• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Progression At Pupil, School And National Levels
 

Progression At Pupil, School And National Levels

on

  • 2,157 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,157
Views on SlideShare
2,149
Embed Views
8

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0

1 Embed 8

http://www.slideshare.net 8

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • This is the slide which describes the parts of MGP
  • Tuition has a dual focus. Partly it is about addressing the needs of those pupils who are already below national expectations when they enter the key stage, partly it is about the needs of the pupils defined by the Making Good Progress investigations as being ‘stuck’ or ‘slow moving’. Tuition in the first part of the key stage could focus on the former, while in years 5, 6 or 9 it might be expected to focus on the latter. It is important to recognise that tuition is not about enabling pupils to catch-up: it’s about early intervention to ensure that they can keep-up. As part of the focus on closing the gap, some tuition has been directed towards looked after children who would particularly benefit from this support. However, this has to be carefully monitored as these children often have other forms of support and tuition at particular times could be counter productive. Many children and young people in care do not receive a successful learning experience. They are more likely to have Special Educational Needs: 28% have a statement of SEN compared to 3% of all children. Their average attainment is far worse than that of their peers. At Key Stage 2, they are significantly less likely to reach level 4 or above in English or mathematics. In 2008 only 46% of looked after children achieved level 4 in English and 44% level 4 in mathematics. By contrast, 81% of all pupils obtained this level in English and 79% in mathematics. As pupils progress through the key stages so the attainment gap increases. In 2008 just 14% of looked after children achieved at least 5 A* – C grade GCSEs, compared with 65% of all pupils. We also know that some specific groups including boys, children that have one or both parents of African Caribbean or African heritage , disabled children and those from lower socio-economic groups are over-represented in care. It is for these reasons that looked after children have been specifically identified as a group who would benefit from one-to-one tuition. This comes from the LAC document which is available in June But within schools and LAs there will be other high priority groups. We know that 121 tuition can have a particularly beneficial effect for children eligible for FSM, schools will want to consider how this can support them to deliver against other priorities, such as narrowing the gaps. The LA has a strategic role in identifying and selecting the most appropriate pupils for tuition, and there will be opportunities today to explore with colleagues how you are drawing on the expertise of your data teams and the knowledge/information from your SIPs about where tuition can have greatest impact in improving pupils’ progress . Need to ensure that this linked to target getting and the focus on progression. SiPs will be crucial here Reference the Making Good Progress Investigations …handout in the pack. These were the criteria that were used in the MGP pilot and we will refer to some of the findings as the day progresses .
  • Briefly recap the parameters of one-to-one tuition including the flexible delivery during the day. The agreed targets are one of the distinct differences between tuition in the pilot and much of the private tuition which takes place. Tuition focuses on the specific barriers to progress faced by the pupil. Tuition is not designed, nor funded, to replace existing intervention. Integration of tuition into overall provision for intervention has been challenging, especially where provision has not previously been mapped. There was an initial surge, not unexpectedly, to focus on pre-SATs support, but schools quickly recognised the need for earlier intervention and moved tuition into other year groups. A number of schools have also begun to apply the processes they use to evaluate tuition to other interventions, recognising that in the past they have not evaluated the impact of intervention. Parameters are the same for ECAW Focus on two bottom points Need to keep an eye on not replacing and who should be responsible for monitoring this? Flexibility during school day needs to be promoted. Fits with extended school agenda. It is not last resort because it is a benefit to the child to be re-engaged with learning across the curriculum. You need to be developing a long term vision of where tuition fits in to curriculum reform and associated developments = models emerging (esp secondary). Design of curriculum should not compromise provision but ,for example, some pupils remain outside of lessons for long periods (in corridors etc). This is an opportunity for real innovation of the curriculum (esp secondary)
  • This slide demonstrates the impact that tuition has on pupils who are on FSM. The data is taken from the MGP pilotetter chance of getting to level 4 or attaining two levels of progress than those We can see from this slide that pupils on FSM who enter the key stage below national expectations and have tuition are more likely to reach level 4 and are more likely to make two levels progress than those who don’t have tuition. The data in the middle of the graph demonstrates that those pupils on FSM who are likely to fall behind are enabled to keep up through tuition.

