
-5.0
A
Number
G Other of entries
YEAR:
School / National differences:
school
Total GCSE points: 832
Average GCSE points per entry:
5.0
Total QCA points: 6672
Average QCA points per entry: 39.7
VA:
nat
diff
5.5
-0.6
females
males
all
43.2
-3.5
0
Gender difference (M-F) for A* to C grades:
National data is taken from JCQ tables
Page 46
Someplace Academy
Analysis of GCSE results (subject level report)
subject
APS local APS national
A*A local A*A national
Illustration 26
2011
gender diff at A*
C (M-F) local - A* C local - A*C A*G local - A*G
national
national
national
Performing Arts (Double)
0.6
18.7
-38.4
-9.0
0.8
Art and Design subjects
Business Studies
Design & Technology
Economics
English
English Literature
French
Geography
History
Mathematics
Music
Science - Additional
Religious Studies
Chemistry
Biology
Physics
Science
Spanish
Prep for working life
-1.3
7.0
1.6
-3.5
4.1
-0.7
-1.1
0.4
2.7
5.9
2.1
6.7
0.1
4.7
1.6
5.4
8.7
-1.6
34.3
-15.7
21.7
1.7
-17.2
4.9
-9.6
-12.6
-9.2
11.5
7.8
0.3
17.4
-9.4
35.7
10.2
37.9
20.0
-12.6
-0.2
-7.0
-4.3
0.7
-17.0
3.1
45.3
-12.9
-3.0
6.7
2.3
16.1
-2.5
2.7
1.4
0.3
-0.4
4.0
-24.3
5.8
7.6
26.1
6.8
-11.7
22.8
0.6
1.8
12.1
8.1
28.9
16.0
30.3
4.2
6.9
6.9
6.3
37.1
-4.1
91.8
0.5
1.5
1.5
-0.2
1.3
-0.2
0.3
0.2
1.7
1.6
1.0
0.7
1.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.9
0.6
99.0
1/2 grade or
more above
national average
10% or more
above national
average
more than 10
points above
national
difference
more than 10
points above
national
difference
more than 10
points above
national
difference
1/2 grade or
more below
national average
10% or more
below national
average
more than 10
points below
national
difference
more than 10
points below
national
difference
more than 10
points below
national
difference
Keys:
Page 47
ILLUSTRATION 27
GRAPH SHOWING PROGRESS OF COHORTS PASSING THROUGH KEY STAGES 3 & 4 OVER TIME
(KS4 PROG)
By using matched data for each student it is possible to calculate how far they have travelled using
their Key Stage 2 average points score as their start position and their Key Stage 4 average points
score as their end position. The Key Stage 4 average points score (per subject) is ‘converted back to
National Curriculum points as discussed earlier in this document. The average distance for a cohort
is presented as the arithmetic mean. A division by five produces the points per year edumetric.
ILLUSTRATION 28
TABLE SHOWING PROGRESS OF PRIOR-ATTAINMENT GROUPS THROUGH KEY STAGES 3 & 4 OVER
TIME (KS4 PROG)
This table is not based on the same 2011 data used in part of the previous graph.
Many secondary schools are assisted in their target setting by using analyses of past patterns of
progress of school cohorts stratified into five prior attainment groups. These analyses, developed by
Professor Jesson, professor at the University of York, are made at subject and whole school level.
His work in this field is available through SSAT, the Specialist Schools and Technology Trust
The five prior attainment groups (1 low; 5 high) used by Professor Jesson have become a common
way of stratifying cohorts students of students in secondary schools and are often known as Jesson
Bands.
This table makes visible the different rates of progress, using the points per year measure, for each
prior attainment group. By showing more the analysis for more than on year, the impact of school
improvement strategies is discernable.
ILLUSTRATION 29
TABLE SHOWING COMPARATIVE PROGRESS OF PRIOR-ATTAINMENT GROUPS THROUGH KEY
STAGES 3 & 4 (KS4 PROG)
This table is similar in nature the one above. The “middle block” of the table presents some of the
comparative contextual information on each school so that inferences drawn from the “bottom
block” are appropriately moderated.
