1

Suffolk Reading Scale (SRS) Digital

www.gl-assessment.co.uk/srsdigital

sample reports

2

SAMPLE REPORTS PAGE

Explanation of the Suffolk Reading Scale report 3

Demographics Comparison table 4

Demographics Comparison graphs 5

Mean Score and Stanine Distribution graph 6

Mean Score and Stanine Distribution table 7

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands 8

Student Listing 9

Case Study – Online testing at Handcross Park Independent Prep School 10

Case Study – Online testing in Leicestershire 11

Contents

Suffolk Reading Scale Digital (SRS Digital)

Suffolk Reading Scale Digital (SRS Digital) is an onscreen version of our popular standardised reading assessment. It offers the same rigour and quality as the paper test and has the added benefit of instant results and analysis, enabling you to monitor the progress and ability of individuals and groups in the important years of reading development.

SRS Digital:

• Gives you greater flexibility in your schedule and a lighter workload

• Provides instant scoring, giving you results at the touch of a button

• Saves you hours of marking time

• Provides full continuity of data for schools moving across from paper to digital assessments.

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

3

SRS ReportSchool: Sample School Section:Group:

A, B, C, D, ESample Group

Section A - Comparison of group and national SAS mean scores.The table shows SAS means and standard deviations for each group of pupils. The chart shows the average SAS scores (red dot)with 80% confidence bands (black horizontal line). Confidence bands are not displayed for groups with less than 5 pupils as theseare usually very wide with few pupils. If the black horizontal line overlaps the national '100' line the results for your group do not differsignificantly from the national average. The chart also shows the score distribution displayed as a box and whisker plot for eachgroup of pupils. The graphic below shows an example for a group of pupils.Half the pupils have scores within the box range which in this example is between 90 and 110. It also shows that 5% of pupils haveSAS scores below 80, 25% have scores below 90, 50% have scores below 105 (vertical black line), 75% below 110 and 95% below125.

© GL Assessment 2009 30-Sep-2009GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

SAS Score Distribution

SRS Level: 2AThe following pages give a summary of the results achieved based on the overall mean Standard Age Scores (SAS). A SAS comesfrom comparing a pupil's raw score with the national standardisation sample, taking chronological age into account. This shows howeach pupil is performing compared to the national average for their age. The national average SAS is 100.

Section B - Comparison of group and national SAS distributions.

Section C - Analysis by reading age equivalent band.

The bar chart shows the percentage of pupils that fall within certain ranges of scores. The score ranges on the graph and table aregrouped into nine categories called Stanines. The chart and table allows you to compare the score distribution of your groups withthe national standardisation sample. The distribution of the national standardisation sample is a "normal" distribution.

This table shows the percentage of pupils by reading age equivalent bands.

Suffolk Reading ScaleLevel 2A

Section D - Student listing.This report lists the results for each student from the selected group of students who took the test. Scores for each student areshown including Standard Age Score (SAS), Stanine, National Percentile Rank, Group Rank, Raw Score and Reading age.

SRS ReportSchool: Sample School Section:Group:

A, B, C, D, ESample Group

Section A - Comparison of group and national SAS mean scores.The table shows SAS means and standard deviations for each group of pupils. The chart shows the average SAS scores (red dot)with 80% confidence bands (black horizontal line). Confidence bands are not displayed for groups with less than 5 pupils as theseare usually very wide with few pupils. If the black horizontal line overlaps the national '100' line the results for your group do not differsignificantly from the national average. The chart also shows the score distribution displayed as a box and whisker plot for eachgroup of pupils. The graphic below shows an example for a group of pupils.Half the pupils have scores within the box range which in this example is between 90 and 110. It also shows that 5% of pupils haveSAS scores below 80, 25% have scores below 90, 50% have scores below 105 (vertical black line), 75% below 110 and 95% below125.

