The first SATs results since 2019 were published earlier this month showing very different stories for children in Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 for reading.

Department for Education statistics showed that approximately similar numbers of children sitting Key Stage 2 SATS (Year 6) have reached the expected standard in reading.

However, analysis of Key Stage 1 results by the FFT Education Data Lab showed that the median Key Stage 1 National Test (Year 2) scores fell to behind pre-pandemic levels.

Our own white paper analysing attainment data up to spring 2022 echoed these results. We found that while children currently in Key Stage 1 (KS1) were potentially up to two months behind the attainment of the pre-pandemic cohort, children in Upper Key Stage 2 (KS2) were likely working at the same level as their pre-pandemic counterparts. This indicates that a similar number of the current Year 5s are likely to be on track for meeting the expected standard in next year’s test.

This division, although disappointing, is not unexpected. A number of studies, including our own earlier white papers, have suggested that younger children may have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic and the resulting disruption to school.

Focusing on KS1, and to help understand whether certain pupil groups or school demographics have been more affected we broke down our own most recent analysis for reading (using our New PIRA tests) by gender, region and Pupil Premium status.  The topics shown here correlate to the National Curriculum skills which children need to succeed in the SATs. Each topic contains a minimum of 1,000 aggregated results.

Relative regional performance

In our spring paper we focused on progress and highlighted that pupils in the North have, on average, made the least progress over the spring (2021-22) terms in KS1 than other regions. Specifically for Year 1, children in the North showed least improvement and the Midlands showed the most improvement. For Year 2, children in the South showed the most improvement, with the Midlands and North showing less improvement.

Focusing now on attainment and to look at relative attainment between the regions, we compared the mean score for each region in each topic to the overall mean topic score. This comparison allows us to see in which topics children in each regional group are performing below and above average. The North regional group consists of the North East, North West and Yorkshire and The Humber regions; the Midlands consists of East Midlands and West Midlands; and the South consists of East of England, London, South East and South West regions.

When looking at average attainment levels for the spring 2022 term, overall, although their progress was slower 21-22, children in the North in Year 1 (Figure 1) have a slightly higher mean score across the topics compared to children in other regions. Children in the South are performing at about the average. Figure 1 also shows that children’s above average performance in the North is primarily driven by their strengths in Summary and Prediction whereas they are obtaining lower marks than the other regions in Vocabulary, which could be a topic to focus on in the coming school year. This Figure also shows that attainment in the Midlands is about average after good progress made in the spring term.

The story for Year 2 seen in Figure 2 is slightly different. Children in the South are performing above average in all topics, while children in the Midlands are performing below average, for these children support is needed across all topics. By contrast for the North, a more targeted approach would be appropriate, as Vocabulary and Comprehension remain topics which require additional support.

Impact of disadvantage

Our previous paper indicated there has also been a difference in performance between children eligible for Pupil Premium and their counterparts. Digging into the topics, Figure 4 shows that Pupil Premium children in both Years 1 and 2 are scoring lower marks in all topics than their counterparts. The difference between these pupils in Year 1 is on average -9.4% across the topics, and it is larger for children in Year 2 (-12.8% on average).  Different strategies for reducing this difference would be appropriate, Year 2 children may need more support in Summarising and Predicting, while Year 1 needs more assistance with Inference.

Summary

As our white paper in the spring showed, this year’s Year 1 and 2 have shown improvement over the course of the last school year, however, these children are still behind the pre-pandemic cohort. There are also differences when drilling down into these results at the topic level. Boys are not performing as well as girls, Pupil Premium children are still behind in all topics and there are regional variations in attainment.

For Year 2, in spring 2021 children in the South were roughly on par with other regions in terms of attainment, however they have shown the most improvement over the course of 2021-2022 and now in spring 2022 the South is outperforming the other regions. For Year 1 in 2021, the North was attaining higher marks on average than any other region, however they have shown the least improvement over the course of 2021-2022 and the other regions have now roughly could up. The Midlands has shown the greatest improvement for Year 1, with children in this region moving from the lowest performing to the highest over the course of the last year, indicating targeted approaches to intervention can have a positive impact on attainment and progress.

If you would like to read more, all our white papers can be found here.

We’re always interested in getting feedback on our work to make sure it stays relevant. If you would like to hear first about updates on the research, or if you’re a senior leader in a school and you would like to work with us to ensure our analysis and outputs are providing insights that support you, please do get in touch with us at assessment@hodder.co.uk quoting Nuffield stating your interest in the project.  

The project has been funded by the Nuffield Foundation, but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily the Foundation. Visit www.nuffieldfoundation.org