24
Report on the Annual Na/onal Assessments (ANAs) of 2011 Presenter: Dr Muavia Gallie (PhD) Educa/on Moving Up Cc.

Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making

Report  on  the    Annual  Na/onal  Assessments  

(ANAs)  of  2011  

Presenter:  Dr  Muavia  Gallie  (PhD)  Educa/on  Moving  Up  Cc.  

Page 2: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 3: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making

15  

20  

25  

30  

35  

40  

45  

Gr  3  Literacy   Gr  3  Numeracy   Gr  6  Languages   Gr  6  Mathema/cs  

Average  Pe

rcen

tage  

Average  %  scores  a0er  re-­‐marking  

Eastern  Cape  

Free  State  

Gauteng  

KwaZulu  Natal  

Limpopo  

Mpumalanga  

Norther  Cape  

North  West  

Western  Cape  

South  Africa  

Page 4: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 5: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 6: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 7: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 8: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 9: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 10: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 11: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 12: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 13: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 14: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 15: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 16: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 17: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 18: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 19: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making

The  following  four  tables  indicate  what  percentage  of  schools  fall  into  two  categories,  using  marks  obtained  from  the  re-­‐marking  process.      •  The  first  category  is  clearly  struggling  schools,  defined  here  as  schools  where  95%  or  more  of  the  learners  performed  at  the  ‘not  achieved’  level  (Level  1).    See  the  ‘!!’  symbol  in  the  tables.  •  The  second  category  is  schools  showing  promise,  defined  here  as  schools  where  at  least  half  (50%)  of  learners  achieved  at  levels  3  or  4,  in  other  words  at  least  the  ‘achieved’  level.    See  the  ‘✓✓’  symbol  in  the  tables.  [p.32]  

Page 20: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 21: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 22: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 23: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making
Page 24: Report on ANAs 2011 - Data driven decision making

Conclusion  •  Is  is  scary  that  not  a  single  province  average  was  beyond  50%;  

•  ANAs  is  good  for  yearly  progress,  but  school  principals  have  these  data  every  week,  or  at  least  every  month,  at  their  disposal  to  track  the  development  of  the  learners  and  the  produc/vity  of  the  teachers;  

•  We  urgently  need  to  capacitate  principals  to  be  aware  of  the  data  available  for  their  use,  and  not  the  current  interpreta/on  that  it  is  only  for  the  use  of  others;  

•  DATA  DRIVEN  DECISION-­‐MAKING  is  at  the  heart  of  the  conversa/on.