By introducing more than on school in this last illustration the possibility of area-wide analyses is
presented. This moves the study from micro-edumetrics into macro edumetrics. A separate
document on macro edumetrics is available.
Page 48
Student progress rates from Y7 start to Y11 end
Illustration 27
4.5
average progress rate in points per year
4.0
3.9
3.7
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.2
3.2
3.1
3.0
3.0
academy
2.9
2.8
national
2.8
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.1
1.9
1.9
1.6
1.5
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Year of exit
Page
ECARDA
Ltd492009
Illustration 28
Progress by ability band (Y7 - Y11)
Points per year
J-Band*
1
2
3
4
5
Pts progress 2010
5.87
4.89
4.54
4.84
4.95
Pts progress 2011
4.88
4.94
5.17
5.15
5.18
*J-Band refers to Jesson bands
Page
ECARDA
Ltd502010
DIFFERENTIATED PROGRESS RATES
Illustration 29
Mean points per year through key stages 3 and 4
N = number (%) (counted only matched data)
R = rate
Jesson Band
1
2
3
4
5
low
below
average
above
high
<22.54
22.55-25.54
25.55-28.54
28.55-30.54
30.55>
Academy A (N)
20 (10%)
38 (19%)
53 (27%)
48 (24%)
37 (19%)
Academy B (N)
20 (6%)
37 (10%)
113 (32%)
91 (26%)
95 (27%)
Academy A (r)
2.87
2.39
3.29
3.32
4.26
Academy B (r)
5.87
4.89
4.54
4.84
4.95
KS2 FDAPS
ECARDA Ltd 2010
Page 51
TWO TRACKING TOOLS
As referred to in the early part of this document, the National Curriculum was designed on a model
of overall average expected progress of a level every two years: namely three points per year. The
actual national outcome rates of progress through each key stage are shown in this first section.
In ‘pitching’ progress for pupils over a year teachers will be setting their overall expectations at
rates above national medians. A common pitch rate is at 4 points per year. For teachers in Key
Stages 1, 2 and three this pitch rate can be described in terms of two sublevels progress each year.
The first tracking tool is presented as a colour-coded step diagram which maps out the staircase at
the rate of a two sublevels a year. It assumes a ‘mid-year’ summative assessment to check progress
along the staircase.
At a pupil level, National Curriculum Levels are designed for summative assessment purposes only as
they require a range of each pupil’s work to be best matched with appropriate level descriptions.
For more finely tuned assessments teachers will be measuring against curriculum related
assessment objectives which come from their shorter term plans. Teachers will also be using other
assessment tools and measures to diagnose possible gaps in pupils’ knowledge, skills and
understanding.
The second tracking tool is presented as a vertical scale as shown earlier in this document. As a class
or cohort tracking tool, this scale is overlain with a moving ‘vertical slider’, in this case set at 4 points,
which allows target setting and tracking through and across both National Curriculum and GCSE QCA
points scales.
Page 52
ECARDA™ Key Stage 2 Pupil Progress Tracker (based on 2/3 level or 4 points expected progress per year)
On entry
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
Mid Y3
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
End Y3
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
Mid Y4
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
End Y4
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
Mid Y5
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
End Y5
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
Mid Y6
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
End Y6
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
1a
1b
1c
W
For each pupil in your class, refer to their level on entry to the school (Key Stage 1 result)
Follow the colour through to your year group
