Contact: John Clarke, Deputy County Education Officer Tel: 01962 846464
email [email protected]

1 Summary

1.1 The main Education Development Plan indicators relate to the performance of Hampshire pupils in tests and examinations and the overall performance of Hampshire schools in relation to counties which are most like Hampshire in terms of the socio-economic makeup of the population (our "statistical neighbours"). This report sets out the headline performance in these areas for the school year 2002-2003 and makes brief comment. More detailed analyses will be provided for the Schools Monitoring Panel in early 2004, when more data on the county's performance will be available and the full results of the evaluation of the Education Development Plan (EDP) to September 2003 will be complete.

1.2 Hampshire schools continue to perform well, overall, in tests and examinations, when measured against national averages and the standards achieved in counties most like Hampshire. OFSTED inspections of Hampshire schools also show a positive picture. 87% of schools inspected in 2002-2003 were judged to be good or very good.

2 Test and Examination Results 2003

2.1 Charts showing the trend in performance appear as Appendix 1. A list of Hampshire's statistical neighbours appears as Appendix 2.

2.2 Key Stage 1: Headlines

2.2.1 86% of Hampshire's seven year olds achieved level 2+ in reading, one point down on 2002. This was two points above the national average and the same as in Hampshire's statistical neighbours. Hampshire's schools continued to perform much better than the national average in terms of the proportion of pupils achieving level 3+ in reading.

2.2.2 There were significant changes to results in writing in Key Stage 1 in 2003. The proportion of pupils achieving level 2+ fell across the country and that decline was visible in Hampshire where 85% of pupils achieved this standard, contrasted with 89% in 2002. However, there was a considerable improvement in those achieving level 3+: 17% contrasted with 9% in 2002. Hampshire now exceeds the national average at level 3+ for writing. In previous years it had been the only measure of academic performance in any key stage where Hampshire's performance was below that of the country as a whole.

2.2.3 Results in mathematics at Key Stage 1 were very similar to those of 2002. 92% of pupils achieved level 2+, the same as our statistical neighbours and above the national average. 35% achieved level 3+: much better than the national average, as in previous years.

2.3 Key Stage 1: Commentary

2.3.1 Since 2000, results at Key Stage 1 have reached a plateau and, in the most recent years, all that has been seen is minor fluctuations. This year the exception was the performance in writing and this is explained simply by a change in the assessment framework. New criteria had the effect of stretching the results. Slightly fewer pupils reached level 2+ and many more level 3+. The general view is that the changes more accurately reflect pupils' overall standards in writing.

2.3.2 Hampshire's infant and primary schools continue to perform well at Key Stage 1.

2.4 Key Stage 2: Headlines

2.4.1 Results in English at level 4+ were the same in 2003 as in 2002. 78% of pupils reached this standard in Hampshire and this was the same number of percentage points above statistical neighbours and the national average as in 2002. However, there was a decline in the proportion of pupils in Hampshire achieving level 5+. While still better than the national average, Hampshire's performance fell below the average for statistical neighbours.

2.4.2 Performance in mathematics was much the same as in 2002 at level 4+ (74%) and the same at level 5+ (30%) although the gap between Hampshire and its statistical neighbours and the national average has narrowed at level 5+.

2.4.3 Science results continue to be very good, and better at both level 4+ and 5+ than our statistical neighbours and the national average.

2.5 Key Stage 2: Commentary

2.5.1 The Key Stage 2 writing tasks have been criticised this year for being poorly framed and so uninteresting that they did not allow pupils to demonstrate attainment at level 5 very easily. If this is true, it is true across the country. In Hampshire, the evidence suggests that some schools taught too narrowly for level 4 and need to give pupils more opportunity to practise those skills needed to demonstrate level 5 on the test.

2.5.2 Although there are small fluctuations from year to year, Key Stage 2 results have shown no significant improvement in Hampshire or England over the last three years. Although Hampshire's primary and junior schools continue to perform strongly when compared with statistical neighbours, the county is still a long way from its targets for 2004.

