DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report from the Primary Phase: Pre-School, School and Family Influences on Children's Development During Key Stage 2 (7-11) Kathy Sylva University of Oxford

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report from the Primary Phase: Pre-School, School and Family Influences on Children's Development During Key Stage 2 (7-11) Kathy Sylva University of Oxford View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Research Online University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Social Sciences - Papers Faculty of Social Sciences 2008 Final report from the primary phase: Pre-school, school and family influences on children's development during Key Stage 2 (7-11) Kathy Sylva University of Oxford Edward Melhuish University of Wollongong, [email protected] Pam Sammons University of Nottingham Iram Siraj-Blatchford University of London, [email protected] Brenda Taggart University of London Publication Details Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Taggart, B. (2008). Final report from the primary phase: Pre-school, school and family influences on children's development during Key Stage 2 (7-11). Nottingham, United Kingdom: Department for Children, Schools and Families. Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Final report from the primary phase: Pre-school, school and family influences on children's development during Key Stage 2 (7-11) Abstract EPPE 3-11 is a large study of the developmental trajectories of approximately 2800 children in England from age 3 to 11 years. This report focuses on the primary school phase, particularly Key Stage 2 (ages 7-11). Many children have prospered, leaving Key Stage 2 (at age 11) with confidence and armed with the skills they need to tackle learning in secondary school. However, some children moved onto secondary school with poor skills in key areas or with low self-image and aspiration. The EPPE 3-11 project set out to explain some of the reasons behind these different developmental trajectories. Keywords during, final, key, report, stage, 2, 7, 11, primary, phase, pre, school, family, influences, children, development Disciplines Education | Social and Behavioral Sciences Publication Details Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Taggart, B. (2008). Final report from the primary phase: Pre-school, school and family influences on children's development during Key Stage 2 (7-11). Nottingham, United Kingdom: Department for Children, Schools and Families. This report is available at Research Online: http://ro.uow.edu.au/sspapers/1807 Research Report DCSF-RR061 Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11) Final Report from the Primary Phase: Pre-school, School and Family Influences on Children’s Development during Key Stage 2 (Age 7-11) Kathy Sylva+, Edward Melhuish#, Pam Sammons$, Iram Siraj-Blatchford* and Brenda Taggart* +University of Oxford, #Birkbeck, University of London, $University of Nottingham *Institute of Education, University of London Contents Research Report No DCSF-RR061 Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11) Final Report from the Primary Phase: Pre-school, School and Family Influences on Children’s Development during Key Stage 2 (Age 7-11) Kathy Sylva+, Edward Melhuish#, Pam Sammons$, Iram Siraj-Blatchford* and Brenda Taggart* +University of Oxford, #Birkbeck, University of London, $University of Nottingham and *Institute of Education, University of London The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department for Children, Schools and Families. © Sylva, Melhuish, Sammons , Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart 2008 ISBN 978 1 84775 292 5 Contents THE EPPE 3-11 RESEARCH TEAM Principal Investigators Professor Kathy Sylva Department of Education, University of Oxford 00 44 (0)1865 274 008 / email [email protected] Professor Edward Melhuish Institute for the Study of Children, Families and Social Issues Birkbeck University of London 00 44 (0)207 079 0834 / email [email protected] Professor Pam Sammons School of Education, University of Nottingham 00 44 (0)115 951 4434 / email [email protected] Professor Iram Siraj-Blatchford Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6218 / email [email protected] *Brenda Taggart Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6219 / email [email protected] Research Officers Dr Sofka Barreau Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6608 / email [email protected] Dr Yvonne Anders (née Grabbe) Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6608 / email [email protected] Dr Stephen Hunt Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6608 / email [email protected] Dr Helena Jelicic Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6608 / email [email protected] Rebecca Smees Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6608 / email [email protected] Wesley Welcomme Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6684 / email [email protected] Olga Cara Institute of Education, University of London 00 44 (0)207 612 6608 / email [email protected] *Also Research Co-ordinator Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The