© GL Assessment 2009 30-Sep-2009GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

SAS Score Distribution

SRS Level: 2AThe following pages give a summary of the results achieved based on the overall mean Standard Age Scores (SAS). A SAS comesfrom comparing a pupil's raw score with the national standardisation sample, taking chronological age into account. This shows howeach pupil is performing compared to the national average for their age. The national average SAS is 100.

Section B - Comparison of group and national SAS distributions.

Section C - Analysis by reading age equivalent band.

The bar chart shows the percentage of pupils that fall within certain ranges of scores. The score ranges on the graph and table aregrouped into nine categories called Stanines. The chart and table allows you to compare the score distribution of your groups withthe national standardisation sample. The distribution of the national standardisation sample is a "normal" distribution.

This table shows the percentage of pupils by reading age equivalent bands.

Suffolk Reading ScaleLevel 2A

Section D - Student listing.This report lists the results for each student from the selected group of students who took the test. Scores for each student areshown including Standard Age Score (SAS), Stanine, National Percentile Rank, Group Rank, Raw Score and Reading age.

SRS ReportSchool: Sample School Section:Group:

A, B, C, D, ESample Group

Section A - Comparison of group and national SAS mean scores.The table shows SAS means and standard deviations for each group of pupils. The chart shows the average SAS scores (red dot)with 80% confidence bands (black horizontal line). Confidence bands are not displayed for groups with less than 5 pupils as theseare usually very wide with few pupils. If the black horizontal line overlaps the national '100' line the results for your group do not differsignificantly from the national average. The chart also shows the score distribution displayed as a box and whisker plot for eachgroup of pupils. The graphic below shows an example for a group of pupils.Half the pupils have scores within the box range which in this example is between 90 and 110. It also shows that 5% of pupils haveSAS scores below 80, 25% have scores below 90, 50% have scores below 105 (vertical black line), 75% below 110 and 95% below125.

© GL Assessment 2009 30-Sep-2009GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

SAS Score Distribution

SRS Level: 2AThe following pages give a summary of the results achieved based on the overall mean Standard Age Scores (SAS). A SAS comesfrom comparing a pupil's raw score with the national standardisation sample, taking chronological age into account. This shows howeach pupil is performing compared to the national average for their age. The national average SAS is 100.

Section B - Comparison of group and national SAS distributions.

Section C - Analysis by reading age equivalent band.

The bar chart shows the percentage of pupils that fall within certain ranges of scores. The score ranges on the graph and table aregrouped into nine categories called Stanines. The chart and table allows you to compare the score distribution of your groups withthe national standardisation sample. The distribution of the national standardisation sample is a "normal" distribution.

This table shows the percentage of pupils by reading age equivalent bands.

Suffolk Reading ScaleLevel 2A

Section D - Student listing.This report lists the results for each student from the selected group of students who took the test. Scores for each student areshown including Standard Age Score (SAS), Stanine, National Percentile Rank, Group Rank, Raw Score and Reading age.

4

Num

berof pupils

Mean Standard A

geScore

Suffolk R

eading Scale D

emographic C

omparisons S

ection ASchool:

Sam

ple School

Group:

Sam

ple Group

SRS2 Level:

2AN

umber of pupils:

25

Standard Deviation

All pupils

Gender

25103.0

23.1

Male

14108.4

23.2

Female

1196.1

22.1

Ethnic Group

White

10105.9

25.4

Asian

893.9

19.9

Black B

ritish7

109.123.2

Free School Meals

No

21109.3

19.3

Yes

469.5

1.0

Special EducationN

one21

109.319.3

School A

ction4

69.51.0

None

21109.3

19.3

EA

L4

69.51.0

EAL

EE

1 EE

111

105.324.0

EE

2 EE

29

108.623.2

EE

3 EE

35

87.817.5

Postcode

30-Sep-2009

© G

L Assessm

ent 2009

GL A

ssessment is part of the G

ranada Learning Group.

