Transcript 2008 provisional GCSE results

2008 provisional National
GCSE results
16 October 2008
2008 PSA target of 60% met and exceeded.
Latest increase is the greatest since 1997
% 15 year olds achieving 5+ A*-C
66
60.9
62
58.5
56.3
58
54
51.6
50
46
64.2
47.9
45.1
49.2
52.9
53.7
50.0
46.3
42
38
34
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
prov
2008 GCSE national results
National results for pupils at the end of key stage 4 in all
schools
47.2 per cent 5+ A* - Cs (inc English and mathematics)
98.6 per cent any pass at GCSE
National results for pupils at the end of key stage 4 in the
maintained sector
47.9 per cent 5+ A* - Cs (inc English and mathematics)
99.2 per cent any passes at GCSE
% pupils achieving 5+ A*-C inc E+M (End KS4)
New PSA target sets a challenging
trajectory (for all schools)
62
58
54
50
46
42
53.0
48.0
44.7
45.6
46.3
2006
2007
47.2
38
34
2005
2008 prov
2009
2010
2011
Standards in LA maintained schools
improving faster than in all schools
A widening gender gap in science
% Achieving 2 "good" science (inc BTECs/OCRs) 2007 - 2008 Boys v Girls
52.0
51.5
50.9
51.0
50.8
50.0
49.2
48.8
49.0
48.7
National (LA Maintained) Boys
48.5
National (All) Boys
National (LA Maintained) Girls
48.0
47.7
National (All) Girls
47.0
46.0
45.0
2007
2008
Neither SATs nor SLTs in KS3
•No national targets at KS3
•Increased significance of APP for heads to monitor
cohorts
•Expert group will recommend new measures
•Likely that national samples taken to track trends
•Likely move to KS2-KS4 progress measure in 2011
•Pilot MGP schools will continue to collect TA data each
term
•Progress measures likely to appear in School Report
National Challenge:
Key principles and processes
• Schools lead their own improvement
• A balance of action for rapid impact and capacity building
• A focused, flexible, Raising Attainment Plan (RAP) developed and
monitored by a RAP Management Group (RMG)
• Six-week improvement cycles
• Challenge, support and brokerage through the National Challenge
Adviser (NCA)
• Carefully tailored and mediated support rather than support
saturation
National Strategies support
programmes
A menu of online resources setting out known good practice
grouped into three programmes and divided into small, selfcontained elements
Stronger Management Systems
Core Plus
Leading Core Subjects
SMS
A programme to ensure leadership results
in:
strong classroom practice through
effective management
reduced in-school variation by improving
consistency of practice at all levels
SMS – three themes and
ten elements
1 Developing and distributing leadership
•Effective line management
•Effective performance management
•Professional development for impact
2 Effective whole-school systems, policy and practice
•Behaviour for learning
•Assessment for learning
•Effective identification and intervention
•Quality standards in lesson planning
3 Monitoring and evaluation for impact and improvement
•Self-evaluation and good practice
•Monitoring and evaluation focused on standards
•Tracking pupils’ progress
LCS – two elements
•Two additional elements to address specific areas:
-senior and subject leaders – developing support
and challenge
-creating a positive environment for retaining
teachers and middle leaders
The next stage of the DCSF
School Improvement
Strategy
Schools where children should be making
better progress
Gaining Ground
Improving Progress in coasting secondary schools
Target group
•Overall respectable performance at
GCSE but unimpressive progress
•Have not benefited from previous
funded interventions
•Those that aren’t currently supported
by either National or City Challenge
LAs have a central role
1. Identifying coasting schools
2. Ensuring each one has an appropriate SIP
3. Facilitating the SIP to broker in high impact
support
4. Stepping up the challenge where schools do
not respond – using statutory powers where
appropriate
Identifying coasting schools – quantitative indicators
Criteria
Definition(?)
Reasonably high attaining but
progress unimpressive
Above 30% 5+A*-C EM
Below median 3L progress ks 2-4 (?)
Little or no improvement in progress < 1ppt rise in 3 yrs (Average 3 levels
from ks2 – 4 over time
progress 2005-2007 = 3ppts)
Ofsted ratings disappointing
Grade 3 or 4 overall
Complacent leadership
Ofsted grade 3 or 4 for leadership
Significant variation in performance
of groups e.g. FSM
Sig- performance in RAISE for any
underperforming group
CVA significantly below average
Sig - on RAISE all subjects (and En or Ma?)
Identifying coasting schools – qualitative indicators
Criteria (?)
Weak AfL, tracking and intervention
Poor implementation of workforce agreement
…….