2.5.3 The DfES continues to provide grant aid for consultants to work in Key Stage 2 and there is a new national Primary Strategy that sets out to promote more enjoyment in the primary curriculum as well as excellence in teaching and high standards in all schools. The Strategy also points to the importance of effective leadership and, in this first year, provides for an intensive programme of support to those schools where there is evidence that pupil progress needs to be improved. Work has already begun in seventy Hampshire schools as part of this programme. All of this may help.

2.5.4 There is evidence to suggest that pupils' progress between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 can be improved in a number of schools. The essence of the issue is this: if all junior and primary schools can build successfully through the four years of Key Stage 2, on the standards that children achieve when they are seven, Hampshire would hit its targets. Many schools achieve excellent progress for their pupils already and they work very hard each year to ensure that their standards are maintained. They deserve to be commended for the improvements that they have made in recent years.

2.5.6 Some schools need to sharpen their practice, particularly those where children make insufficient progress in years 3 and 4. All schools need to make sure that they:-

· place the highest priority on pupils' progress;

· set expectations of what should be achieved in each year of the key stage by each pupil;

· ensure that mechanisms are in place that track pupils' progress rigorously;

· intervene where children are not making the progress expected of them and seek advice if solutions cannot be found;

· as far as possible, keep parents informed of and involved with pupils' progress;

· create regular opportunities for their staff to review pupils' work together, to talk about children's progress and, thereby, to discuss the outcomes of their teaching and learn from each other.

· actively support the work of English and mathematics consultants in their schools and reinforce their messages;

· provide regular reports to their governors on the progress that pupils are making so that the Governing Body can fulfil its role in evaluating the work of the school.

2.6 Key Stage 3: Headlines

2.6.1 In line with the performance of statistical neighbours and the national picture, results in English, mathematics and science improved at level 5+ in Key Stage 3 in 2003, by: two points in English, to 73%; four in mathematics, to 76%; and two in science, to 75%.

2.6.2 There have been similar improvements at level 6+ at Key Stage 3. Mathematics improved by four points, to 55% and science, dramatically, by eight points, to 47%. Both of these improvements matched the national trend.

2.6.3 The improvement at English at level 6+ matched the national improvement although counties like Hampshire improved more.

2.7 Key Stage 3: Commentary

2.7.1 The Key Stage 3 Strategy has been largely welcomed by Hampshire's secondary schools and it is generally well supported by headteachers and leadership teams. The vast majority of Hampshire schools have effective arrangements for leading and managing the strategy. The impact across subject departments is variable and the Education Department is targeting support on particular departments so as to have maximum effect.

2.7.2 Its effects are seen in this year's results and further improvements can be expected in future years. It is, however, likely that the improvement will be incremental as new approaches become embedded. It is unlikely that the county's targets for 2004 will be hit in that year.

2.8 Key Stage 4: Headlines

2.8.1 There was a slight improvement in GCSE results in Hampshire in 2003. The
5+ A* - C figure rose by 0.6 of a percentage point to 56.8%. 90.9% of pupils achieved 5+ A* - G grades and 96.7% achieved 1+ A* - G grades. All of these figures are above the national averages and above those of statistical neighbours.

2.9 Key Stage 4: Commentary

2.9.1 Many schools across the country have instituted GNVQ courses and these have tended to boost overall GCSE figures. Hampshire schools have been more reticent to take this path and, against that background, GCSE performance this year is stronger than the raw figures might suggest.

2.9.2 The county is still some way from its EDP targets for 2004. The slight improvement this year has made little impact on the journey that needs to be travelled to hit them and it seems more likely that it will be a later year before all the targets are hit. Its performance against statistical neighbours remains strong but, while some of those counties improved by over one percentage point, the performance of four counties with which Hampshire is compared declined. This might suggest the beginnings of a plateau and it might be that further major improvements at GCSE will not be seen until the improvements in students' standards in Key Stage 3 feed through.