5

Num

berof pupils

Standard Age Score distribution

6070

8090

100110

120140

130

25

Suffolk R

eading Scale D

emographic C

omparison G

raphs Section A

School:S

ample S

choolG

roup:S

ample G

roupSR

S2 Level:2A

Num

ber of pupils:

All pupils

Gender

25

Male

14

Female

11

Ethnic Group

White

10

Asian

8

Black B

ritish7

Free School Meals

No

21

Yes

4

Special EducationN

one21

School A

ction4

None

21

EA

L4

EAL

EE

1 EE

111

EE

2 EE

29

EE

3 EE

35

Postcode

30-Sep-2009

© G

L Assessm

ent 2009

GL A

ssessment is part of the G

ranada Learning Group.

6

Suffolk R

eading Scale M

ean Score and S

tanine distribution Section B

School:S

ample S

choolG

roup:S

ample G

roupSR

S2 Level:2A

Num

ber of pupils:25

Stand. Age Scores

NM

eanSD

1

Percentage of pupils in each Stanine

23

45

67

89

National

47

1217

2017

127

4100.0

15.0

Suffolk

Reading

Scale 2A

<7474-81

82-8889-96

97-103104-111

112-118119-126

>126

All pupils

25103.0

23.120

012

812

88

032

Gender

Male

1414

108.423.2

014

07

714

043

Female

1127

96.122.1

09

1818

90

018

30-Sep-2009

© G

L Assessm

ent 2009K

ey: N - N

umber of pupils, S

D - S

tandard Deviation.

GL A

ssessment is part of the G

ranada Learning Group.

7

Stand. Age Scores

NMean SD 1

Percentage of pupils in each Stanine

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Suffolk Reading Scale Mean Score and Stanine distribution Section BSchool: Sample SchoolGroup: Sample Group

SRS2 Level: 2ANumber of pupils: 25

<74 74-81 82-88 89-96 97-103 104-111 112-118 119-126 >126

National 4 7 12 17 20 17 12 7 4100.0 15.0

All pupils 25103.0 23.1 20 0 12 8 12 8 8 0 32

GenderMale 14 14108.4 23.2 0 14 0 7 7 14 0 43

Female 11 2796.1 22.1 0 9 18 18 9 0 0 18

Ethnic Group

White 10 20105.9 25.4 0 10 0 20 0 10 0 40

Asian 8 2593.9 19.9 0 25 13 0 25 0 0 13

Black British 7 14109.1 23.2 0 0 14 14 0 14 0 43

Free School MealsNo 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

Yes 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special EducationNone 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

School Action 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

None 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

EAL 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EAL

EE1 EE1 11 18105.3 24.0 0 9 9 9 9 9 0 36

EE2 EE2 9 11108.6 23.2 0 22 0 11 0 11 0 44

EE3 EE3 5 4087.8 17.5 0 0 20 20 20 0 0 0

Postcode

30-Sep-2009© GL Assessment 2009Key: N - Number of pupils, SD - Standard Deviation.

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

Stand. Age Scores

NMean SD 1

Percentage of pupils in each Stanine

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Suffolk Reading Scale Mean Score and Stanine distribution Section BSchool: Sample SchoolGroup: Sample Group

SRS2 Level: 2ANumber of pupils: 25

<74 74-81 82-88 89-96 97-103 104-111 112-118 119-126 >126

National 4 7 12 17 20 17 12 7 4100.0 15.0

All pupils 25103.0 23.1 20 0 12 8 12 8 8 0 32

GenderMale 14 14108.4 23.2 0 14 0 7 7 14 0 43

Female 11 2796.1 22.1 0 9 18 18 9 0 0 18

Ethnic Group

White 10 20105.9 25.4 0 10 0 20 0 10 0 40

Asian 8 2593.9 19.9 0 25 13 0 25 0 0 13

Black British 7 14109.1 23.2 0 0 14 14 0 14 0 43

Free School MealsNo 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

Yes 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special EducationNone 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

School Action 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

None 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

EAL 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EAL

EE1 EE1 11 18105.3 24.0 0 9 9 9 9 9 0 36

EE2 EE2 9 11108.6 23.2 0 22 0 11 0 11 0 44

EE3 EE3 5 4087.8 17.5 0 0 20 20 20 0 0 0

Postcode

30-Sep-2009© GL Assessment 2009Key: N - Number of pupils, SD - Standard Deviation.

