Christine.Merrell@cem.dur.ac.uk
Using Data to Inform Teaching and Learning, and Monitor Progress www.cemcentre.org
ASPECTS Feedback School: 42373 Class: Nursery Language and maths development
80 70
Raw score
60
50 Iu an
40
B et hany
Fred
30
e ri etta Ala naChri stHinen re Guineve nn y Le M icha el E ddy
D av id
20
K yl e Jessic a
10
0 36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
Age at assessment (months) 0% 11-Oct-02
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
60
ASPECTS Feedback School: 42373 Class: Nursery Language and maths development
80 70
Raw score
Iu a ynle a K ett i nr He
d Fre
60 v id Da
50
na Al a
40
e ver in e a c i ss Je
Gu
ny Len
B ethan
y
y E dd Chris tin e
30
20
10
0 36
39
42
45
48
51
54
57
Age at assessment (months) 0% 11-Oct-02
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
60
IDEAS+
Primary 1: IDEAS+ Highlighting and filtering Creating Custom Groups Creating feedback for an individual child Looking at one class against full cohort
Primary 3, 5 and 7: PIPS+ Website
Cohort Summary Value-added
What do you make of each cohort’s results?
PIPS P3, 5 and 7 ~ Grade Frequencies Context VA E D C B A Group Average National Average
-0.0% (0) 4.3% (2) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 4.3% (2) 10.0%
8.5% (4) 8.5% (4) 6.4% (3) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 23.4% (11) 15.0%
0 2.1% (1) 14.9% (7) 40.4% (19) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 57.4% (27) 50.0%
+ 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 6.4% (3) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 6.4% (3) 15.0%
++ 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 2.1% (1) 6.4% (3) 8.5% (4) 10.0%
Group Average 10.6% (5) 27.7% (13) 53.2% (25) 2.1% (1) 6.4% (3) 100.0% (47)
Prior VA E D C B A Group Average National Average
-0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 10.0%
0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 15.0%
0 6.7% (3) 17.8% (8) 17.8% (8) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 42.2% (19) 50.0%
+ 2.2% (1) 6.7% (3) 20.0% (9) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 28.9% (13) 15.0%
++ 0.0% (0) 4.4% (2) 15.6% (7) 2.2% (1) 6.7% (3) 28.9% (13) 10.0%
Group Average 8.9% (4) 28.9% (13) 53.3% (24) 2.2% (1) 6.7% (3) 100.0% (45)
Can you interpret this information? How would you use it?
Mean Score
P3, 5 and 7 Attainment 60
60
58
58
56
56
54
54
52
52
50
50 Maths
Reading
Science
48
48
46
46
44
44
42
42
40
40 Subject
Are these results bad?
Mean Score
P3, 5, 7 Context value-added 10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
0 Maths
Reading
Science
-2
-2
-4
-4
-6
-6
-8
-8
-10
-10 Subject
How do you interpret these results and what should you do?
Maths Attainment Mean Score
Progress over time 60
60
58
58
56
56
54
54
52
52
50
50 Primary Three
Primary Five
Primary Seven
48
48
46
46
44
44
42
42
40
40 Year Group
Maths Context VA Mean Score
Progress over time 10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2
2
0
0 Primary Three
Primary Five
Primary Seven
-2
-2
-4
-4
-6
-6
-8
-8
-10
-10 Year Group
Examples – Ian’s Reading Results Reading
Context
Prior
Context v-a
Start P1
55
End P1
58
Primary 3
56
68
0
-
Primary 5
67
66
+
0
0
Examples – Katy’s Maths Results
Maths
Context
Prior
Context v-a
Start P1
35
End P1
45
Primary 3
58
48
+
+
Primary 5
57
47
0
+
+
Group Grids 15
>>>Mark>>>
Doing better than expected, however they are no longer as far ahead as they used to be
Probably on track before, they have made Ellen Gemma excellent progress and have now moved Ben further aheadHarry
Doing better than expected and this may have been a consistent characteristic over time
Concurrent Value-added
Qasim
5
Helen Abbey
>>>Jack>>>
Lucy
Michael
Gemma
Jonathan Sharna
Doing as well as expected. However, they have moved from a position where they were ahead of similar children
Victoria
Patrick
Fay
Karl Davina Probably underachieving before, however they On track and is probably a consistent Catherine Penny have made excellent progress and are now on Yasmin Edward characteristic over time track. Nicole Kerry Adam Owen
Jodie HannahDaniel
>>>Nathan>>>
Michael
-5
Lee
Olivia Tara Ralf Zoe Fergus
Probably on track before but has fallen behind and is now underachieving
Becky
Isobel Ian
George
Probably underachieving before. They have made good progress but they still have some catching up to do
Underachieving and this may have been a Michael consistent characteristic over time Neil
-15 -15
-5
5 Prior Value-added
15
Standard Feedback Achievement
Standard Feedback Developed Ability
Standard Feedback Reading Modules
Standard Feedback General Maths Modules
Standard Feedback Developed Ability Modules
Standard Feedback Attitudes
Scores Charts
Longitude Charts
Age Equivalent Score
11 10 9 8 7 6 5 7
7.5
8
8.5
9 Age
9.5
10
10.5
Longitude Charts Reading Cameron (25/10/1999)
Age Equivalent Score
11 10 9 8 7 6 5 8
8.5
9
9.5
10 Age
10.5
11
11.5
12
Age Comparison Charts 15
Reading
e Elois e Ja k
14 hel Ra c Amie
13 nn Sha
on
Age Equivalent Score (years)
h Rac
12
be Ara
el
e arin Kath
lla
rge Geo Ellie
re And
w
k Ja c
11
h Isaia
Ro y H
el amu S y en oOllw
e Jam
Reference Upper Limit Lower Limit Reading
nna Joa
s
e Luk Gus
10 am Willi
es Jam
9
Kiera
u Sam
el
ael Mich a Tian
ley Brad
8
7
ria Victo
essa Van
6 9
10 Age (Years)
11