15% drop in KS2 SATS results

[minionmadess]

Would you be concerned if your usually consistent, above average results, always outstanding rated primary school produced this?

Would you want to know why and who would you ask.

VA figures

I don't think that you mean VA (value added). It is centered at 100 (national average) - so 91% would be dire (and unheard of)

Do you mean expected progress? Which may be 2 levels or may not be- but is often called 2 levels progress.

One year, I wouldn't be concerned.

We have a similar situation with the school that my daughter will (hopefully) go to. I had a very informative chat with the head teacher as the school performance data did not look too hot.

He said that there were 4 children with a statement of SEN and others recieving school-level intervention that year, out of a cohort of around 30. One child has undiagnosed SEN/ socio-emotional issues and could not cope with the SATs testing environment so did not complete the papers. In a small cohort this sort of stuff really matters as each pupil counts for 3 per cent or more of the total figure (providing these pupils had not been exempted from SATs).

The percentage of children with statements of SEN/ supported under school action plus may not be high, but there may well be lots of children who still have SEN and are supported under the 'school action' category.

If you are concerned, ask the head to explain things. You won't be the first person to do so. He or she will be well-versed in the figures. Or at least you would hope so. If they seem not to care/ give you the brush off, then that is when to worry ...

One child has undiagnosed SEN/ socio-emotional issues and could not cope with the SATs testing environment so did not complete the papers.

If the head teacher told you this then I would be very concerned.

In a small cohort this sort of stuff really matters as each pupil counts for 3 per cent or more of the total figure (providing these pupils had not been exempted from SATs).

No, they still 'count' in the total figure.

egnahc I may be interpreting the figures wrong... those figures to relate to 2 levels of progress.

As most have suggested, will just view it as a low performing cohort since it would appear that they have mostly made 2 levels of progress compared to their KS1 SATs levels.

Hmmm. Those results are bang on national average with a lower than average % of children with ESOL/ FSM. It could be a blip and if school has got good record most likely but I would ask questions. In London where nationally results are higher, local schools who have posted results like that have gone in to requires improvement (I'm sure there were other factors too) and they had high % of ESOL and FSM.

When were they last inspected by the way?

we are a high achieving school, school very concerned with results etc etc.
last years SATS were amazing, 3 years ago amazing, 2 years ago average.

As a governor I know that the cohort in that year was a really tough one. The teacher did really well to get the results she did, but the bald statistics don't tell the story. In particular, they worked really hard with 2 kids, to get them up to level 4, bearing in mind these 2 had already had loads of focused input through their school career, and they both did very well for them, but missed the level 4.

I remember visiting schools when we moved here, one school had dropped from outstanding to good. I asked why and she said you can't (at that time) get outstanding unless you have a certain percentage of level 4. She had had 3 kids join year 6. They were all very far below where they needed to be, as she put it:
'Am I supposed to turn a child away because they might bring our sats results down, or do I do what I firmly believe is right, which is to accept those kids and give them the best education we can and try really hard to get them ready for secondary, even though it messes up our results?'

We were last inspected in 2013, results for the two years previous to this were highest in the group of the 4 local primary schools. 2013 results were top of the group too. 89% being our lowest score during those years.

2014 results show our school at the bottom of that group and as a school we have a significantly lower % of SEN and FSM (I appreciate that relates to the whole school though, not YR6) and there may have significant reasons within this particular cohort.

Would that 15% dip falling to below average score trigger a visit from Ofsted.

Thanks to all the replies here I can see now how lots of factors can affect the figures so shouldn't be taken at face value.

It's an excellent school, very good reputation locally and is always over subscribed compared to the other 3 local schools. In fact 4 dc in my own dc's respective classes that have siblings who didn't get a place and have had to go elsewhere.

Why is it a concern if the headteacher told me that one pupil couldn't access the test? He didn't mention the child's name and I would have no way of knowing who he was referring to. Surely that is not a data protection or confidentiality issue? Actually I think what he said was that this pupil did not have a statement (not that his SN were undiagnosed) but that s/he had found it difficult to access the test.

I don't quite understand the point about inclusion in the statistics, egnhac. Some children are not eligible for KS2 SATs because they are working well below expected levels etc.

The statistics also don't necessarily show less 'obvious' causes of poor results at the school level. At our local school there are some traveller pupils with very poor attendance levels and little parental support for schooling. However, they would not be counted in any measure of economic disadvantage (e.g., Ever 6 Free School Meals) because they're not.

He told you that a child had undiagnosed sen and social and emotional issues. In a cohort of 30 you may well have been able to identify that child. It is highly unprofessional and bang out of order!

There would be no way for me to identify the child as I don't know any of the children/ families in that cohort. My daughter does not attend the school in question yet.

I don't quite understand the point about inclusion in the statistics, egnhac. Some children are not eligible for KS2 SATs because they are working well below expected levels etc.

So in a cohort of 30 children, if one child was working below expected levels, their results would still count, even if everyone else attained L4+. The results would be 96% L4+, even though the child didn't even sit them.

Unlikely that it would cause an inspection. Not unless there were other factors such as change of head or similar. They wouldn't inspect them until 2017 or 2016 earliest. But if they posted those results every year til then they wouldn't get outstanding because they are not

The children not achieving level 4 might have made progress though as we do not know their starting positions when entering the school. School cohorts vary so are not identical every year. The children achieving 3a would not be SEN. They are performing just below the average child!