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

Stand. Age Scores

NMean SD 1

Percentage of pupils in each Stanine

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Suffolk Reading Scale Mean Score and Stanine distribution Section BSchool: Sample SchoolGroup: Sample Group

SRS2 Level: 2ANumber of pupils: 25

<74 74-81 82-88 89-96 97-103 104-111 112-118 119-126 >126

National 4 7 12 17 20 17 12 7 4100.0 15.0

All pupils 25103.0 23.1 20 0 12 8 12 8 8 0 32

GenderMale 14 14108.4 23.2 0 14 0 7 7 14 0 43

Female 11 2796.1 22.1 0 9 18 18 9 0 0 18

Ethnic Group

White 10 20105.9 25.4 0 10 0 20 0 10 0 40

Asian 8 2593.9 19.9 0 25 13 0 25 0 0 13

Black British 7 14109.1 23.2 0 0 14 14 0 14 0 43

Free School MealsNo 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

Yes 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special EducationNone 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

School Action 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

None 21 5109.3 19.3 0 14 10 14 10 10 0 38

EAL 4 10069.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EAL

EE1 EE1 11 18105.3 24.0 0 9 9 9 9 9 0 36

EE2 EE2 9 11108.6 23.2 0 22 0 11 0 11 0 44

EE3 EE3 5 4087.8 17.5 0 0 20 20 20 0 0 0

Postcode

30-Sep-2009© GL Assessment 2009Key: N - Number of pupils, SD - Standard Deviation.

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

8

Suffolk Reading ScaleSample School

Sample Group

School:

Group: Number of Pupils: 25

SRS2 Level: 2A

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands Section: C

6:11 orless

7:00 -7:11

Average age of pupils(yrs:mnths)

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands

8:00 -8:11

Number ofpupils

9:00 -9:11

10:00 -10:11

11:00 -11:11

12:00 -12:11

13:00 -13:11 14:00 +

All Pupils 25 8:11 16% 8%20%

11 8:11 18% 9%27%

14 8:11 14% 7%14%Male

Female

12%

18%

7%

12%

9%

14%

0%

0%

0%

4%

0%

7%

12%

9%

14%

16%

9%

21%

30-Sep-2009

© GL Assessment 2009

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

Suffolk Reading ScaleSample School

Sample Group

School:

Group: Number of Pupils: 25

SRS2 Level: 2A

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands Section: C

6:11 orless

7:00 -7:11

Average age of pupils(yrs:mnths)

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands

8:00 -8:11

Number ofpupils

9:00 -9:11

10:00 -10:11

11:00 -11:11

12:00 -12:11

13:00 -13:11 14:00 +

All Pupils 25 8:11 16% 8%20%

11 8:11 18% 9%27%

14 8:11 14% 7%14%Male

Female

12%

18%

7%

12%

9%

14%

0%

0%

0%

4%

0%

7%

12%

9%

14%

16%

9%

21%

30-Sep-2009

© GL Assessment 2009

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

Suffolk Reading ScaleSample School

Sample Group

School:

Group: Number of Pupils: 25

SRS2 Level: 2A

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands Section: C

6:11 orless

7:00 -7:11

Average age of pupils(yrs:mnths)

Percentage of pupils by Reading Age equivalent bands

8:00 -8:11

Number ofpupils

9:00 -9:11

10:00 -10:11

11:00 -11:11

12:00 -12:11

13:00 -13:11 14:00 +

All Pupils 25 8:11 16% 8%20%

11 8:11 18% 9%27%

14 8:11 14% 7%14%Male

Female

12%

18%

7%

12%

9%

14%

0%

0%

0%

4%

0%

7%

12%

9%

14%

16%

9%

21%

30-Sep-2009

© GL Assessment 2009

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group.