Brokering high
impact support –
the offer
Delivery system
Timeline
Overcoming Barriers to Improvement
Strengthening AfL, the effectiveness of pupil
tracking and its impact on planning for
progression
Improving use of progression targets rather than
threshold targets supported/challenged by SIPs
Improving the impact/effectiveness of leadership
at senior/subject leader level
An end to uninspiring and inappropriate lessons
Challenge to raise low aspirations and
expectations
Support
•£25m package
•Additional 4 days SIP time – to include additional training
•Conference in spring for Heads, CoGs, parent governors
and SIPs
•Procurement of provider to facilitate school-to-school
support
•Targeted support to enhance pupil tracking
•Extended study support
•SMS and Core Plus versioned for this purpose
Timeline
•Publication 13 Nov
•LAs identify schools (and SIPs) – from 13
Nov – finalised once progress data released
•Launch conference(s) March 09
•Additional SIP training summer 09 (possibly
May)
Fig 1c. GCSE and equivalent trends, Birmingham compared to National,
2002- 2008
GCSE and equivalent 5A*-C Trend
National
Birmingham
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
GCSE and equivalent 5+A*-C inc. Eng & Maths Trend
Birmingham
National
50
45
40
35
30
25
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Birmingham Boys
Birmingham Girls
GCSE and equivalent 5+A*-C inc. Eng & Maths by Gender Trend
National Boys
National Girls
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
2005
2006
2007
2008
National
GCSE and equivalent 5A*-G Trend
Birmingham
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Table 2. Pupil Performance 2008: Comparison with Core Cities and
Statistical Neighbours (Provisional Results)
Phase
2008 GCSE and
Equivalent
5 A* - C
5 A* - C including
English & Maths
Any passes
Birmin
gham
Core City Statistical
Average
Neighbour
Average
Birmingham
Rank Order (out
of 17)
66.4%
45.4%
98%
60%
39%
96%
2nd
4th
=2nd
59%
41%
98%
Fig 3a. End of Key Stage 3 N C Assessments Trends and Targets: Pupil at Level 5 and Above
80%
70%
60%
50%
Targets
English
Maths
Science
57%
54%
56%56%
54%
Trends
66%
65%
60%
58%
56%
62%62%
59%
69%
67%
61%
70%
66%
70%
69%
65%
63%
73% 73%
70% 70%
69%
64%
57%
48%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2008
Fig 3b. End of Key Stage 3 N C Assessments Trends and Targets:
80%
Targets
English and Maths
Two Levels Progress English
Two Levels Progress Maths
70%
60%
Trends
70%
62%
60%
62%
60%
50%
58%
56%
55%
53%
47%
40%
36%
30%
30%
30%
27%
28%
2007
2008
20%
10%
0%
2005
2006
2009
Fig 4b. Trends and Targets for Students Achieving 5 or more GCSE and equivalent
A*-C Grades including GCSE
English and Maths
TARGET
TRENDS
70%
60%
49%
50%
47%
Percentage
45%
41%
40%
42%
39%
37%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2008
2009
Fig.6b) Progress on New Floor Targets 2006-2008 (Provisional 20/10/08)
120
100
Number of schools
80
Primary Schools trends 2006 - 2008
77
66
60
51
Secondary Schools Trends 2006 - 2008
(National Challenge floor targets)
40
30
27
20
20
0
KS2 English & M aths (Schools with le ss than 55% Le v e l 4+)
5A*-C (Schools with le ss than 30% 5A*-C incl. English & M aths)
Fig 8a. 2008 GCSE and Equivalent 5+ A*-C by Ethnic Group, Gender and Free School Meals
100%
Pupils eligible for Free School Meals
90%
Boys
Pupils not eligible for Free School Meals
Girls
80%
70%
LA Average
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
White B
White G
Afr/Carb. B
Afr/Carb. B
Bangla. B
Pakist. B
Pakist. B
Pakist. G
White B
Bangla. B
Indian B
Afr/Carb. G
Bangla. G
Pakist. G
Bangla. G
White G
Afr/Carb. G
Indian G
Indian B
Indian G
0%
FSM
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
Fig 8b. 2008 GCSE and Equivalent 5+ A*-C inc GCSE English and Maths by Ethnic Group, Gender
and Free School Meals
100%
Pupils eligible for Free School Meals
90%
Boys
Pupils not eligible for Free School Meals
Girls
80%
74%
75%
70%
57%
60%
50%
45%
LA Average
38%
40%
30%
20%
27%
18%
29%
31%
39%
46%
47%
48%
48%
50%
59%
51%
39%
33%
21%
10%
White B
Afr/Carb. B
White G
Pakist. B
Afr/Carb. B
Bangla. B
Pakist. G
Afr/Carb. G
Pakist. B
Indian B
Bangla. B
Indian G
Afr/Carb. G
White B
Bangla. G
Pakist. G
Bangla. G
White G
Indian B
Indian G
0%
FSM
FSM
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
No
FSM
One-to-one
tuition
•
‘Because every child should leave
primary school able to read, write and
count, any child who falls behind will not
be left behind – but will now have a new
guaranteed right to personal catch up
tuition.’