Please let the pupil learning co-ordinator have the names of pupil who are
(a) more than two sublevels (colours) below expectation
(b) at two sublevels below expectation
For your own reference, note the names of all pupils who are below expectation.
Check to see if particular groups of pupils are working below expectation, for example, G&T, SEN, LAC, ESL and Gender.
Have in place clear strategies to ‘get back on track’ those below their expected trajectory.
Key Stage progress tracker design © ECARDA Ltd 2006
Page 53
ECARDA™ Key Stage 3 Pupil Progress Tracker (based on 2/3 level or 4
points expected progress per year)
On entry
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
Mid Y7
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4b
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
End Y7
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
Mid Y8
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
End Y8
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
Mid Y9
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
End Y9
8a
8b
8c
7a
7b
7c
6a
6b
6c
5a
5b
5c
4a
4b
4c
3a
3b
3c
2a
2b
2c
For each student in your class, refer to their level on entry to the school (Key Stage 2
result)
Follow the colour through to your year group
Please let the subject leader & year tutor have the names of pupil who are:
(a) more than two sublevels (colours) below expectation;
(b) at two sublevels below expectation.
For your own reference, note the names of all students who are below expectation.
Check to see if particular groups of students are working below expectation, for
example, G&T, SEN, LAC, ESL and Gender.
Have in place clear strategies to ‘get back on track’ those below their expected
trajectory.
Key Stage progress tracker design © ECARDA Ltd 2006
Page 54
Pitching, tracking and reporting progress through Key Stages 2, 3 and 4
Current national
mean attainment
NC
points
63
FD
level
10
NC
level
Tracking
level
62
End Y11 (47.1)
End Y10 (43.2e)
End Y9 (36.2)
End Y8 (33.3e)
End Y6 (27.5)
End Y2 (15.3)
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
GCSE
grade
A*
56
55
54
53
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
QCA
points
58
57
9
9.00
8.83
8.67
8.50
8.33
8.17
8.00
7.83
7.67
7.50
7.33
7.17
7.00
6.83
6.67
6.50
6.33
6.17
6.00
8
7
6
5.83
5.67
5.50
5.33
5.17
5.00
4.83
4.67
4.50
4.17
5
4
4.33
4.00
3.83
3.67
3.50
3.33
3.17
3.00
2.83
2.67
2.50
2.33
2.17
2.00
3
2
1
1
8A/9C
8A
8B/8A
8B
8C/8B
8C
7A/8C
7A
7B/7A
7B
7C/7B
7C
6A/7C
6A
6B/6A
6B
6C/6B
6C
5A/6C
5A
5B/5A
5B
5C/5B
5C
4A/5C
4A
4B/4A
4B
4C/4B
4C
3A/4C
3A
3B/3A
3B
3C/3B
3C
2A/3C
2A
2B/2A
2B
2C/2B
2C
1A/2C
1A
1B/1A
1B
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
Tracking
grade
A*
A*
A*A/A*
A+
A
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
A
A
AA/B
B+
B
B
B
BB/C
C+
C
C
C
CC/D
D+
D
D
D
DD/E
E+
E
E
E
E-
KS2 to KS4
design rate
actual median rate
pts per year
3
3.96
These figures are indicative of average gains made by all
learners in all subjects. Individual learners will be
spread around these averages. Nationally, some groups
make slower progress than others but this does not
mean that they necessarily should. ( eg: lower
attainers on entry; boys etc). Similarly, progress in
different subjects varies nationally but, again, this does
not mean it necessarily should.
KS2 to KS3 (Y9)
design rate
actual median rate
pts per year
3
2.93
E/F
F+
F
F
F
FF/G
G+
G
G
G
G-
KS1 to KS2
design rate
actual median rate
pts per year
3
3.03
1C/1B
1C
W
Page 55
ECARDA
Ltd 2008

the document

Transcription

Similar documents

Features: - Klangfarbe

the document

Promineo product overview

the document

TEMPLATES FOR RECORDING, TRACKING

Untitled - Double Penny Collection

Helping Your Family Save Money | Kids.gov

ELSB Software - Attainment Company

Chapter 5, Tofino to Bamfield

[23MB PDF]