9

Suffolk Reading ScaleSample School

Sample Group

School:

Group: Number of Pupils: 25

SRS2 Level: 2A

Student Listing Section: D

Name of Student RawScore

KS English LevelSRS level andFormStanine Percentile

RankStandard Age Score (90% Confidence Bands) Group

Rank*Reading

AgeAge at test(yrs:mnths)

End of KS2Current

Students Results sorted by Standardised Score

Rosaline Nash 74 2A9 98 1 13:11131 5C8:11 5B+ David Smith 81 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5B8:11 5B+ Mary Aransiola 83 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5A8:11 5B+ Neil Dawes 83 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5A8:11 5B+ Peter Watt 80 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5B8:11 5B+ Nick Watt 71 2A9 98 6 13:01130 4A8:11 5B Adrian Fowler 71 2A9 98 6 13:01130 4A8:11 5B Richard Mathews 69 2A9 96 8 12:07127 4A8:11 5B Jackie Murdie 57 2A7 79 9 10:03112 4C8:11 4A Tim Vincent 57 2A7 79 9 10:03112 4C8:11 4A Kareena Khan 56 2A6 77 11 10:01111 3A8:11 4A Sanjay Rooprai 52 2A6 63 12 9:05105 3A8:11 4A Nita Moss 50 2A5 55 13 9:01102 3B8:11 4B Susan Bush 49 2A5 53 14 9:00101 3B8:11 4B Dominic Browne 46 2A5 42 15 8:0697 3B8:11 4B Maureen Kennedy 45 2A4 37 16 8:0595 3C8:11 4C Nancy Roberts 41 2A4 25 17 7:1190 3C8:11 4C Tim Chung 39 2A3 21 18 7:0888 2A8:11 3A Sarah Ling 36 2A3 16 19 7:0485 2A8:11 3A Daniel Browne 34 2A3 13 20 7:0283 2A8:11 3B Nathan Gill 22 2A1 4 21 6:0473 2C8:11 2 Tom Albright 19 2A1 3 22 6:0271 2C8:11 2 Rita Tucker 0 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2 Robert Robinson 12 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2 Nina Sharma 11 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2

30-Sep-2009

© GL Assessment 2009

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group

*Group Rank based on Standard Age Score

Suffolk Reading ScaleSample School

Sample Group

School:

Group: Number of Pupils: 25

SRS2 Level: 2A

Student Listing Section: D

Name of Student RawScore

KS English LevelSRS level andFormStanine Percentile

RankStandard Age Score (90% Confidence Bands) Group

Rank*Reading

AgeAge at test(yrs:mnths)

End of KS2Current

Students Results sorted by Standardised Score

Rosaline Nash 74 2A9 98 1 13:11131 5C8:11 5B+ David Smith 81 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5B8:11 5B+ Mary Aransiola 83 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5A8:11 5B+ Neil Dawes 83 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5A8:11 5B+ Peter Watt 80 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5B8:11 5B+ Nick Watt 71 2A9 98 6 13:01130 4A8:11 5B Adrian Fowler 71 2A9 98 6 13:01130 4A8:11 5B Richard Mathews 69 2A9 96 8 12:07127 4A8:11 5B Jackie Murdie 57 2A7 79 9 10:03112 4C8:11 4A Tim Vincent 57 2A7 79 9 10:03112 4C8:11 4A Kareena Khan 56 2A6 77 11 10:01111 3A8:11 4A Sanjay Rooprai 52 2A6 63 12 9:05105 3A8:11 4A Nita Moss 50 2A5 55 13 9:01102 3B8:11 4B Susan Bush 49 2A5 53 14 9:00101 3B8:11 4B Dominic Browne 46 2A5 42 15 8:0697 3B8:11 4B Maureen Kennedy 45 2A4 37 16 8:0595 3C8:11 4C Nancy Roberts 41 2A4 25 17 7:1190 3C8:11 4C Tim Chung 39 2A3 21 18 7:0888 2A8:11 3A Sarah Ling 36 2A3 16 19 7:0485 2A8:11 3A Daniel Browne 34 2A3 13 20 7:0283 2A8:11 3B Nathan Gill 22 2A1 4 21 6:0473 2C8:11 2 Tom Albright 19 2A1 3 22 6:0271 2C8:11 2 Rita Tucker 0 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2 Robert Robinson 12 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2 Nina Sharma 11 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2