EPPE 3-11 project is a major longitudinal study funded by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). The research would not be possible without the support and co- operation of the six Local Authorities (LAs) and the many pre-school centres, primary schools, children and parents participating in the research. EPPE is an associate project in the ESRC Teaching and Learning Research Programme. Contents Contents Page no. Executive Summary i Section 1: Introduction and background to the study 1 Summary of Key Messages 1 Earlier findings from the EPPE research programme: ages 3 - 7 1 The impact of pre-school at school entry (age 5) 2 The impact of pre-school at the end of Key Stage 1 (age 7) 3 What differentiates the most effective pre-schools?: Evidence from case studies 4 Section 2: How EPPE 3-11 studied children’s development 8 Summary of Key Messages 8 Design of the study 8 Aims of the research for Key Stage 2 (KS2) 8 The Sample 8 Child trajectories 9 The academic effectiveness of the primary school 13 Observations of classrooms and school processes 13 Ofsted inspection judgements 14 Case Studies 14 Data collection 14 Analytical strategy 14 The research questions 15 Section 3: Child, family and home background effects at the end of primary school 16 Summary of Key Messages 16 Child characteristics 16 Parental, family and home characteristics 16 Background effects at the end of primary school 17 Child characteristics 17 Parental and Family characteristics 18 The Early years Home Learning Environment (Early years HLE) in the pre-school period 21 Section 4: Pre-school and Primary School Influences on children’s attainment and progress in Key Stage 2 - Cognitive and social/behavioural outcomes 28 Summary of Key Messages 28 Continuing Pre-school effects 28 Pre-School Attendance 28 Pre-school Quality 29 Pre-school Centre Effectiveness 34 The combined effect of the home learning environment (HLE) and pre-school 39 Primary school academic effectiveness 45 Contents The combined impact of pre-school experience and primary school effectiveness 46 The combined impact of pre-school effectiveness and primary school effectiveness 47 Summarising Pre-school and Primary School Influences 50 Pupils’ progress across Key Stage 2 (KS2) 50 Summary and implications of pre-school and primary school effects at end of primary school 51 Section 5: Understanding the influences of primary school practices 55 Summary of Key Messages 55 Exploring classroom processes in Year 5 55 Classroom observations 55 Disadvantaged groups 59 Predicting children’s progress using observational measures and teacher perception factors 59 What matters in the classroom? 60 What matters outside the classroom? 63 The relationship between classroom observations and measures of effectiveness 67 Conclusions 70 Key findings on the influences of primary school practices 71 Section 6: Exploring Pupils’ Self-perceptions and Views of primary school 73 Summary of Key Messages 73 A. Factors contributing to Pupils’ Self-perceptions and Views of primary school 74 Pupils’ Self-perceptions 74 Pupils’ Views of primary school 76 B. Relationships of Pupils’ Self-perceptions and Views of primary school to their developmental outcomes 76 Pupils’ Self-perceptions and outcomes 76 Pupils’ Views of primary school and outcomes 78 Conclusions and Implications 79 Section 7: Understanding Pupils’ learning trajectories 81 Summary of Key Messages 81 Achievement gaps and what influences them 81 Key findings on the effectiveness of pre-school, primary school and the Early years home learning environment (HLE) 83 Performance above or below expectation and what predicts it 84 How do low SES families support pupil’s learning in the home? 85 The qualitative case-study research questions 87 Section 8: Other influences on children’s development 91 Summary of Key Messages 91 The neighbourhood influences on children’s development 91 Mobility and children’s development 94 Contents Out of school hours learning (OSHL) in Key Stage 2 96 Transition between primary and secondary school 99 Term of birth (Summer born children) 102 Section 9: Concluding discussion 104 Key Findings 104 EPPE 3-11 findings relevant to policy 110 How EPPE 3-11 has contributed to the research literature 111 Relationship of the EPPE 3-11 findings to other research studies 112 EPPE 3-11 becomes EPPSE - Effective Pre-school, Primary and Secondary Education 113 References 114 Glossary of terms 127 Appendix 1: The policy context of the EPPE 3-11 study 131 Appendix 2: Summary of data collected 134 Appendix 3: Home Learning Environment (HLE) measures 135 Appendix 4: The Multiple Disadvantage Index 136 Appendix 5: Investigating the academic effectiveness of all primary schools in England 137 Appendix 6: The relationship between classroom observations and teachers’ perceptions 138 Appendix 7: The Key Stage 1 Home Learning Environment (HLE) 141 Appendix 8: Classroom observation instruments 142 List of Tables Page no.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Leveraging the Private Sector to Improve Primary School Enrolment
