Targets and data drops
We undertake three ‘data drops’ each year, in terms 2, 4 and 6 of each academic year. Each pupil has been set ambitious targets, a clear majority of which are in the Upper Quartile of the national Progression Guidance. Our default expectation is that targets are set in or above the Upper Quartile for each pupil’s age and starting point. The challenge is moderated by the Assistant Heads who in turn benchmark our expectations though meetings with regional partner schools.
Pupils for whom there is no Progression Guidance have targets using national criteria where they exist and high expectations based upon our professional judgment and benchmarking of challenge with regional partner schools where they don’t.
The progress towards the agreed targets is evaluated at each of the data drops and is analysed at a number of different levels:
- At an individual pupil level. Class teams use the data and teachers meet with Assistant Heads to go through data at an individual pupil level. The degree of target challenge will be examined and extended if possible.
- At a class level. After considering the individual pupil data then any patterns across a class of pupils will be examined by teachers with Assistant Heads. Responses to patterns will be made – what’s working well and could be generalised or what isn’t working/hasn’t been covered sufficiently and needs to have a refreshed approach or focus?
- At a departmental level. As well as Assistant Heads discussing departmental outcomes with departmental teams, the data is discussed with the Head and Deputy and the analysis presented by the Assistant Heads to the governing body. The analysis includes a focus upon potentially vulnerable groups within the department. Priorities for the department are informed by these processes.
- At a whole school level. Whole school data is analysed, shared and reported to the governing body where the analysis includes a focus upon departmental data, and whole school and departmental potentially vulnerable groups. Priorities for the school are informed by these processes.
Data is presented in such a way as to enable analysis at a number of different levels and by cohorts identified as specifically meriting attention. It is in a format appropriate for a range of stakeholders.
Governors have determined that the data should be presented in two ways. Firstly, the aggregated data is presented in summary form. An overview of the data is supported by a colour coding system predicated upon the following proportions:
- <70% of challenging targets achieved is coloured orange
- 70-85% of challenging targets achieved is coloured green
- >85% of challenging targets achieved is coloured purple
Secondly, the data is analysed according to whether pupils are on track to exceed or meet targets as well as those on track to miss their targets. This is presented in the form of a range of potentially vulnerable cohorts.
Whole school data, English, 2017/2018 can be found here:
Whole school data, maths, 2017/2018 can be found here:
There is a strong correlation between the quality of teaching, the rigour and accuracy of assessments and outcomes for children and young people.
The quality of teaching is evaluated on a rolling programme by senior leaders and middle leaders, all of whom have received accredited five day lesson observation training from Cambridge Education. We routinely engage in paired lesson observations both internally and with our Senior School Improvement Officer. These paired observations have very high levels of correlation with each other. The cycle of lesson observations is offset from the schedule of data drops, so there is a time lag between pupil outcome and lesson observation data sets. We have been investing heavily in the quality of teaching and have seen the impact of this reflected in pupil outcomes.
None of our students have undertaken an English Baccalaureate GCSE in the last 3 years.
None of our students have undertaken AS or A-level accreditation.