Progression At Pupil, School And National Levels Progression At Pupil, School And National Levels Presentation Transcript

  • Progression at Pupil, School and National Levels Workshop 14 DCSF Conference: The Use of Evidence in Policy Development and Delivery 9th February 2010
  • What the Data Tells Us Tanya McCormack Schools Analysis and Research Division, DCSF
  • Pupil Progress Rates Vary by Prior Attainment… Percentage of pupils progressing from average level at Key Stage 2 to GCSE thresholds Percentage of pupils making 3 levels of progress in English and Maths from KS2 to KS4 Source: SARD; 2008 KS4 data
  • … and a range of characteristics
    • Boys, deprived children, those with special educational needs and mobile pupils all progress at lower rates than their peers from Key Stage 2 to 4;
    • Girls, and those with English as an additional language progress at a higher rate than their peers from Key Stage 2 to 4.
  • Ethnic Groups with a lower proportion of FSM pupils generally achieve higher thresholds Source: SARD; 2008 KS4 data
  • White FSM Boys Make the Least Progress Source: SARD; 2008 KS4 data
  • Risky Behaviours have an Increasingly Detrimental Effect on Progress Percentage of pupils making 3 levels of Progress in Mathematics from Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 4, by Risk Factors Risky behaviours include: (i) being a frequent smoker; (ii) drinking alcohol 3 or more times a month; (iii) playing truant within the previous 12 months; (iv) trying cannabis; (v) graffitiing on walls; (vi) vandalising public property, (vii) shoplifting and; (viii) taking part in fighting or public disturbances.
  • Progress by School Deprivation Progress from the Expected Level at Key Stage 2 to 5+A*-C E&M by School FSM-band Source: SARD, 2008 data Least Deprived Schools Most Deprived Schools
  • Progress by School Type Progress from the Expected Level at Key Stage 2 to 5+A*-C E&M by School Type and Deprivation
  • Key Stage 1 Attainment is a strong predictor of Key Stage 4 Attainment
    • 85% of pupils at Level or above at KS1 went on to meet the 5A*-C including English and Maths threshold, compared to 7% of those at Level 1;
    • Poor performance at KS1 appears to exclude the possibility of very high performance at GCSE. 01% of those at Level 1 at KS1 achieved 3 A/A* grades at GCSE.
    Source: SARD; 2008 data
  • For Every Combination of Prior Attainment, FSM Pupils are Less Likely to Meet 5A*-C E&M Percentage of pupils getting to the 5A*-C English and Maths threshold from each combination of Key Stage 1 & 2 prior attainment, by FSM Source: SARD; 2008 data Key Stage 1 attainment Key Stage 2 attainment Below Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Not FSM FSM Not FSM FSM Not FSM FSM Not FSM FSM Below *** *** 1 1 13 13 *** *** Level 1 *** *** 2 2 20 14 69 63 Level 2C *** *** 3 2 29 19 81 81 Level 2B *** *** 4 3 42 28 87 75 Level 2A *** *** 5 4 57 38 91 79 Level 3+ *** *** 10 *** 71 52 95 85
  • Focusing on Progression Val McGregor Lead Advisor for Tuition and Making Good Progress
  • Teaching for Progression Progress for all End Making Good Progress Progression premium Progression targets Single level tests Assessment and tracking Individual tuition
  • One-to-One Tuition - selection criteria
    • Pupils who entered the key stage below age related expectations
    • Pupils who are falling behind trajectory during the latter stages of a key stage
    • Looked after children who would particularly benefit from this support
    • This selection must not exclude pupils because they are considered harder to reach and/or are considered to have behaviour issues
  • One-to-One Tuition - the parameters
    • One to one
    • 10 hours (plus 2 hours liaison/planning/training)
    • Suggested minimum of one hour per session
    • Delivered by a qualified tutor
    • Based on targets agreed between class teacher, tutor and pupil
    • Not a replacement for other intervention strategies but part of available suite
    • Can be delivered flexibly during or outside the school day
  • Tutored pupils keep up
    • The final report of Making Good Progress found tuition had a positive impact on pupil progress. In particular:
      • Tutored pupils with the lowest KS1 results outperformed their peers at KS2;
      • In reading, pupils progressed in line with their peers – a significant achievement given they were selected for tuition because they were stuck in their learning.
      • 75% teachers surveyed confirmed the impact of tuition on pupil progression.
  • 2009 KS2 attainment of pupils in MGP schools eligible for FSM and receiving one-to-one tuition in English
  • One-to-One Tuition – early feedback......
    • 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 deliver tuition during the school day
    • You can’t send a tutor to the pupil’s home
  • And some further questions.....
    • We are currently exploring the following:
    • What does good quality one-to-one tuition look like in different key stages? ...in different subjects...?
    • In what ways should we measure impact?
    • Are there other questions that we should be considering?
  • Further Information
    • The Research Report ‘Measuring Progress at Pupil, School and National Levels’ can be found on the DCSF Research and Statistics Gateway here:
    • http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/RRP/u015807/index.shtml
    • The Final Report on the ‘Evaluation of the Making Good Progress Pilot’ can be found here:
    • http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/DCSF-RR184.pdf
    • [email_address]
    • [email_address]