There is a vast range of official information about standards and assessment. This short article can serve only as a brief introductory tour.
Pupils in England are required to be assessed at regular intervals throughout their school career by National Curriculum tests at the end of each Key Stage (The National Curriculum applies to pupils of compulsory school age in community and foundation schools, including community special schools and foundation special schools, and voluntary aided and voluntary controlled schools).
Teacher assessments are reported centrally for core and non-core foundation subjects at the end of Key Stages 1-3. Statutory tests are set in English, Mathematics and Science and assessed centrally at Key Stages 2 and 3. Key Stage 4 is assessed by levels of achievement acquired at General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) level. Having completed GCSEs, pupils have a choice of whether to continue with further education at school or college or to undertake employment.
Since 1998 a complex web of nationally devised targets has been introduced to improve standards. Central were the National Learning Targets, (see www.dfes.gov.uk/nlt/ ) launched in 1998 and amended in successive years. They set out to provide a focus for raising attainment and participation in education and training for the key stages at the ages of 11, 14, 16, 19, 21 and on into adulthood. By 2002 the targets included:
In addition targets have been set regarding pupil absence, the performance of looked after children and of ethnic minorities. More recent modification of the process allows for LEAs and schools to have some influence over the pace of meeting targets, but within the context outlined above. For LEA 2006 targets (now known as Public Service Agreement targets) set against 2004 results go to www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ts/docs/2006targets2006.xls.
National Learning Targets are achieved and measured through progress in individual curriculum subjects. Each Key Stage establishes skill based attainment targets within detailed programmes of study for curriculum subjects, (including Citizenship at KS3 and 4). An attainment target sets out the ‘knowledge, skills and understanding’ which pupils of different abilities and maturities are expected to have by the end of each key stage. Overall Analysis of pupil performance at KS1-3 in 2005 can be seen at: http://www.qca.org.uk/12305_12536.html . For performance linked to other factors see: National Curriculum Assessment, GCSE and Equivalent Attainment and Post-16 Attainment by Pupil Characteristics, in England 2005 at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000640/index.shtml. QCA's National Curriculum in Action website illustrates standards of pupils' work at different ages and key stages. (http://www.qca.org.uk/ncaction).
For specific Key Stage and subject performance data see:
· Post 16: GCE VCE A/AS Examination Results for Young People in England 2004/05 http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000634/SFR03-2006v1.pdf
Cross-curricular performance is also measured through The Foundation Stage Curriculum. This is a statutory stage of the national curriculum for England, within Key Stages 1-4. The curriculum covers six areas of learning covering children’s physical, intellectual, emotional and social development across subject areas (Personal, social and emotional development; Communication; language and literacy; Mathematical development ; Knowledge and understanding of the world ; Physical development; and Creative development. Foundation Stage Profile (FSP) assessments for 2005 can be seen at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000634/SFR03-2006v1.pdf .
See http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000610/SFR46-2005-v3.pdf for the most recent information on the overall achievements of young people at the end of Key Stage 4 (GCSE and equivalent examinations) and progress against national learning targets. An average increase of 2 per cent per year is envisaged in the percentage of 16-year-old pupils achieving 5 or more GCSE/GNVQs at grades A*-C. In 2004/05 55.7 per cent achieved this compared with 53.4 per cent in 2003/04. This
was an increase of just over 2.0 percentage points. 2002/03 and 2001/3 showed only 0.5 improvement. There has been an increase of 10% in the percentage of 16-year-old pupils achieving 5 or more GCSE/GNVQs at grades A*-C since National Targets were first introduced. (See Chart 1))
Nonetheless, interpreting overall progress towards raising standards is still problematical. Girls continue to outperform boys, particularly at the higher grades (A*-C); 61.6 per cent of girls achieved 5 or more grades A*-C compared to 51.5 per cent of boys. This 10% gap has not narrowed significantly in recent years (See Chart 2). There are also clear differences in the performance of ethnic minorities in schools. At Key Stage 4, whilst pupils of Mixed White and Asian Heritage are amongst the highest achieving with 65 percent achieving 5+ A*-C GCSE/GNVQs, pupils of Mixed White and Black Caribbean heritage have lower attainment at
Key Stage 4, with 40 percent achieving 5+ A*-C GCSE/GNVQs. Only 23 percent of Gypsy/Roma pupils achieved 5+ A*-C GCSE/GNVQs. See: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RTP01-05.pdf
The impact of social advantage/ disadvantage on progress towards attaining standards is also apparent. Schools with a high proportion of pupils with Special Educational Needs or who receive free school dinners tend to obtain lower proportions of good GCSE grades (The 2004-5 5 A*-C figure for pupils eligible for free diners is 30.1% http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000640/Addition7.xls ). Equally pupils in selective schools would seem to attain more highly (2004-5: 53.8% gained grades A*-C in comprehensives, 98% in selective schools). This all means that the data needs to be used and presented with great care.