    Leveraging the Private Sector to Improve Primary School Enrolment: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial in Pakistan 1 (November 2013) [PRELIMINARY AND INCOMPLETE — DO NOT DISTRIBUTE] Felipe Barrera-Osorio (Harvard, Graduate School of Education) David S. Blakeslee (Columbia University) Matthew Hoover (RAND) Leigh L. Linden (University of Texas at Austin, BREAD, J-PAL, IPA, IZA, NBER) Dhushyanth Raju (The World Bank) Stephen Ryan (University of Texas at Austin) Abstract: We evaluate the effects of publicly funded private primary schools on child enrollment in a sample of 199 villages in 10 underserved districts of rural Sindh province, Pakistan. The program is found to significantly increase child enrollment, which increases by 30 percentage points in treated villages. There is no overall differential effect of the intervention for boys and girls, due to similar enrollment rates in control villages. We find no evidence that providing greater financial incentives to entrepreneurs for the recruitment of girls leads to a greater increase in female enrollment than does an equal compensation scheme for boys and girls. Test scores improve dramatically in treatment villages, rising by 0.67 standard deviations relative to control villages. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 We are deeply grateful to Mariam Adil and Aarij Bashir of The World Bank for their valuable insights in the design of the survey and their crucial support in its implementation. ! 1! I. Introduction The promotion of universal primary education is an important policy priority, as reflected in such initiatives as the Millennium Development Goals and the Education for All movement. Considerable progress has been made in recent years in raising primary education levels; nonetheless, low enrollment levels persist in regions such as Sub- Saharan Africa, West and Southwestern Asia, and South Asia (Hausmann et al., 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • EDUCATION in CHINA a Snapshot This Work Is Published Under the Responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD
    EDUCATION IN CHINA A Snapshot This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Photo credits: Cover: © EQRoy / Shutterstock.com; © iStock.com/iPandastudio; © astudio / Shutterstock.com Inside: © iStock.com/iPandastudio; © li jianbing / Shutterstock.com; © tangxn / Shutterstock.com; © chuyuss / Shutterstock.com; © astudio / Shutterstock.com; © Frame China / Shutterstock.com © OECD 2016 You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgement of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to [email protected]. Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) at [email protected] or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) at [email protected]. Education in China A SNAPSHOT Foreword In 2015, three economies in China participated in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment, or PISA, for the first time: Beijing, a municipality, Jiangsu, a province on the eastern coast of the country, and Guangdong, a southern coastal province.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Childhood Education and Care in the United States: an Overview of the Current Policy Picture
    International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy Copyright 2007 by Korea Institute of Child Care and Education 2007, Vol. 1, No.1, 23-34 Early Childhood Education and Care in the United States: An Overview of the Current Policy Picture Sheila B. Kamerman Shirley Gatenio-Gabel Columbia University Fordham University USA USA Early childhood education and care (ECEC) in the US includes a wide range of part-day, full-school-day, and full- work-day programs, under educational, social welfare, and commercial auspices, funded and delivered in a variety of ways in both the public and the private sectors, designed sometimes with an emphasis on the “care” component of ECEC and at other times with stress on “education” or with equal attention to both. Although ECEC scholars and advocates are increasingly convinced of the need to integrate all these program types, categorical funding coupled with diverse societal values continue to support the differences. The result is a fragmented ECEC system, of wide- ranging quality and with skewed access, but with some movement in recent years toward the integration of early childhood education and care. Key Words : early education, child care, preschool 1Increased attention to early childhood education and in a variety of ways in both the public and the private care (ECEC) has been observed in all the industrialized sectors, designed sometimes with an emphasis on the countries but our focus here is on a current picture of “care” component of ECEC and at other times with ECEC in the United States (U.S.). stress on “education” or with equal attention to both.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evaulation of Key Stage 3 2007
