1. Ansford The Results 5ACEM 20072008200920102011 5A*-C (EM) 52%50% 54%73.5% 5A*-C64%63% 64%86% 5A*-G99%96% 97%98% 1A*-G100%99%100% 98% 3A*-AN/A21%34%18%33%

2. Observation 1: If a student gets Ma and En they always get 5ACEM Action Focus on En and Ma: They’ve had priority over just about everything – more curriculum time; 1:1 out of other lessons (£15000 worth), pre-exam prep, own TA support. Outcome En 62% to 78%; Ma 66% to 79% Staff still complain – but not much..... Results in Foundation subjects.... quite variable

3. Observation 2: If students get En, Ma and two sciences the rest is easy. Action Science needed to get from 65-70% where its been for years to 80%+. We used BTec for 24 critical students... Key committed member of staff set it up... Outcome: 88% got two sciences

4. Observation 3: Linkage between En and Ma has been poor. (In 2010, Ma 66% and En 62% led to 5ACEM of 54%. 14 students got one but not the other.) Action Fortnightly meetings between head, Asst Head and Heads of Ma and En, tracking the linkage and putting in the intervention packages. Outcomes All but 6 students who got one got the other (78En, 79 Ma led to 74 5ACEM).

5. Observation 4: Low aspirations in English (always 59-64%) Action LUCK.... Head of English steps down and replaced by someone she trained... 26 years old, very clever, payment by results, driven, an outstanding leader. Drives standards, close focus on ‘what to do to get a C, B, A, A*’, 1:1 support, lunchtime support, less focus on Lit (though results jumped 20%), lots and lots of marking, no student allowed to fail. Outcomes English goes from 62% to 78% in one year. 43% get an A*/A.

6. Observation 5: The school has been poor at keeping its ‘eye on the ball’ between December and June of Year 11. Action Tutors, LT and Head monitor every year 11 student on a three week cycle... But the outcomes are linked to specific interventions which are then checked. (It’s my responsibility to know which students are ‘rising to the challenge’ and ‘going off the boil’ and to communicate this to relevant staff). Outcomes Predictions were constant around the 82AC 72ACEM, there was no fall away in the Spring Term. Staff became more confident predictors... Results as expected.

7. Observation 6: Students do less well with new staff Action Created list of ‘At Risk’ Classes with clear support framework New staff NQTs Staff with a record of satisfactory results Support, three weekly meeting with HoF working to a formula Put in extra staff to split groups giving concern: 28 Ma C/D borderline group split into 2 lots of 14 29 French disaffected group split into two Outcomes 20 in the Ma group got a B/C (looked like being 12) 21 in the French group got a A*-C (looked like being 15)

8. Observation 7: The students who underachieve are predictable – KS2 L4, low aspiration, trundling along, sometimes benign/sometimes not. Action Judicious use of BTecs – only two courses in Science and Performing Arts Use as a motivator for the 5AC indicator and then the 5ACEM Don’t talk about limits set by data to staff or students; get the curriculum and expectations right Outcome 100% AC in both Btecs KS2 L4 to GCSE conversion much better 3 and 4 levels progress much better

9. Observation 7: Maths teach well and get ‘OK’ results – students fade in year 11 Action Modular Maths – careful monitoring of results Split C/D borderline group into two in Y11 Outcome Maths goes from 66% to79%... Still more to do...

10. Is it repeatable? Data would suggest so. Expectations would suggest so. But.... English Edexcel (I don’t trust them at all) and Maths modular retakes in November are going to be critical. What have I learnt? If there’s a problem/issue don’t duck it and if it costs money, pay up. These results came with ‘hidden additional costs’ of about £30000 on a year group of 113 students. Focus on high quality middle leaders who don’t tolerate mediocrity.