Really poor KS2 results for school

[Ilovecrumpets]

My DS’ school’s KS2 results are out and are really poor - below average. This is a significant drop from last year and also out of kilter with the other schools in the area ( London borough). Headteacher made a very bland comment in the newsletter about having complete faith in her staff. I get she needs to support them but if have hoped for some more detailed acknowledgment or ansense she is going to do something - although I appreciate it is early days.

My DS is only in Yr1 where he is very happy ( he moved this year as he was unhappy at his other school).

I’m just wondering how concerned I should be?

How bad are they? Have you looked at both the % reaching the standard in individual subjects and in combined? Is there a particular area they are weak in? Are the progress figures also bad? Have you looked at all the school's data not just year6, is it as bad?

It could be specific cohort issue or it could be quality of teaching. However we keep repeating to staff its not just year 6, everyone has a part to play and responsibility for SATs results, so it probably isn't just a year 6 issue. There is plenty of time for changes before your dc gets to year 6 and if it is an issue lots of LA support can happen in five years.

So one cohort was lower in a school that has otherwise good results, happy children and good teaching and you're after the head to detail in a newsletter their strategic plans.

Some cohorts are weaker than others. Some cohorts might have more children with SEN who might not get the expected standard so the % will drop. Some years there are wobbles. They are SATS. We're not talking school plummets GCSE outcomes here which affects post 16 options.

Honestly, if your child is happy and you like the school then I think you're being a little daft. The head has faith in her staff. If there's anything thay needs to go on behind the scenes then that's where it should happen and it shouldn't be justified in a newsletter.

Maisy, I think it's quite normal for parents to worry about significant drop of the results of their dc's school.

OP, school change over the years. Your dc is still in lower primary. I am sure the school is more worried about results than parents and thinking about what to do. After all, it's their reputation.

Normal to think 'gosh that's a drop. I hope it comes right again'.
Not normal to think 'head says they have faith in their staff but really they should have given us some detailed explanation in the christmas newsletter'

Head is unlikely to be able to give detailed reason why for confidentiality of students. As said above, it could have been a year with high SEN, a generally weak cohort, higher English as a second language (have you seen what year 6 have to know for grammar??!!). Also, there is no guarantee every child in year 6 went the whole way through that school. School could have inherited weak children moving in late in KS2. Speak to parents who knew those kids to get a vibe. Weak cohorts happen.

The stats for all the way through kids are published, so you can look at the progress of those, if those show poor progress and poor results, then the "poor cohort" argument doesn't really stack up.

Obviously you need to look beyond the headline, but equally you rarely have sufficient information to look beyond the headline, but that is why so much of the job of the SLT is management of a school, which includes good communication, simply expressing faith is not great communication.

Personally I'd want to see a lot more evidence of failings than simply some poor SATs results, but I don't think it's unreasonable for people to expect more analysis from the head. The SATs information is public, and commenting it doesn't in any way breach confidentialities.

"We struggled this year to show good progress in maths, so we're looking carefully at the way we taught, and if there's any areas we could particularly improve having been given this heads up, I've asked "head of maths" to lead on this".

That is of course what the SLT is likely doing, but saying it provides so much better communication to parents who might be anxious - and disengaged parents, or moving children is not in the childrens or the schools interest unless there really is a reason.

"We struggled this year to show good progress in maths, so we're looking carefully at the way we taught, and if there's any areas we could particularly improve having been given this heads up, I've asked "head of maths" to lead on this"
I don't even think that is appropriate.

If parents want more than 'i have faith in my staff' then the max that should be out there is 'These are this year's results. I have complete faith in my staff that this was an anomoly year and, as ever, webare striving to provide the best education for children'

Parents do not need to be told the detail of what is going on behind the scenes. They either trust the school or they don't.

Put it this way, I'm a teacher and I would happily send my child to a local requires improvement school because I know the school and know schools can get pulled down for some odd reasons. Equally, if i was happy with the school then one dip year is just that, one dip year. I don't need to be told what's going on behind the scenes to make a confidence judgement.