Measuring Performance: “League Tables” and “Value Added”
Although National Learning Targets and their assessment are central to the process of improving standards for individual pupils, they have also become a key element in the debate over school effectiveness. Individual pupil assessments, collated and published at school level have been presented as indicators of how effective a school is in enhancing the educational experience of its pupils. This is then used to allow data comparisons of schools against each other and over time. This process has become the most visible element in the government drive to raise standards whereby schools that are achieving target standards have been rewarded with earmarked funding and specialist status. Those that are seen to be least effective are deemed to be failing and at risk of closure or replacement by Academies. In recent years schoo effectiveness in reaching the target standards have ben displayed in two forms: “League Tables” and in “Value-Added” data.
League Tables
Perhaps the best known performance statistics are the “league tables” published each year showing GCSE and A level results for secondary schools across the country. The title is somewhat misleading, as the performance statistics published at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/performancetables/ks3_05.shtml are not ranked, but the media commonly produce ranked versions showing “best and worst performing” schools.
The tables provide basic information on Key Stage performance (though not on other aspects of school performance such as pastoral care) but are not easy to interpret. Official statistics show progress against these targets, as well as showing how performance varies by gender, ethnic group. Basic progress across all Key Stages since 1997 (Targets to 2008, reported progress to 2003) can be seen here: http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ts/docs/targets.xls
There were two main criticisms raised about interpreting the league tables, especially before 2003. Firstly, that they are “output” tables and do not make any allowance for the effect on results of “input” differences such as the ability range of pupils (particularly differences between selective and non-selective schools) or of other factors that may have an educational impact, such as type of locality (e.g. inner-city compared with leafy suburb). Secondly, that they do not show how much, in comparison with the national average, a school has added to pupils’ performance as they move from one key stage to the next. In Wales these problems led the withdrawing the publication of school results. In England, on the other hand, the response has been to add more performance data to the tables.
Value Added
From 2003 onwards, Key Stage Results for schools also contain “Value Added” information. Value Added is a way of measuring the progress a pupil makes between one stage of education and the next. The progress a school helps pupils to make compared to their different starting points allows comparison between groups of schools with different pupil intakes. It should be a clear indicator of an effective school. Such data is intended to help parents, teachers and governors interpret performance statistics. Schools are also encouraged to use the Value Added information to evaluate the progress made by their own pupils, compared to local and national patterns. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000631/index.shtml (GCSE and Equivalent Results and Associated Value Added Measures in England 2004/05)
Unfortunately, Value Added data as calculated for the Performance Tables is itself problematical. Value-added figures at end of Key Stage 4 are based largely on student progress from Key Stage 2 to GCSE. The Value-Added figures are so closely related to the data they derive from that they may suffer from precisely the same defects as raw-scores, of being largely predictable from prior attainment and/or student background and not taking account of other factors outside a school’s control, such as gender, mobility and levels of deprivation. Consequently, confirming the difficulty in identifying schools that are clearly more or less effective. See http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/educ/equity/VA Questioning paper.pdf for more on this argument.
For these reasons Performance Tables must continue to be treated with considerable care. The DfES is in the process of developing and introducing a new Contextualised Value Added (CVA) model which is to take into account a number of those factors outside a school’s control. CVA is being piloted by the Department this year and, subject to evaluation, will be included in the revised SFR in January 2007.
It is to be hoped that the introduction of CVA data will make both individual pupil progress and a school’s effectiveness in enabling this across all Key Stages easier to track. As even a cursory use of the references in this commentary by the reader will have shown, current reporting on the achievement of standards in the National Framework of Assessment is complex and in need of a context.
May 2006
Top Back to Curriculum and Standards Data