Institution Context

Nature

Primary 7-11 in the South of England. Set in a small town, with a mixed catchment area, with high value added for many students. The school had been rated as 'good' in their last OFSTED report, but realised that there was a discrepancy between their English score (c80%) and their Mathematics and Science (c70%).

Focus

The focus was on improving Mathematics - it was acknowledged that there might be a knock on effect on Science. It was agreed that Year 5 should be targeted as November left little time for Year 6.

Working with staff

The Head was very willing to take part in the Pilot, which had been recommended to him by the LA. He wanted to involve two of his staff on the 'front line' - the Teacher responsible for examination data and the Head of Mathematics. He had some idea of the project they had not.

 

CIEA Intervention

Number of meetings

In all, 3 visits were made, an introductory one, a follow up to look at progress and reset targets, and a final one to review the process. Emails were exchanged at other stages.

Use of tools

The school already had a database for examination/tests results, but did not have an accurate breakdown of component sections. Therefore the Excel grid used in CEA training was called into use. Past questions were kept on a database and these were added to and assigned according to Levels. Mark schemes were also used for examinations.

Processes

The school decided that to analyse the results of every student would be too big a process in the time available, so decided to examine those of the 15 'borderline' students in Year 6. They also intended to identify a similar number in Year 5 - only to discover they needed to examine 20. The data suggested that they were spending too much time on some topics and insufficient on others. They therefore decided to prioritise major areas, and work cross-curricular on others. The Head observed lessons and set new objectives with staff on assessing the work of individual students. The Head of Mathematics drew up a list of terms to use to ensure consistency - e.g. number/figure/digit/numeral.

Some staff attended courses where they learnt about the format of SAT tests - i.e. certain questions were always aimed at certain levels. This was then cascaded to all staff. A database was established of examples of questions at all levels, so that staff could draw on them, and it is intended to add to these in the future.

Standardisation was set up through the Head to monitor marking according to mark schemes. This was delayed by the illness of the Head of Mathematics, so it was decided to implement this after the end of Year examinations through sampling 5 students per class.

Results in other areas were also scrutinised, so that a move to formative assessment grew throughout the school during the project.

Impact:

View of CEA

From the CEA point of view huge strides were made. The school wrote and adopted its own policy. The analysis of results was put to good use and the staff were working towards AfL in a big way.

View of institution

The school was very positive in their analysis. They realised in the short term improvement might be limited and looked more for long-term improvement.

The school was very positive. For the first time many of the tests done on pupils were being used to analyse weaknesses. The methods of analysis were going to be transferred across the curriculum, and staff felt they owned their policy. Those who were more dubious about the worth on analysis were coming to accept it, but there was a realisation that the work had only just begun, time and support were still vital if results and therefore education were to prosper.