3 Pupil Attendance

3.1 Headlines

3.1.1 Pupil attendance improved slightly in Hampshire primary schools during 2002-2003. Total absence fell from 5.1% to 5%, and this is better than the situation nationally or among statistical neighbours.

3.1.2 Attendance in secondary schools in the county showed a similar improvement. Total absence fell from 8.1% to 7.7% and this placed Hampshire in a slightly better position than its statistical neighbours and better than the national average.

3.2 Commentary

3.2.1 Following the Ofsted inspection of the LEA, changes were made in the way in which the LEA supports schools to ensure good rates of pupil attendance. These changes are bearing fruit.

4 Permanent Exclusions

4.1 Headlines

4.1.1 The number of pupils permanently excluded from primary schools is very small and Hampshire's figures are the same as the national figures and those of statistical neighbours.

4.1.2 The numbers of students permanently excluded from secondary schools is much larger and growing and, for the first time, exclusion rates are greater than the national average and the average for statistical neighbours.

4.1.2 The rate of permanent exclusions has grown in special schools. Although numbers are smaller and figures therefore potentially more volatile, in the last year the exclusion rate rose to be above both the national average and that of statistical neighbours.

4.2 Commentary

4.2.1 The growth in the number of secondary exclusions is the direct result of a change of national policy. Schools have the right to exclude pupils and the LEA has a statutory duty to provide full time education for all such pupils.

4.2.2 There have been detailed reports presented to the PRC already about permanent exclusions and it is clear that new approaches have to be explored. The cost to the education budget is in the region of £12,000 p.a. for each permanently excluded pupil and all of this has to be clawed back from secondary school budgets, penalising those who rarely exclude along with those who exclude more frequently. Discussions are taking place with secondary headteachers on new models to try to address this issue and reports on progress will be made to the PRC in the new year.

4.2.3 Further work is needed with special schools although a project which was to be centred on EBD schools has had to be postponed because of the budget difficulties in the current financial year.

5 Ofsted Inspections 2002-2003

5.1 Headlines

5.1.1 79 Hampshire schools, 1 early years centre and 2 education centres were inspected by Ofsted during the school year 2002-2003. Although Registered Inspectors do not write their reports to formulae, and use different words to describe the same standard, it is possible to analyse the text of the report summaries and provide some conclusions as to the overall quality provided by these schools.

5.1.2 The summaries of the inspectors' judgement are set out below.

	Very Good	Good	Satisfactory	Unsatisfactory
Early Years Centre	1
Infant Schools	4	8	1
Junior Schools	5	7	3
Primary Schools	9	27	3
Secondary Schools	2	3	1	1
Special Schools		5
Education Centres			1	1
Total	21	50	9	2
Percentage	26%	61%	11%	2%

5.2 Commentary

5.2.1 If this sample is representative, Hampshire schools continue to come through the inspection process well. Attainment, measured by tests, is not the only outcome of education which is examined during inspections. This summary provides evidence of good health in the vast majority of Hampshire schools in the wider aspects of education: for example, breadth and balance in the curriculum and pupils' social development.

5.2.2 A revised inspection framework is being used by Ofsted inspectors in the current school year. More emphasis is placed on the school's evaluation of its own strengths and weaknesses but this does not mean that inspection is any less rigorous. In some ways it is more robust. Leadership and management are not described as good, for example, unless there is clear evidence of its positive influence on the quality of teaching and pupils' progress. Teaching is not described as satisfactory unless, similarly, it can be shown to have had positive effects on pupils' progress. Previously, progress, teaching and leadership could sometimes be judged as though they were independent of each other.

Recommendations

1. That the achievements and commitment to improvement of schools and those who support them are commended.

2. That the report is distributed to all Hampshire headteachers and Governing Bodies.

Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - Background Documents

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB The list excludes:

1. Published works

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.