    An Evaluation of Key Stage 3 2007 S13/2007 November 2007 FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES POLICY AND PERFORMANCE KEY STAGE 3, 2007 Research Report S13/2007 This research report presents an analysis of Key Stage 3 results in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea in 2007. Results are compared with statistical neighbours and the national averages, and with previous years. Results are presented by school and are contextualised by gender, entitlement to receive a free school meal, SEN, ethnicity, time in school, term of birth, IDACI and pupils’ attendance. The Royal Borough’s results are compared with the 2007 national average and with previous years. The results of a ‘value-added’ assessment of pupil achievement at Key Stage 3 (2007) are presented, using pupils’ previous achievement at Key Stage 2 (2004) as the baseline measure. Further Sam Utting or Diana Hall information available from: Telephone: 0207 361 3096 or 0207 598 4815 Policy and Performance welcomes your comments on this and other reports, and any suggestions for future research. KEY STAGE 3 2007 CONTENTS Paragraph numbers: 1 Introduction 2 The requirements of Key Stage 3 Statutory Assessment in 2007. 3 The structure of Key Stage 3 Assessment in 2007. 4 Evaluation of Key Stage 3 Targets in 2007. 5 Summary of results 6 Borough level results 7 Holland Park 8 St Thomas More 9 Sion Manning 10 Cardinal Vaughan 11 Factors affecting performance (borough level) 12 Ethnicity 13 Attendance 14 Key Stage 2 (2004) to Key Stage 3 (2007) 15 Looked After Children 16 Conclusion 17 Recommendations
    [Show full text]
  • Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 3 Transition Project
    Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 3 Transition Project Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 3 Transition Project August 2005 Prepared by Keith Fuller (Senior Consultant) Frank Thomas (Associate Consultant) Colin Horswell Mouchel Parkman Strelley Hall Nottingham NG8 6PE T +44 (0)115 9061 313 F +44 (0)115 9061 302 Prepared for KS2-3 Transition Design Collaborative Steering Group Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the staff and pupils of the following for their co-operation and support in the compilation of this report. Seven Kings High School (Redbridge); Valentines High School (Redbridge); Archbishop Tenison’s C of E High School (Croydon); Norbury Manor High School for Girls (Croydon); Jo Richardson Community School (Barking and Dagenham); Haydon School (Hillingdon); Rutlish School (Merton); Preston Manor High School (Brent); Battersea Technology College (Wandsworth); Lady Margaret School (Hammersmith and Fulham); Stockwell Park School (Lambeth); Highbury Fields School (Islington); Stanley Park High School (Sutton); Park View Academy (Haringey); Tolworth Girls’ School (Kingston-upon-Thames); The Ravensbourne School (Bromley); Little Ilford School (Newham). Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 3 Transition Project Contents 1 Introduction.................................................................................................1 2 Methodology ...............................................................................................3 2.1 The questionnaire and interviews in schools.................................................3 2.2 Good practice
    [Show full text]
  • Classifying Educational Programmes
    Classifying Educational Programmes Manual for ISCED-97 Implementation in OECD Countries 1999 Edition ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Foreword As the structure of educational systems varies widely between countries, a framework to collect and report data on educational programmes with a similar level of educational content is a clear prerequisite for the production of internationally comparable education statistics and indicators. In 1997, a revised International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED-97) was adopted by the UNESCO General Conference. This multi-dimensional framework has the potential to greatly improve the comparability of education statistics – as data collected under this framework will allow for the comparison of educational programmes with similar levels of educational content – and to better reflect complex educational pathways in the OECD indicators. The purpose of Classifying Educational Programmes: Manual for ISCED-97 Implementation in OECD Countries is to give clear guidance to OECD countries on how to implement the ISCED-97 framework in international data collections. First, this manual summarises the rationale for the revised ISCED framework, as well as the defining characteristics of the ISCED-97 levels and cross-classification categories for OECD countries, emphasising the criteria that define the boundaries between educational levels. The methodology for applying ISCED-97 in the national context that is described in this manual has been developed and agreed upon by the OECD/INES Technical Group, a working group on education statistics and indicators representing 29 OECD countries. The OECD Secretariat has also worked closely with both EUROSTAT and UNESCO to ensure that ISCED-97 will be implemented in a uniform manner across all countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Lower Secondary Schools in Norway