With schools you really need to make your own judgement from what you can see of it yourself. Inspection reports are second best to personal experience. My DD's school gets great results but it is clear to me that they push the boys much more than the girls in maths which is really damaging DD's education. This is just an example but it shows how much can be hidden by the overall results.

I do not see why parents cannot be informed of progress of the cohort rather than the Head saying she has faith in her staff. We all know that’s what Chairmen of football clubs say about their managers just before they sack them.

If results are disappointing, it is possible to say that x number of children didn’t get 100 by just a few marks. It is possible to say their progress was good, (if it was) and it should be said that the school is reviewing the results and progress to make adjustments to its improvement plan (a summary of which can be given to parents). Good communication is not breaking confidentiality because you are not identifying or naming pupils but you are making sure parents know you are looking at the results critically and trying to ensure any issues are dealt with. This would reassure parents.

The statement by the Head is actually pointing the finger at the staff. It should, in fact, be pointed at her!

I can understand your concerns. My child goes to a school which has not had particularly good results (league table or KS 2 SATS) for the past few years. When I enrolled my son the academic standard appeared to be above average. Schools nearby and within the borough are generally doing very well and with almost all, the past few years have seen steady improvements.
I work as a teacher and I can see from the quality of work my child produces that expectations are not the same as those at the school I teach at. There is a far more relaxed attitude to homework and reading logs.
On the other hand I have found my son's teachers to be warm, committed and sincere. The pastoral care at my child's school is particularly good he is mostly happy there. So I can understand your concerns and the dilemma it can create.
I do not believe that league tables or SATS results are irrelevant although occasionally there be a weak cohort.

Have you looked at the DfE figures on their website in any more detail or are you just going on headline figures? For instance, my DD goes to a school that isn't great on % meeting expected standard but their progress figures are brilliant and I can't speak highly enough of the teachers.

That’s the problem isn’t it Bubbles? Explaining your results with that statement is virtually an admittance of guilt. Most schools would be quite happy to explain a dip in results to parents and do so. When a school doesn’t it looks a bit odd.

It is certainly an admission of poor management!

I honestly think people are reading too much into this.
It's totally reasonable to think 'oh dear. That's not ideal. The school is otherwise goos so i hope it's a one off', maybe even decide to keep an eye with a view to moving if other warning signs are there and then speculating over why it happened and judging the head for not giving some public account.

To put another spin on it, I've had GCSE pass rates from national averahe through to-100% with most years being above the national average, but I wouldn't say I was a fundamentally better teacher the year I got 100% vs 70%. The groups were very different, different abilities, different SEN/EAL profiles, different work ethic, different attitude around school etc.

So the same can be true with SATs.

I think there maybe a lot of different reasons why the school's results have dipped, and I think it's natural for parents to want to know rough idea why.
My ds's school had very bad results 2 years in a row. I really don't care, only because I lost faith in school academic wise.
Ds loves school for all the other reasons, and I know my ds won't suffer from poor teaching. So poor results as a school don't bother me. But in a way, it's kind of sad way to see the school; I can't trust teachers for their teaching.

But irvine not all reasons could or should be shared.

It's not appropriate to explain 'actually a regugee child joined 2 years ago so only got working towards because they'd only been learning English 24 months.' Or 'the thing is 1/4 of that class have a SEND need which impacts, to a greater or lesser degree, on their processing (and they will probably spend years at secondary trying to get access arrangements to give those kids a chance - we have classes like that).
Or 'school and parents have been trying for years to get support for a child with possible ASD so they can gain a 1-1 TA. Unfortunately despite school and home's best efforts cuts mean it's not been possible to have a TA until the EHCP comes through. So this child had up to y4 without the support they need.'

One year my results were slightly lower is because I had a y11 group who had a teacher in y10 who had suffered a breakdown. I'd covered them for chunks during y10 on and off so thry had a subject specialist. Then near the end of y10 it was decided they would become my class. They did well, right number of A/A* compared to national average, C pass rate higher than average but there were kids there who with more stability should have got a gradr higher than they did.
No way (should a similar situation happen in primary) should they head hang a member of staff out and say 'wr get you're disappointed but we had to change staffing due to prolonged staff absence'

That's my point. It is entirely normal to wonder why or think 'hmm that's not ideal', but expecting the head to justify it and put the strategy out there is unreasonable. She has faith in her staff. She will be doing what she can behind the scenes. If she isn't and it keeps being low then Ofsfed will be in.

gosh, your head teacher really needs to train her staff better in how to cheat, and how to play the system.

They are clearly lagging behind there.

Very poor, must do better

If he’s happy and it’s only one year I wouldn’t be worried. Likely just to be a weak cohort. More concerning if it turns into a trend.

More concerning if it turns into a trend.
This ^^

Weak years happen.

Maisy, It's really turning into a trend at our school. But I don't blame school.
Our school is in not affluent but not deprived either area, low sen, low pp, low EAL. School are regularly hosting parents workshops. It's really weird that most of parents who attend are small number of foreign parents, who tends to have able kids who doesn't need help.
I am worried, all the kids go to same secondary, so if they are not meeting expected standard, the standard for secondary will go down as well. But what can I do? Good teacher seems to leave, leaving school mostly with young and enthusiastic, but inexperienced teachers who may not be able to turn it around without more engagement from parents.

Many schools now publish their Improvement plans so schools do put information out there. Where I am a governor, we have shared our maths strategy so parents understand it and are able to help their children. We did not openly say we were concerned about our maths teaching and results, but we were.

It’s good communication to demonstrate where a school wants to improve and Primary parents are far more involved with schools than secondary parents are. Of course you do not go into specific details of each child but if the school can say they maintained good progress with this cohort and are happy with their teaching strategies then it helps parents feel they are still a good school. Just saying the school has confidence in the teachers is a statement that should not have been made.

irvineoneohone
If it's a trend then I see why you're worried.

About secondary, something to consider is that the cohort is bigger. E.g. primaries tend to be 1-3 form entry (30-90 pupils). Mid-large secondaries like mine are 9/10 form entry (270-300 pupils). The impact of a weaker class from one primary is much smaller and sensible schools tend to take primary scores with a pinch of salt (we have to use it for tracking progress but if someone comes in lower and we think they can do more, we push them and challenge them).

I wouldn't worry too much if there is a few newer staff. They tend to bring a fresh perspective and I always find a balanced staff (mix of new and experienced and vetrans) is best. All older experienced can be a bit long in the tooth and can be stale.

I would be more concerned if lots of older and experienced staff were leaving and the school is almost exclusively recruitibg NQTs.All new can be a sign of inability ro recruit or huge budget constrains which makes NQTs thr affordable option - but without the experience to help mentor them.

Thanks everyone - I agree I will be more concerned if it turns into a trend and I have no intention of attacking the head. I have looked at the figures and I don’t think this is just a weak cohort. It is all figures I am looking at. It also is not a school with a deprived intake . The stats seem to indicate in the bottom 8% of all schools from well above average. It is the massive drop that concerns me tbh - I wondered if it might be just a misreading of the new SATS even though this is the second year.

I completely understand confidentiality and teacher standing by her staff. I think the tone of communication was unnecessarily dismissive however. I obviously wasn’t expecting a detailed strategy ( and didn’t indicate this in my OP) but I would have expected something that recognised the significant drop and acknowledged they would be looking to see what, if any, changes to their approach this may necessitate, with the emphasis being on the head not the staff.

is it a small school as even a couple of pupils can have a big impact on data.

My children's school only had about 35% meet the expected level for a few years now - it takes nerves of steel to keep the kids there but I do really believe its a good school.

My ds's school's SATs results went down drastically, from 100 per cent of dcs getting Level 4 to about fifty per cent of dcs reaching 'expected standards' in the last 2 years.

That's because the year six teacher was shit (and the year five one too).

So no secret there! Lots of dcs in the top two years left. It was hellish. All they did was drill for the tests and still got atrocious results.

Oh yes, and the head said how confident she was in her staff too!

But the parents weren't.

OP, I'd be very worried if I were you...