• Gordon Brown, September 2008
Why one-to-one tuition?
•Ensuring the right support is in place for all children, regardless of
class or social background is important in closing the attainment gap.
For those who can afford it, individual tuition has always been the
preferred method of additional support for pupils not achieving their
potential.
Session objectives
•To outline the rationale for one-to-one tuition
•To summarise the approach adopted in the
Making good progress (MGP) pilot
•To start to consider the role of local
authorities in a roll-out programme
Tuition in the MGP pilot
•One-to-one
•10 hours (plus funding for 2 hours liaison)
•Minimum of one hour per session
•Out-of-school hours
•Delivered by a qualified teacher
•Have agreed targets (with the class
teacher) for the work of the pupils
•Part of the overall provision for intervention
MGP selection criteria
•Pupils who have entered key stage below
age-related expectations
•Pupils who are falling behind trajectory
during the latter stages of a key stage
•Looked after children who need this
support
•
* This selection must not exclude
pupils because they are considered harder
to reach and/or are considered to have
behaviour issues.
The process
•Next steps for pupils identified using the
Assessing pupils’ progress (APP) criteria
•Clear targets agreed between the teacher and
the tutor
•Programme shaped around pupil’s needs
•Informal liaison between teacher and tutor
during sessions
•Targets amended during the sessions as the
pupil’s needs change
MGP: delivery of tuition
•Schools have found:
•a variety of people to deliver tuition
•a wide range of places to deliver
tuition
•a range of times to deliver tuition
The myths
•An hour is too long
•Pupils would prefer one-to-two or -three
•Pupils will not want to stay after school or have
sessions at the weekend
•Young pupils will be too tired at the end of the day
•Pupils will be stigmatised
•You can’t send a tutor to the pupil’s home
•A good classroom assistant or HLTA could deliver
the tuition
Response from pupils (1)
•Pupils:
•are overwhelmingly positive about the
experience
•are unfazed by one-to-one contact even if
delivered by an unfamiliar adult
•find that the hour flies by
•say tuition is fun because of the wide range of
activities used
Response from pupils (2)
Pupils:
are able to identify what they need to improve
know they are improving because they are
more confident and get better marks in class
see tuition as a privilege
value being able to shape the sessions and
like that tuition is tailored to their needs
Pupils’ comments
•
‘Sometimes your
teacher can be scary
but my tutor is just my
friend who knows more
than me so I can ask
more questions.’
•In class, I’m scared
people will make fun of
me when I don’t know
things.’
•
‘There’s just her
and you, so you can have
all her time, she can help
you when you are stuck.’
•‘The time goes really
quickly because you are
enjoying yourself.’
Response from parents
•Parents are extremely supportive of the offer –
some have attended sessions
•Evidence that the tuition passport is engaging
parents in their children’s learning
•Some parents report significant changes in
their children’s attitudes to learning
Response from tutors
•Find the sessions intense but rewarding
•Are confident about range of teaching
and learning strategies required
•Recognise the benefit of being able to
intervene at the point of misconception
•Are clear that the pedagogy for one-toone tuition is different from that for wholeclass teaching
Impact – confidence,
self-esteem and motivation
•Following tuition, pupils are more willing to have a go,
ask questions, put their hands up, etc.
•Teachers report seeing the transfer of skills from
tuition to the classroom
•Focus now is on monitoring whether the initial impact
seen in tutored pupils is sustained
So what is the future?
Nationally we are committed to supporting 300,000 children a year with one
to one tuition in English and 300,000 children a year in mathematics by
2010-11
To enable every LA to put the necessary infrastructure in place to help us meet
this commitment, funding will be made available through the 2009 and 2010
Standards Fund Grants
This funding is ring-fenced for one to one tuition for a specified proportion of
pupils in key stages 2,3 and, in National Challenge Schools, Key Stage 4
How can we make it happen?
Biggest challenge will be tutor recruitment:
plan it early
cast a wide net – private agencies, trusted supply,
retired or part time teachers
work with schools to identify the spread – and the
where and when
Support from central services…and of course
school improvement services
What will the funding cover?
marketing to and recruitment of tutors
training for tutors
quality assurance
liaison with head teachers
liaison with HR
supporting inclusion and access
monitoring and evaluation
Impact – progress and attainment
•Teachers report that pupils who have finished
tuition show improvements in attainment as
recorded through termly teacher assessments
•Overall tuition data in the MGP pilot indicates
that a higher proportion of pupils who have
tuition make expected progress than those who
don’t
Pedagogy materials
•Developing one-to-one tuition:
•operational handbook for local authorities
and schools
•guidance for local authorities and schools
•guidance for tutors
•supported by video extracts on DVD