30-Sep-2009

© GL Assessment 2009

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group

*Group Rank based on Standard Age Score

Suffolk Reading ScaleSample School

Sample Group

School:

Group: Number of Pupils: 25

SRS2 Level: 2A

Student Listing Section: D

Name of Student RawScore

KS English LevelSRS level andFormStanine Percentile

RankStandard Age Score (90% Confidence Bands) Group

Rank*Reading

AgeAge at test(yrs:mnths)

End of KS2Current

Students Results sorted by Standardised Score

Rosaline Nash 74 2A9 98 1 13:11131 5C8:11 5B+ David Smith 81 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5B8:11 5B+ Mary Aransiola 83 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5A8:11 5B+ Neil Dawes 83 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5A8:11 5B+ Peter Watt 80 2A9 98 1 16:00131 5B8:11 5B+ Nick Watt 71 2A9 98 6 13:01130 4A8:11 5B Adrian Fowler 71 2A9 98 6 13:01130 4A8:11 5B Richard Mathews 69 2A9 96 8 12:07127 4A8:11 5B Jackie Murdie 57 2A7 79 9 10:03112 4C8:11 4A Tim Vincent 57 2A7 79 9 10:03112 4C8:11 4A Kareena Khan 56 2A6 77 11 10:01111 3A8:11 4A Sanjay Rooprai 52 2A6 63 12 9:05105 3A8:11 4A Nita Moss 50 2A5 55 13 9:01102 3B8:11 4B Susan Bush 49 2A5 53 14 9:00101 3B8:11 4B Dominic Browne 46 2A5 42 15 8:0697 3B8:11 4B Maureen Kennedy 45 2A4 37 16 8:0595 3C8:11 4C Nancy Roberts 41 2A4 25 17 7:1190 3C8:11 4C Tim Chung 39 2A3 21 18 7:0888 2A8:11 3A Sarah Ling 36 2A3 16 19 7:0485 2A8:11 3A Daniel Browne 34 2A3 13 20 7:0283 2A8:11 3B Nathan Gill 22 2A1 4 21 6:0473 2C8:11 2 Tom Albright 19 2A1 3 22 6:0271 2C8:11 2 Rita Tucker 0 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2 Robert Robinson 12 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2 Nina Sharma 11 2A1 2 23 6:0069 18:11 2

30-Sep-2009

© GL Assessment 2009

GL Assessment is part of the Granada Learning Group

*Group Rank based on Standard Age Score

10

How online tests are used to monitor progressat Handcross Park School

case study

Handcross Park Independent Prep School inWestSussex has a deserved reputation for providing highstandards of childcare for 2 – 13 year olds.The schoolprides itself on achieving excellence in all areas andassessment is a key aspect of informing teaching andlearning across the whole school.

In the Autumn term of 2007, Handcross Park decided toadopt a suite of online reasoning, literacy and numeracyassessments from GL Assessment in order to provide anefficient method of assessing pupils and collating results.Neil Cheesman, Deputy HeadTeacher, noticed thedifference immediately.

“We instantly saw a huge reduction in the time it took toanalyse results. Online assessment provides results withinminutes and saves a great deal of time previously taken upby marking written assessments.”

However, not only was the school new to digitalassessment; it was also using GL Assessment’s tests forthe first time. “Our previous tests didn’t cater for pupils thatwere out-of-range and we wanted a means of assessingpupils of all abilities. Another problem was that the data wasin an unfriendly format and we had to spend hours goingthrough the reports and making them easily accessible forstaff.”

