Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

@SouthCoastSaint it's going to work that way for the first few years, and then the plan is to work on historical data, so you know where you are in advance.

 

It'll have to be on the current year's data to start with, though, as a lot of schools don't have a curriculum designed for Progress 8 at the moment...

Posted

So (head aching a bit here).....

 

2016 students will be measured against their fellow 2016 students. A school will have to perform better than the national average to get a positive P8 score.

 

But (skating over 2017-18 as I am not sure how they work yet!), 2019 students will be measured against a benchmark set in 2016. So in theory, all schools in the country could get a positive P8 score. Is that right?

Posted

My understanding is that 2016 will be compared to the previously published Attainment 8 Estimated Outcome for 2013 (really annoys me that call it estimated and not expected...), 2017 against 2014, then from 2018 onwards a 3 point moving average will be used each year.

 

Theoretically, yes it is possible for every school to have a positive P8 when working with previous year's data (which is the best we'll have for monitoring) - however this means the following year's P8 will be significantly higher than previous. It's based on averages so there will always be some + some -.

 

Already seeing big changes - I applied 2017 point scores and latest (2014) Attainment 8 expected to my 2016 cohort; they went from an overall positive P8 to well below floor standard (-0.5)

 

This is going to be messy for a few years!

 

Don't forget - everyone must be above average ;)

Posted
I'm pulling my hair out trying to sort KS2 fine point scores so that I can work this stuff out properly! NCA Tools and K2S only gives us test marks, I can't find anything other than sub-levels in FFT Aspire and FFT Live does show fine point scores but never shows the full cohort. Ggggrrrrrr
Posted

"My understanding is that 2016 will be compared to the previously published Attainment 8 Estimated Outcome for 2013 (really annoys me that call it estimated and not expected...), 2017 against 2014, then from 2018 onwards a 3 point moving average will be used each year."

 

@losojos, can you point me to anything that explains this? I made my assumption based on the guidance document that came out last week:

 

"Estimated grades

In 2016, the minimum grades each pupil requires to achieve a positive Progress 8 score (also known as their ‘estimated grade’) will not be known in advance. This is because each pupil’s results are compared to other pupils with the same prior attainment within the same cohort."

 

This is so very complicated *cries*

Posted

It won't be an a priori measure until 2019:

 

2016 schools measured against 2016 national data

2017 schools measured against 2017 national data

2018 schools measured against 2018 national data

2019 schools measured against 2016 national data

2020 schools measured against 2017 national data

and so-on

 

The key parts are on page 21 of the guidance note, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/progress-8-school-performance-measure

 

From 2019 we plan to move to a system in which schools are informed in advance about the results each pupil will require to achieve a positive Progress 8 score. In 2019, expectations will be set three years previously, using 2016 results, so that the information is available to schools during pupils’ year 9 study. Then for 2020, expectations would be set from the 2017 results, and so on.

 

This approach would allow the Progress 8 measure to recognise improvement in national performance, and it will help schools with their target setting.

 

 

But note that they also state

We will confirm the position for the 2017 and 2018 progress measure later in the year.

 

There has been a history of this translating to mean

We'll look at the data, and realise that this wouldn't work, or is incorrect, and then have to change policy to reflect this

 

The stark reality, is that many schools are nowhere near ready for Progress 8 in terms of the curriculum offer, so there won't be a settled approach to handling this in schools until maybe 2017 or 2018 results. That's if the government doesn't change, if policy doesn't change, and a million and one other things. Personally, I think some kind of a-priori measure would be a good idea, but a three-year old one is crazy. Nothing stays still for three years in education!

Posted

@MattMitchell - thanks for that, very helpful.

 

You're right, basing P8 on 3 year old data seems dumb to say the least. Surely, a 3 point moving average would give a much better basis? Basing it on a single year leaves the whole thing open to massive deviation, particularly for 2019-2021 when it's based on the early days and (by then) vastly different curriculum models.




×
×
  • Create New...