Agenda item

New Key Stage 4 Performance Measures

(To receive a report which outlines the new performance measures to be introduced in 2016 for all secondary schools and its potential impact on Lincolnshire School)

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the new performance measures to be introduced in 2016 for all secondary schools and its potential impact on Lincolnshire schools.

 

It was reported that the principal indicator used by central government and by the media to judge the performance of an individual mainstream secondary school or academy was the percentage of pupils attaining five or more GCSEs at grades A*-C including English and Maths (5ACEM), which was an "attainment" measure.  It was noted that the 5ACEM measure took no account of the ability of the students taking the examinations or of their prior attainment when they entered a school.  Schools that fell below 40% 5ACEM were considered to be below the national 'floor standard' for this measurement.  It was also noted that this measure also concentrated on just 5 subject areas rather than attainment across a broader range of subjects judged to be important for a rounded education.

 

Members were advised that in 2016 the principal measure, and only floor standard, would change to a "progress" measure which would span 8 subjects rather than 5, which would be called "Progress 8".  The new measure would also recognise the importance of English and Maths above all subjects and these subjects would have double weighting in the calculations.  There would also be an "attainment" measure which would be called "Attainment 8" but the Floor Standard would be based on the Progress measure spanning the same eight subjects (Progress 8).  From 2016 onwards, mainstream schools would be deemed to be below the floor standard if their Progress 8 score fell below -0.5.

 

It was also reported that in 2017 a new grading system would be introduced that would use grades 1 to 9 rather than G to A*.  The current grade C was expected to correspond to a numerical grade of 4, but grade 9 would be reserved for the highest scoring 3% of students nationally.  However, grade 5 would be the 'Gold Standard' threshold and equivalent to a current grade C expectation.

 

The Committee received a presentation which explained "attainment 8" and "progress 8" in more detail and members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers in relation to the information contained within the report, and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         This measure would not show the attainment for those children who did not have good academic ability;

·         There was a need to return to teaching children practical skills;

·         It was noted that the range of vocational qualifications had been slimmed down, and these would have to go in the third 'bucket', and a maximum of three could be included in the "Progress 8" score;

·         It was commented that the new measure was discriminatory towards those that wanted to study vocational subjects;

·         There would be a need for schools to respond to this agenda, if they did not, they would be deemed to have failed.  This would be the indicator by which schools would be judged in the future;

·         This measure would take no account of a child's ability when they started at secondary school;

·         In order to deliver Progress 8, there would be a need for teachers who could teach up to 8 subjects, particularly in smaller schools (below 600 pupils was considered to be a small school).  There would be a need to make schools bigger, or give them the opportunity to be part of a bigger organisation so they could share teaching staff;

·         It was queried how the change in exams for maths and English would affect schools, as previously pupils had been allowed to retake exams through the year until they achieved a suitable result, but this change would mean that only the first entry counted, and there would be a move away from early entry;

·         It was noted that over the past two years, a lot of proposals for primary school extensions had come through this scrutiny committee, and it was queried when the children attending these schools would start filtering through to secondary schools shortly.  Members were advised that it would be 5/6 years before these children reached Key Stage 4;

·         Due to the influx of children from abroad, it was queried how children who had not taken SATS at Key Stage 2 would be affected by this measure, and members were advised that SATS would be scrapped and replaced with something else.  Children would receive a secondary readiness score, and primary schools would be required to advise the secondary school of those children who were not 'secondary ready'.  It was suggested that a separate briefing could be provided to the Committee on the changes to the primary curriculum in the future;

·         This would not take into account the local skills needs across the county;

·         In relation to the local needs issue, children would have to ensure that these subjects were extra to the attainment 8 subjects;

·         With the move towards end of course exams, rather than throughout the year, the less academic would be less likely to achieve;

·         There was currently a big discussion taking place nationally on whether RE should be included as an EBacc subject, and it was possible it could become a 'bucket 2' subject in due course;

·         Children still tended to choose their GCSE subjects for year 10 and 11 at the end of year 9;

·         It was acknowledged that children develop at different rates, but if they had not achieved English and maths by the end of year 11, they would be required to retake it until they passed;

·         A child must be developed through good teaching and good study habits;

·         This measure would measure progress against an average score, by comparing on child with the results of an average child with the same prior attainment;

·         There were concerns regarding how children and young people could be better prepared to meet the needs of the local area, mainly in the areas of health and farming.  It was noted that farming was not as labour intensive as it used to be but instead required a different set of skills;

·         It was queried whether the Committee could write to the Secretary of State for Education to express their thoughts about the measure;

·         It was noted that guidance from government indicated that vocational study should be for post-16, and before that the focus should be on academic subjects, particularly English and maths;

·         There was very little space in the curriculum for young people to look at what to specialise in.

 

RESOLVED

 

1.    That the report and the points raised be noted;

2.    That this information be taken into account when forming judgements or making recommendations about secondary schools.

 

Supporting documents:

 

 
 
dot

Original Text: