Ansford

The Results 5ACEM2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

5A*-C (EM)

52% 50% 50% 54% 73.5%

5A*-C 64% 63% 63% 64% 86%

5A*-G 99% 96% 96% 97% 98%

1A*-G 100% 99% 100% 100% 98%

3A*-A N/A 21% 34% 18% 33%

Observation 1: If a student gets Ma and En they always get 5ACEM

ActionFocus on En and Ma: They’ve had priority over just

about everything – more curriculum time; 1:1 out of other lessons (£15000 worth), pre-exam prep, own TA support.

OutcomeEn 62% to 78%; Ma 66% to 79%Staff still complain – but not much.....Results in Foundation subjects.... quite variable

Observation 2: If students get En, Ma and two sciences the rest is easy.

Action Science needed to get from 65-70% where its

been for years to 80%+. We used BTec for 24 critical students... Key committed member of staff set it up...

Outcome:88% got two sciences

Observation 3: Linkage between En and Ma has been poor.(In 2010, Ma 66% and En 62% led to 5ACEM of 54%. 14 students got one but not the

other.)

ActionFortnightly meetings between head, Asst Head

and Heads of Ma and En, tracking the linkage and putting in the intervention packages.

OutcomesAll but 6 students who got one got the other

(78En, 79 Ma led to 74 5ACEM).

Observation 4: Low aspirations in English (always 59-64%)

ActionLUCK.... Head of English steps down and replaced by

someone she trained... 26 years old, very clever, payment by results, driven, an outstanding leader. Drives standards, close focus on ‘what to do to get a C, B, A, A*’, 1:1 support, lunchtime support, less focus on Lit (though results jumped 20%), lots and lots of marking, no student allowed to fail.

Outcomes English goes from 62% to 78% in one year. 43% get an

A*/A.

Observation 5: The school has been poor at keeping its ‘eye on the ball’ between December

and June of Year 11.ActionTutors, LT and Head monitor every year 11 student on a three

week cycle... But the outcomes are linked to specific interventions which are then checked. (It’s my responsibility to know which students are ‘rising to the challenge’ and ‘going off the boil’ and to communicate this to relevant staff).

OutcomesPredictions were constant around the 82AC 72ACEM, there was

no fall away in the Spring Term. Staff became more confident predictors... Results as expected.

Observation 6: Students do less well with new staff

Action Created list of ‘At Risk’ Classes with clear support framework• New staff• NQTs• Staff with a record of satisfactory resultsSupport, three weekly meeting with HoF working to a formulaPut in extra staff to split groups giving concern:28 Ma C/D borderline group split into 2 lots of 1429 French disaffected group split into two

Outcomes20 in the Ma group got a B/C (looked like being 12)21 in the French group got a A*-C (looked like being 15)

Observation 7: The students who underachieve are predictable – KS2 L4, low aspiration, trundling along,

sometimes benign/sometimes not. ActionJudicious use of BTecs – only two courses in Science and

Performing ArtsUse as a motivator for the 5AC indicator and then the 5ACEMDon’t talk about limits set by data to staff or students; get the

curriculum and expectations rightOutcome100% AC in both Btecs KS2 L4 to GCSE conversion much better3 and 4 levels progress much better

Observation 7: Maths teach well and get ‘OK’ results – students fade in year 11

ActionModular Maths – careful monitoring of resultsSplit C/D borderline group into two in Y11

OutcomeMaths goes from 66% to79%... Still more to do...

Is it repeatable?

Data would suggest so.Expectations would suggest so.But....English Edexcel (I don’t trust them at all) and Maths modular

retakes in November are going to be critical.What have I learnt?If there’s a problem/issue don’t duck it and if it costs money,

pay up. These results came with ‘hidden additional costs’ of about £30000 on a year group of 113 students.

Focus on high quality middle leaders who don’t tolerate mediocrity.