tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post6604390087619266618..comments2017-09-21T06:30:14.413-07:00Comments on School Data Updates: KS2 progress measures 2017: a guide to what has and hasn't changedJames Pembrokenoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-63849854859409809942017-09-19T13:04:37.508-07:002017-09-19T13:04:37.508-07:00You mean at KS1? Prior attainment bands as follows...You mean at KS1? Prior attainment bands as follows:<br />Low: <12 APS<br />Middle: 12-17.99 APS<br />High: 18+ APS<br /><br />Hope that helps James Pembrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839642769644656596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-40612407127777526452017-09-19T12:10:11.130-07:002017-09-19T12:10:11.130-07:00Thank you James for your help and clarity.
Is the...Thank you James for your help and clarity.<br /><br />Is the measure of 17+ still deemed as above average?<br />What is 'above above average'?<br />ThanksUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06393981198857148908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-42565402841335026072017-09-14T04:32:36.184-07:002017-09-14T04:32:36.184-07:00No. It just means less than 5% are below floor (it...No. It just means less than 5% are below floor (it was approx 5% last year). Surprised that they kept them the same but this way you can show improvement due to fewer schools below floor.<br /><br />Genius. James Pembrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839642769644656596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-10672800786667756842017-09-14T04:23:46.158-07:002017-09-14T04:23:46.158-07:00Interesting Point to make about floor targets at R...Interesting Point to make about floor targets at Reading: -5<br />Writing: -7 Maths: -5 is the Bottom 5% is Reading: -3.9 & below Writing: -4 & below Maths: -4.3 & below. <br /><br />Does that mean no school is below floor?<br /><br />Julian Wood (@ideas_factory)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02362551615609120965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-9001022463360028042017-09-10T10:29:59.621-07:002017-09-10T10:29:59.621-07:00Yes, in theory it's possible: if the national ...Yes, in theory it's possible: if the national average score for 2b pupils was 98 then any 2b pupil achieving above that will have a positive VA score. However it is highly unlikely. Last year the national estimates for pupils with KS1 APS of 15 were around 100. This year slightly higher reflecting the increasing KS2 attainment of that prior attainment group. It will no doubt only rise as years go on. <br /><br />The other thing to consider is whether 2b really represents the national expectation at KS1. 1) KS1 assessments are highly subjective and therefore not especially reliable (one school's 2b is another school's 2c or 2a); and 2) 2b ceased to be national average many years ago. The last time sublevels were used, the KS1 APS was around 16.8 so much closer to a 2a. <br /><br />Let's arrange a call. James Pembrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839642769644656596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-14967847232747500162017-09-10T09:53:58.722-07:002017-09-10T09:53:58.722-07:00"But that's how it works now: it 2b child..."But that's how it works now: it 2b children on average score 98, then 98 is the estimate, so if your 2b child scores 99 then they make positive progress." <br />Yes, I agree with this - I think I'm understanding the current process now, however, I am wondering whether this is appropriate? A child who was age related at ks1, converting to below age related at ks2, yet still getting a +ve VA?<br /><br />I shall email you and book a conversation - thank you.<br /><br />Maybe even a chance for you to come up to Bolton and address our head teacher cluster?<br /><br />saint petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07928474554657743737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-51676556086372824972017-09-10T09:24:10.016-07:002017-09-10T09:24:10.016-07:00But that's how it works now: it 2b children on...But that's how it works now: it 2b children on average score 98, then 98 is the estimate, so if your 2b child scores 99 then they make positive progress. <br /><br />The phrase 'expected progress' concerns me. The removal of levels has resulted in the end of expected progress measure. Even Ofsted have stated that inspectors must not use the phrase. By fixing estimated outcomes to a specific scaled score from each start point, we have effectively reinstalled the measure. <br /><br />It's a complex issue. Probably best discussing in person or by phone. Email me and we can arrange a phone call. James Pembrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839642769644656596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-8375485042738694232017-09-10T06:37:41.825-07:002017-09-10T06:37:41.825-07:00Thanks - it's all very fascinating.
I now hav...Thanks - it's all very fascinating.<br /><br />I now have so many questions.<br /><br />I find myself wondering how the system would change if the expected progress where determined by a static attainment outcome I.e., 15 APS convert to 100 scaled score, as oppose to the current system where expected progress is determined by how well the national cohort does.<br />Theoretically if the national cohort do badly, then expected progress in that year would drop? A PA 2b child could fail to achieve ARE at ks2, yet still have a positive VA, if they exceed national average for the PA group? Hypothetical, I realise, yet an interesting thought.<br /><br />Thank you for your insight - always appreciated.saint petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07928474554657743737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-21912870409785278172017-09-09T14:59:21.192-07:002017-09-09T14:59:21.192-07:00It perhaps makes more sense if you think about KS4...It perhaps makes more sense if you think about KS4. Perhaps the average GCSE result in maths for a pupil that was 4.5 at KS2 is a grade 4 this year. This becomes the VA benchmark for all 4.5 pupils. Next year that may increase to a grade 5, so the benchmark (expectation) increases to a grade 5. If we implemented the system you proposed for KS2, we would always expect a grade 4 for 4.5 pupils, but that the value of a grade 4 changes over time. This couldn't work because grades are supposed to be comparable (stable). Scaled scores are also supposed to be comparable year on year. James Pembrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839642769644656596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-3839482337461594322017-09-09T14:50:32.127-07:002017-09-09T14:50:32.127-07:00I sort of get where you're coming from. Howeve...I sort of get where you're coming from. However, doing that goes against the concept of VA: that pupils are compared against the average score for their prior attainment group in that year. <br /><br />The scaled score conversion already does fluctuate each year to reflect changes in difficulty of the tests. The raw score required to achieve expected standard is set using results of sample and live tests. Once the expected standard has been set, they can then establish the scale. If you say in advance that all 2b pupils (bear in mind we only have 2 more years of them) need to get 100 to make average progress, then the underlying the raw score will change considerably. it doesn't really change anything: what children have to get to make average progress still changes every year. Either it's a raw score, or the scaled score. <br /><br />Also I think what you're proposing changes the meaning and value of the expected standard. At the moment it represents an acabdemic standard we expect all pupils to meet; if we went with this idea, it would become the standard we expect 2b pupils to meet.<br /><br />It would also probably result in the return of expected progress measures, progress matrices, and points-based progress measures.<br /><br />15 to 100 is 85 points over the key stage.<br /><br />That's approx 20 points per year. <br /><br />I worry about stuff like that. James Pembrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839642769644656596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8546074595093882670.post-39227086552824217652017-09-09T14:27:01.608-07:002017-09-09T14:27:01.608-07:00Fantastic post - thank you.
Just to clarify thou...Fantastic post - thank you.<br /><br />Just to clarify though - why do the estimates have to change each year? <br />Could the estimates not be kept the same, but the scaled score conversion be adjusted to account for the change in average raw score achieved for that PA group.<br />So the raw score may fluctuate each year, needed to achieve the scaled score required, but the scaled score estimate could remain static - thus allowing the 2b PA group of 15 APS+ to always be expected to achieve 100 scaled score? <br /> saint petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07928474554657743737noreply@blogger.com