    Reviews of National Policies for Education IMPROVING LOWER SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN NORWAY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The report Improving lower secondary schools in Norway aims to help education authorities in Norway and other OECD countries to understand the importance of lower secondary education and to find approaches to strengthen this key education level. It provides an overview of the structure of lower secondary education and the main challenges it faces across OECD countries, develops a comparative framework of the key policy levers for success in lower secondary and adapts it to Norway’s specific context. The recommendations focus on teacher quality, school success, student pathways and on the process of effective policy implementation. The report is a result of the OECD’s efforts to support making reform happen across OECD and partner countries. Lower secondary is key to consolidate student achievement in education Lower secondary is a fundamental level of education with two complementary objectives: to offer all students the opportunity to obtain a basic level of knowledge and skills considered necessary for adult life; and to provide relevant education for all students, as they choose either to continue studying further on in academic or a more vocational route, or to enter the labour market. It is a key stage of basic education, in transition between primary and upper secondary. The first years of secondary education are the best chance to consolidate basic skills and to get the students at risk of academic failure back on track. Lower secondary education is the level that usually caters to early adolescents between the ages of 10 and 16.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Education in Primary School in Sweden: a Study of Teachers Views on Teaching Strategies and Subject Content
    Paper ID #12004 Technology education in primary school in Sweden: A study of teachers views on teaching strategies and subject content. Mrs. Birgit Fahrman, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Birgit Fahrman is PhD student at The School of Education and Communication in Engineering Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Her research focuses on teachers’ use of practical exercises in teach- ing technology and engineering. She teachers technology in secondary school. Dr. Lena B. Gumaelius, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden Dr Lena Gumaelius has a background as a researcher in Biotechnology, in which field she still teaches undergraduate students at KTH. (Lena got her Master of Science in chemistry 1993 and her PhD in Environmental Microbiology in 2001.) In parallel with her research, she worked for several years with development of experiments for students at House of Science. In 2006 Lena became the director of House of Science, which she remained until 2012. House of Science is a university based Science centre with about 40 000 visitors were the goal is to stimulate high school students’ interest for the natural sciences, math and technology. During these years Lena developed her pedagogical skills and competence in the pedagogic field and besides leading the activities she organised pedagogical training for teachers, pupils and university students. Since 2011 Lena is head of the new Department of Learning at the School of Education and Communi- cation in Engineering Sciences (ECE), KTH. Lena is responsible for building up a new strong research environment in engineering and technology education, K-12 to university level. Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • KPS) Becomes an Academy Under Sikh Academies Trust (SAT
    1st February 2021 Khalsa Primary School (KPS) becomes an academy under Sikh Academies Trust (SAT) On the 1st February, Khalsa Primary School (KPS) has been officially designated as an academy by the Department for Education (DfE) under the newly established Sikh Academies Trust (SAT). Converting to an academy trust provides the opportunity to maximise expertise and best practice to further advance the school, and the ability to use resources more efficiently and effectively for the benefit of all pupils, staff and parents. Benefits include: • Ability to broaden and enrich the curriculum to enhance opportunities for all children • Greater control with regards to how finances are spent and increased access to funding streams • Management of school budgets that is focused on supporting pupil progress • Driving the development and growth of the school. The academy conversion will help KPS build on its successes in recent years. Highlights of 2020 saw KPS being rated as the ‘Best Primary School in Slough’ and was once again graded as ‘Outstanding’ by Ofsted. Furthermore, KPS teachers won Silver Awards in the category for Teacher of the Year in a Primary School and, the award for Headteacher of the Year in a Primary School. Pupils benefited from a stream of new facilities including a new library, a state-of-the art food technology room, outdoor gym, a new IT suite and refurbished toilets throughout the school. As an academy, KPS will have the opportunity to form stronger links with other schools for the benefit of all children, and will continue to maintain a mutually beneficial relationship with Slough Borough Council.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 1 and 2 Framework Document
