Evaluation of the Two Year Key Stage 3 Project - Communities and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table E3 - Change in scale scores from Year 7 to 9: Pupils exposed to condensed curricula atPhase 1 Project schools compared with pupils at Comparison schoolsExposed pupils atPhase 1 Projectschools (N=1794)SDPupils atComparison schools(N=1727)SDSignificant(ind t-testp
ANNEX F - CASE STUDY SUMMARIESPhoebeth SchoolThe case study visit took place in Autumn 2004. At that time the first cohort of Project pupils were inYear 8.Phoebeth School is a large, mixed, 11-16 school located in a village in rural England. It serves anintake with a wide range of ability. The proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals is muchlower than the national average and very few pupils come from minority ethnic groups. In terms ofattainment, performance at Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4 is above the national average, and the DfESvalue added scores are in line with the national average.The school participated in Phase 1 of the Project. The idea of a shortened Key Stage 3 arose well beforethe Project (perhaps 10 years before) with an accelerated mathematics course for the top set. This arosefrom an awareness of areas of repetition within the Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4 curricula. However,under this arrangement the Key Stage 3 course was simply stopped after two years at whatever pointhad been reached rather than attempting to condense the curriculum. These pupils were then following atwo year GCSE course which was completed in Year 10, followed by A level modules in Year 11.Science later followed a similar pattern and when the school heard about the Key Stage 3 Project itseemed natural to take part.Departments decided for themselves whether to participate in the Project and some, such as the ModernForeign Languages Department, elected to take part while others, such as Humanities, decided not toparticipate.Among those subjects in which a condensed Key Stage 3 was pursued departments were able to choosewhether all or just some pupils should follow a condensed Key Stage 3. For example, in mathematicsall pupils followed a two year Key Stage 3 course. For the top sets this led on to GCSE mathematicsand an additional mathematics qualification with both completed in Year 11. For the bottom sets thisimplied a foundation year in Year 7 followed by a two year Key Stage 3 in Year 8 and Year 9 leading toFoundation GCSE mathematics in Years 10 and 11. For middle sets a condensed Key Stage 3 course inYear 7 and Year 8 was followed by a three year GCSE course.In contrast only some pupils completed a Modern Foreign Languages Key Stage 3 programme in twoyears with the bottom set following an entry level qualification in Year 9 and the top set going on tostart GCSE courses in Year 9.In other subjects, following the completion of a two year Key Stage 3 course pupils could elect tofollow a ‘pre-Key Stage 4’ option course. By bringing forward option choices to Year 9 it was hopedthat pupils could elect to drop subjects in which they were not interested while having achieved thesame levels that would have been expected after three years.All three teachers interviewed expressed the view that some pupils’ attainment reached a plateau andthat bringing assessment forward could enable them to achieve the same test levels and then move on towork on programmes of study that they found more engaging.Interestingly, the mathematics department, with its experience of early entry to GCSE followed by Alevel modules in Year 11 had elected to have all pupils sit examinations in Year 11 rather than Year 10because previous experience indicated that early entry could lead to a loss of motivation among pupilsin Year 11 (some of whom would not be planning to follow mathematics at A level).72
Page 1 and 2:
RESEARCHEvaluation of the Two YearK
Page 4 and 5:
CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY 21. EVALU
Page 6:
nationally expected level for pupil
Page 9 and 10:
For schools operating an accelerate
Page 11 and 12:
2.2 Attainment and attitudesThe tim
Page 13 and 14:
could follow a Year 7 and Year 8 Ke
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 2 - Percentage of Project sc
Page 17 and 18:
The analysis of Key Stage 3 results
Page 19 and 20:
Table 4 - Proportion of pupils achi
Page 21 and 22:
Figure 4 - 2005 Key Stage 3 mathema
Page 23 and 24: Table 6 - Proportion of pupils achi
Page 25 and 26: SummaryIn the case of English, when
Page 27 and 28: 4.4 Attainment summaryThe analysis
Page 29 and 30: to 8 these were in the opposite dir
Page 31 and 32: Figure 10 - Percentage of Year 7 pu
Page 33 and 34: 6. ANALYSIS OF CASE STUDY DATAAs ha
Page 35 and 36: Table 9 - Operationalisation of the
Page 37 and 38: 6.1 Overall viewsMost, though not a
Page 39 and 40: Points of interest for the higher s
Page 41 and 42: The key advantage is opening up Key
Page 43 and 44: 6.3 ProgressionNevertheless, findin
Page 45 and 46: would no longer exist. Both of the
Page 47 and 48: However, as a colleague noted, even
Page 49 and 50: Most commonly the freedom was used
Page 51 and 52: Phase 2 Project and Phase 2 Compari
Page 53 and 54: A11 - Key Stage 3 attainmentProject
Page 55 and 56: A20 - Reported number of books in t
Page 57 and 58: The variables listed below were inc
Page 59 and 60: Table C1 - Final model for Year 7 M
Page 62 and 63: Table C3 - Final model for Year 7 E
Page 64 and 65: Figure C2 - Year 7 English Optional
Page 66 and 67: Table C8 - Final model for Year 8 m
Page 68 and 69: Figure C4 - Year 8 mathematics high
Page 70 and 71: Table C11 - Final model for Year 8
Page 72: Good teachersMy teachers make sure
Page 77 and 78: Abbotswell SchoolThe case study vis
Page 79 and 80: Elsiemaud SchoolThe case study visi
Page 81 and 82: Henryson SchoolThe case study visit
Page 83 and 84: ANNEX G - OTHER EARLY ENTRANTS TO 2
Page 85 and 86: Table G5 - Key Stage 3 Mathematics
show all

Evaluation of the Two Year Key Stage 3 Project - Communities and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?