Sudden drop in percentage of kids getting good KS2 results - reason?

[MrsBungleBear]

Hello

I wonder if anyone can help. I have just had a look at the 2012 primary school league tables to have a look at how our local primary school did as I have applied to this school for my DD to start in September.

Before I applied I checked the previous years and the results were always above average (not brilliant but perfectly acceptable to me).

This year the results are 22% lower than they were in 2011. All other years the percentage of kids reaching level 4 or above in English and maths was in the 80's and was always above the national average. This year it's in the 60's and below the national average.

This seems a big drop?

My question is: could there be a reason for this? Or is it likely that the standard of teaching has gone way down hill?

I feel uncomfortable about sending DD if this is the start of a down ward slide.

TIA!

If you look on the Department of Education website
www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance/

you can find more detailed information.

A couple of things to look out for:

• how big is the cohort? If small, it only takes 1 or 2 children to massively skew the results
• what is the school's value add (i.e. maybe this was just a less able cohort).

or you could always ask the headteacher why s/he thinks the results are less good and how (if appropriate) they are addressing this.

Thanks for replying Redsky.

The number of pupils was 21 - no idea if that is small or average.

The value added is 98.2 - no idea what that means!

Good idea re asking the Head. I might do that. I've looked around the school and really liked it but this sudden drop has just put me off although I don't want to jump to conclusions knowing nothing about how all of this works!

AT 21 pupils, each child accounts for roughly 5%, so results in the 60's mean that of the 20 or so children 8 didn't achieve level 4, which is a pretty big group of underperforming children. There MIGHT be good reasons, small schools often attract children with "difficulties" as the smaller class sizes are seen as a positive. However the VA score of 98.2 is also poor, it means that the children aren't making the progress expected of them, whatever the overall level they achieve. So I would do some more digging, if I were you!

21 is small - below average. It means each child is worth just under 5%, so 2 children doing worse will mean a drop of 10%. Compare this to a school I once worked in with 100 children in a year group so each one was only worth 1% - they could have 15 children not get level 4, and still have a very respectable looking 85%.

Look closely at the number of pupils with SEN (statements, school action/school action plus) - a couple statemented/action plus children could have made excellent progress from a lower starting point and so reduce the over all figure.

Finally, do you know of anything in the history of the school that could have caused a blip? Another school I worked at had had a very traumatic change of head some 6-7 years previously which had resulted in a lot of people withdrawing their children. The current head then started and transformed the school - BUT - the cohort in year 6 was one where many children had been withdrawn and therefore there had been a lot of spaces, many of which had been filled by poorly achieving children whose parents were fed up with their previous schools. Not a problem in itself, apart from the ones that arrived in year 5 & 6 so the school had no time to do anything with them. The headline figure looked dire, but every child who had started in reception and been at the school for 7 years left with level 5s and 6.

Value added "should" be 100% (as I understand it), so 98.2 is concerning. But again, it's comparing the children's results at year 2 with year 6, and there are many reasons why this can cause problems (infant schools sometimes/often level children higher than primary at year 2, children may have moved into the school from somewhere that was giving unreliable levels etc etc etc). All you can do is take your questions to the Head and see what you think of the answers you get. The Head of the second school I mention above could explain exactly where the SATS results came from and give detailed reasons for achievement and under-achievement. Any decent Head will be able to do that.

Thanks very much Cumbria and TooMuch.

I can't think of any reason why this year would be different. Same head, no other issues that I am aware of.

Having looked at the last ofsted (2008) the inspector noted that the improvement levels were in the top 1% nationally - so something has gone down hill. Seems a big 'blip'.

I shall contact the Head - when I looked round he said he could meet us anytime if we had questions so I shall do that!

Thanks again.

It could just be one of those years where everything went wrong for the school!

The results do show a large drop, so it would be sensible to listen to what the head teacher has to say. Good question to ask him is what he expects the results to be this year, anything less than 80% I would suggest is cause for concern when taken with the 2012 results, the blip is becoming a trend.

Yep, it's a really quite small cohort.

The value added thing can be misleading too if there's any movement of children in and out of the year group.

At ds's small primary (cohorts range from 10-14), in the year above him, two very bright (level 3+ at KS1) children left end of yr 5 (one to go private; one moved away) and two significantly less able children (level 1 at KS1) took their 'places'. The yr 6 teacher had two terms to 'do something' with them. They did come on really well.

But: for those two 'places', barely any progress had been shown - a KS1 level 3 child scraped a KS2 level 4 - because they weren't the same children!!! It can happen.

'Your' school is small enough that I wouldn't base much on results.

Thank you admission and cuppa.

Great advice. I will definitely ask what he expects the results to be like this year. Hopefully there is a reason and It's just a blip as I like the school and It's really close.

Thanks for everyone's help, I'm new to all of this as you can tell!

If you like the school and in your guts it is the school that you want your child to go to, then I would say to you that that is what you should do. Forget what the figures might or might not say, go on your gut feeling that this is a good school for your child. Go an see the school again and hope you get a suitable tingling sensation that it is the school for you.

Thank you

Our local frankly brilliant school has appalling sats this year. 53% or something like that. there were only 14 in the class and two came to school in year six, had missed a lot of school and had other difficulties in their lives. the sats don't really work for small take all comers schools in my opinion. I would hate to think anyone was put off our school just because of sats.

Thanks denial. I posted this to understand the possible reasons for such a big drop. I don't want to be put off the school if there's no real reason to. I really want to send dd there.

I'm hoping it is an anomaly due to being quite a small school.

Its set my mind at rest to know ir doesn't mean the school is suddenly crap. I'm going to talk to the head for his opinion and unless there's some major issues hopefully dd will be going there.

In dd's school, there was a nasty glandular fever like bug that went round Yr 6 in SATs week: by some curious freak it struck the three highest achievers in the class. That sort of thing matters.

our school sent round a letter explaining within the bounds of confidentiality the circumstances and carefully sharing predictions for next two cohorts and school as a whole.it was wrote reassuring as its hard not to worry when the results are so much worse than most of the country. our school is reception to year six which is fairly unusual round here and they do suffer from an exodus at year 3 due to competing juniors. this has largely been reversed in recent years so bigger classes coming through. I would never have understood all this before first child entered system so I understand your concerns completely.

Thanks again everyone - this is really reassuring.

I'm sure there's probably a good reason for this. I'm going to ask the head this week.

(PS I am the op mrsbunglebear, I've just name changed).