    The national curriculum in England Key stages 1 and 2 framework document September 2013 Contents 1. Introduction 4 2. The school curriculum in England 5 3. The national curriculum in England 6 4. Inclusion 8 5. Numeracy and mathematics 9 6. Language and literacy 10 7. Programmes of study and attainment targets 12 English 13 Spoken language – years 1 to 6 17 Key stage 1 – year 1 19 Key stage 1 – year 2 26 Lower key stage 2 – years 3 and 4 33 Upper key stage 2 – years 5 and 6 41 English Appendix 1: Spelling 49 Spelling – work for year 1 50 Spelling – work for year 2 55 Spelling – work for years 3 and 4 59 Word list – years 3 and 4 64 Spelling – years 5 and 6 66 Word list – years 5 and 6 71 International Phonetic Alphabet (non-statutory) 73 English Appendix 2: Vocabulary, grammar and punctuation 74 Glossary for the programmes of study for English (non-statutory) 80 Mathematics 99 Key stage 1 – years 1 and 2 101 Year 1 programme of study 102 Year 2 programme of study 107 Lower key stage 2 – years 3 and 4 113 Year 3 programme of study 114 Year 4 programme of study 120 2 Upper key stage 2 – years 5 and 6 126 Year 5 programme of study 127 Year 6 programme of study 135 Mathematics Appendix 1: Examples of formal written methods for addition, subtraction, multiplication and division 142 Science 144 Key stage 1 146 Key stage 1 programme of study – years 1 and 2 147 Year 1 programme of study 148 Year 2 programme of study 151 Lower key stage 2 – years 3 and 4 154 Lower key stage 2 programme of study 155 Year 3 programme of study 157 Year 4 programme of study 161 Upper key stage 2 – years 5 and 6 165 Upper key stage 2 programme of study 166 Year 5 programme of study 168 Year 6 programme of study 172 Art and design 176 Computing 178 Design and technology 180 Geography 184 History 188 Languages 193 Music 196 Physical education 198 3 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Stage 3 Curriculum for Years 7, 8 & 9
    Key Stage 3 2014 Key Stage 3 Curriculum for Years 7, 8 & 9 HITCHIN BOYS’ SCHOOL, GRAMMAR SCHOOL WALK, HITCHIN, HERTFORDSHIRE. SG5 1JB ART AND DESIGN Name of Head of Department: Mrs D Aldin-Burnett (from whom further information may be obtained) Teachers: Mrs O Konanec Mrs H Scripps Mrs G Anderson Miss K Rainbow Art Technician Mrs D Ward Number of teaching periods per week: Year 7 2 (One hour periods) Year 8 1 Year 9 1 Homework: Homework is set in line with the whole-school policy. It may involve such tasks as internet research about particular artists, collecting source material or working in sketch books. Method of assessment: Year 7: Assessment at the end of each unit of work (3 units per year) + examination in June. Year 8: Assessment at the end of each unit of work (3 units per year) + examination in June. Year 9: Assessment at the end of each unit of work (3 units per year) + examination in June. Details of field trips or visits: Visits will be arranged to local galleries and museum. All visits form part of the syllabus. Visits will relate to topics undertaken in class. Details of special equipment or clothing needed with approximate costs: Pupils are advised to wear some form of protective clothing. An overall, apron or old shirt will be adequate. Staff and other pupils cannot be held responsible for clothing accidentally damaged. An A4 book and portfolio will be issued at the beginning of each KS3 year. Pupils taking GCSE will be asked to purchase an A3 book for the 4 units throughout the 2 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress Scores for Key Stage 4: School and College Performance Tables
    Progress scores for key stage 4: school and college performance tables Progress measure ‘bandings’ – how we calculate them In the school and college performance tables, the Progress 8 scores are grouped into 5 ‘bandings’: • well below average • below average • average • above average • well above average The bandings look like this: The table below explains how we calculated the bandings for 2019 and 2018. What the Progress 8 scores show The Progress 8 score in the performance tables show how much progress pupils at this school or college made from the end of key stage 2 to the end of key stage 4 studies, compared to pupils across England who got similar results at the end of key stage 2. Read more about how Progress 8 and Attainment 8 measures are calculated See the school and college performance tables. How we calculated the bandings for 2019 and 2018 Progress A school/college1 was given the description if… description The progress score is 0.5 or higher, and lower confidence interval limit Well above is higher than 0. average 2019: About 14% of schools/colleges in England 2018: About 14% of schools/colleges in England The progress score is higher than 0 but lower than 0.5, and lower confidence interval limit is higher than 0. Above average 2019: About 17% of schools/colleges in England 2018: About 17% of schools/colleges in England The progress score has a confidence interval that includes 0. That is, the score’s lower confidence interval limit is 0 or less and/or the Average score’s upper confidence interval limit is 0 or more.
    [Show full text]