Towards Good Achievement for All Chris Snudden June 2013

An objective view of achievement in every Norfolk school

Why group schools according to risk? To identify those schools of real concern To identify those schools at risk of ‘Requires Improvement’, in order to challenge appropriately and offer Norfolk to Good and Great (N2GG) To identify those schools that should be judged by Ofsted as Good or better in order to engage in partnership - commissioning and brokering system leadership / school to school support

LA Assessment of Risk Focus is on achievement over time Only hard data evidence used Benchmarked against Ofsted criteria for achievement Occasionally other factors – e.g. significant transition has affected assessment of risk

Risk Assessment All schools in Norfolk (including Academies and Free schools) have been risk assessed – providing an initial hypothesis related to pupil outcomes Analysis of every school goes beyond the data headlines – Raise online, focus on vulnerable groups, trends over time

Risk Assessment Every school is classified according to the initial hypothesis about achievement Ofsted definition for good–achievement / progress is consistent, over time, improving at faster than the national rate, proportions compare favourably with national The assessment is not a prediction, a category, a local authority grade, it is an initial hypothesis based on pupil outcomes.

Approach to Risk Assessment LA School dashboard – holds wide range of information e.g. -Performance data including groups - over time -Ofsted outcomes – over time -Attendance, exclusion data – over time -Finance rags, HR info, health and Safety audits -Complaints to Ofsted

Process of Risk Assessment School Dashboard – predominantly pupil performance data over time Raise online reports – over time Current Ofsted grade, date of last inspection, Ofsted outcomes over time New or absent leadership /governance/school transition

School classification F1 (Outstanding) E1 ( Good/outstanding) E2 (Good with some vulnerability) C3 (RI and improving) B3 (RI, stuck) D1,2,3 (Transition –temporary Schools of Concern) A4 Schools of Concern

Summary of risk % E2 to F1 = 47% Good or better % B3 to C3 = 34% Requiring Improvement % D to A4 = 18% Schools of Concern

Provisional summary of risk PrimarySecondaryComplex /SS Totals% F1 (outstanding) E1 ( Good/outstanding) E2 (Good with some vulnerability) C3 (RI and improving) B3 (RI, stuck or declining) D1,2,3 (Transition –temp schools of concern) A4 Schools of Concern TOTALS

Achievement Update John Crowley June 2013

Achievement Updates FFT Update Early Years Foundation Stage National Curriculum Assessments

FFTlive.org New look for the FFTLive Governor Dashboard – 4 page New Self Evaluation Booklets Subscribe via Services to Schools Technical support –Chris Jackson

FFT Governor Dashboard

FFT Self Evaluation

FFT Subscriptions 1 st September 2013 MI Sheet 031/2013 Services to Schools

FFT Live Subscriptions MI Sheet 031/2013 Infant28% Junior67% Primary62% Secondary57%

Briefings from FFT Primary 15 th October a.m. / p.m. Secondary14 October a.m.

Early Years Foundation Stage New EYFS Profile Characteristics of Effective Learning –Narrative – no judgements 17 Early Learning Goals –Prime Areas –Specific Areas “Expected” level

17 Early Learning Goals

Progress: Ofsted Subsidiary Guidance Where children make progress from age-related expectations at the beginning of nursery, to age- related expectations at the beginning of reception and the end of reception (where levels of development can be compared with Early Years Foundation Stage Profile national figures) this is likely to represent expected progress during the Early Years Foundation Stage.

Good Level of Development Achieving the expected Level in –all 8 ELGs in the Prime Areas Communication and Language, Physical Development Personal Social Emotional Development –4 ELGS in Literacy and Numeracy –Average Point Score of all ELGs

Progression into year 1 No link between ELGs and National Curriculum levels Higher expectations in literacy and numeracy in line with new National Curriculum Characteristics narrative is as the ELG judgements 2013 cohort will be the only one to have a KS1 NC level in 2015

Key Stage No overall English “test” level Separate Reading (test), Writing (TA), SPaG (test) results published Overall APS (Re + Wr + 2x Ma) / 4 Floor Standard measures –60% Re + Wr + Ma –Above national 2013 median for expected progress in Re, Wr & Ma –Underperforming = below all four measures

Key Stage Floor Standard measures –65% Re + Wr + Ma (+ SPaG ?) –Above national 2013 median for expected progress in Re, Wr & Ma 2015 New National Curriculum –No Levels –New expectations –New tests

Time to think about … How do we track pupils in between key stages when there are no National Curriculum Levels ? Key Stage 2 BelowExpectedAbove Key Stage 1 Below GoodOutstanding Expected GoodOutstanding Above Good

Web Links EYFS ning/assessment/eyfs/a /eyfs-handbook ning/assessment/eyfs/a /eyfs-handbook Floor Standards rimary_12/p7.htmlhttp:// rimary_12/p7.html econdary_12/s8.htmlhttp:// econdary_12/s8.html Ofsted Subsidiary Guidance guidance-supporting-inspection-of-maintained- schools-and-academieshttp:// guidance-supporting-inspection-of-maintained- schools-and-academies