Update on National KS2 Results 2012
By now I am sure you will have seen your updated Summary Report in RAISEonline, containing 2012 data for KS1, KS2 and Y1 Phonics Screening. No doubt you will also have noticed that the national figures at Key Stage 2 rose quite significantly this year. This has had a significant impact on both the attainment and progress elements of RAISEonline.
Attainment
Whilst in previous years, the national average attainment for English and maths have been in the region of 27.3 - 27.6, this year the national averages have risen to 28.1 (English) and 28.4 (maths).
Therefore, scores of 27.0, which in previous years would have been ‘broadly average’, this year could be showing as sig-. (This is likely to be the case for schools with average-size or larger cohorts). Similarly, scores of 29.0, which previously (for schools with average or larger cohorts) would have likely been sig+, will this year probably not be statistically significantly different to the average.
Progress
The national rates of progress were significantly higher this year than ever before, with the average increase in APS from KS1 to KS2 being in the region of 13, rather than the 12 points increase that we have been used to. Therefore, whilst your initial analysis of your KS2 results might have led you to expect a Value Added score of over 100 you might actually have found that your VA is below 100. (This would certainly be the case if your APS increase lies somewhere between 12 and 13.)
The reason for this is because the Value Added model is norm-referenced, i.e. it is worked out each year based upon the national trends evident in that same year. To explore these trends, you can download the ‘2012 KS1 to KS2 Pupil Ready Reckoner’. You will find this in RAISEonline, by clicking on the ‘Library’ link, then clicking on the link ‘How Ofsted and DfE analyse your data’. The Ready Reckoner tool allows you to explore the ‘Estimated KS2 Attainment’ (i.e. the national average attainment) for different combinations of KS1 scores. Here are two examples:
a)where a pupil has KS1 results of 2b in each of reading, writing and maths (i.e. KS1 point score=15), the KS2 Estimate is 28.1 – in other words a 13.1 point increase
b)where a pupil has KS1 results of Level 3 in each of reading, writing and maths (i.e. KS1 point score=21), the KS2 Estimate is 34.0 – in other words a 13.0 point increase
NB the KS2 estimate is based not just upon the overall KS1 APS but on the individual subject scores. For example, consider these two examples of pupils each with a KS1 APS of 17:
a)a pupil with a 2a in each of reading, writing and maths (APS=17) has a KS2 estimate of 30.2 (i.e. a 13.2 point increase)
b)a pupil with 2b in both reading and writing and a L3 in maths (APS=17) has a KS2 estimate of 31.4 (i.e. a 14.4 point increase!)
As an alternative to using the Ready Reckoner, you can also explore your pupils’ results and their ‘expected outcomes’ in the ‘VA Pupil List’ report, which you will find in the report list in RAISEonline.
How does this affect a school’s Self-Evaluation?
Where schools have written a SEF on the basis of initial analysis of the results, they might need to consider adjusting their SEF now that RAISEonline has been produced. Results that were previously thought to represent ‘above average’ progress might now in fact be seen as ‘average’ progress and, similarly, previously ‘average’ progress may now be downgraded to ‘below average’. However, you may feel in a strong enough position to stick with your initial analysis – after all, national average progress has, until now, consistently been in the region of 12 points, meaning that 13 points progress would be bordering on ‘good’. The fact that schools across the country have raised this average, through sheer hard work and tireless dedication to improving pupil outcomes, should not (in my view) diminish this effort by downgrading 13 points progress from ‘good’ to ‘requires improvement’. It is just possible (though I can offer no guarantees!) that this argument might work with Ofsted in some circumstances. Crucially, it will depend upon the quality of teaching seen in Ofsted inspections – if the Headteacher is arguing that progress is good on the basis of a 13 point increase, and progress made by children in observed lessons and in their written work can be seen to be good, this argument might just work.
It is also worth checking how your percentages of children making ‘expected progress’ compare with the national figures – if, for each level of prior attainment, these proportions are in line with or better than the national figures (89% for English and 87% for maths) then they can be said to ‘compare favourably’, which is part of the grade descriptor for ‘good’ achievement in the current Ofsted framework. (NB it is quite possible for a school to have 100% of pupils making expected progress but a Value Added score below 100. For example, a child who progresses from 2a at KS1 to 4c at KS2 has only made 8 points of progress – far short of the average of 13 points – and hence would have negative value added, but would count as having made ‘expected progress’, which is based only on the whole levels.)
What has happened this year illustrates the inherent problem of a norm-referenced system, such as Value Added. If the national average rate of progress has risen from 12 to 13 points because all schools across the country have been working incredibly hard to raise pupil achievement, one would like to think that the system could recognise this. But the fact that value-added is a norm-referenced system means that it is statistically impossible for more than about 25% of schools to be able to demonstrate ‘good progress’. If, instead, we could fix the ‘expectation’ of progress at 12 points, rather than base it on the national average, it would become theoretically possible for every school to demonstrate good, or better, progress. It may be worth bearing this in mind when explaining this year’s data to governors or, where necessary, an Ofsted inspector.
Ben Fuller, Assessment Adviser, Hertfordshire Children’s Services
November 2012