Handcross Park chose to adopt the digital version ofGL Assessment’s Cognitive AbilitiesTest (CAT) to assesspupils’ reasoning abilities. CAT measures the three principalareas of reasoning – verbal, non-verbal and quantitative – andis the most widely used test of reasoning abilities in the UK.

To measure specific strengths and needs in English, theschool selected the Suffolk Reading Scale (SRS) andProgress in English (PIE). For Maths, they adopted Progressin Maths (PIM), a standardised series of tests designed toprovide rich diagnostic information about pupils’mathematical abilities.

Used together, Handcross Park found that the test dataprovided a useful, objective means of assessing pupilsprogress which supported ongoing classroom assessment.

Introducing online assessmentWhen the school introduced GL Assessment’s onlinetesting platform,Testwise, Neil Cheesman found little needfor staff training. “Having established that all we neededwas a reliable internet connection, we required virtually notraining with the new assessments. We are reasonablycomputer literate and just had to log in and start.”

“The support in setting-up the online system has been veryefficient, together with the ongoing support, which has beensuperb.The results have always been available withinminutes of the assessments being completed,” he says.

“The electronic assessments are forYears 3 – 8 and while itcan be a busy time for me in organising the process, wesave so much staff time as we are not wasting valuablehours marking papers.”

Instant reportingOnce a test has been completed by a pupil, test scores anddetailed diagnostic reports are delivered instantly, enablingteachers at Handcross Park to evaluate pupils’ needsimmediately.

At the beginning of the academic year, Handcross Park usesthe PIE, PIM and SRS tests to provide a comparison ofStandardised Age Scores within the class, year group andnationally.

“We use these to inform target setting, teaching andlearning for the year ahead.Teachers particularly like theoption of producing a question-by-question analysis as itallows them to review individual and group progress, andthen embark on specific target setting,” Neil explains.

A ‘Value AddedTracking Chart’ is also used to view year-on-year progress of individual pupils, classes and year groups.

The school finds this very useful in monitoring the progressof individual pupils, together with displaying an overallpicture of the year group’s ability levels in Maths andEnglish.This is also used as a comparison across classeswithin year groups to evaluate teaching at the school.

In the summer term, the school uses CAT data to informteaching and learning based on comparisons within eachclass and year group. It is also used to obtain a usefulguideline for Key Stages 2–3 and GCSE predictors, and toascertain a comparison of boys and girls. For example, thedata can enable teachers to see if girls are out performingboys in numeracy, or whether a particular group of childrenare struggling with a specific area in English.

“All of these tests arm our teachers with knowledge aboutour pupils’ levels of understanding across the curriculum,enabling them to take into account specific areas of learningduring lessons”, Neil explains.

“We can tailor lessons accordingly and take into accountspecific areas of learning during lessons, so that each pupilwill gain the maximum benefit.The whole process isworking extremely well and the online element ensures thatour time is given to supporting pupils rather than given tounnecessary paperwork.”

March 2009

“We immediately noticed a huge differencein the time it took to analyse results –online assessment provides results withinminutes and saves a great deal of timeinvolved in marking written assessments.”

GLP309.artwork:Layout 1 25/8/09 15:57 Page 1

11

case study

Online testing enhances pupil progresschecking in Leicestershire

The Government is encouraging schools to focus on abalanced combination of end of Key Stage assessmentand more regular, teacher-based methods of checkingtheir pupils’ achievement in key curriculum subjects toraise attainment.

This ethos is central to the way pupils’ progress ismonitored at Christchurch and St Peters C of E PrimarySchool. Headteacher, Sandy Gourlay, has been using thedigital versions of GL Assessment’s Progress in English(PIE) and Progress in Maths (PIM) tests to assist teachers intracking their pupils’ progress in these crucial subjects asthey move through the school.

Christchurch and St Peters is located in the village ofMountsorrel in Leicestershire. Attended by 360 five to 11-year-olds, the school is committed to creating a happy andstimulating environment in which its pupils can fulfil theiracademic potential.The leadership team works hard toensure every child is provided with teaching and learningthat meets their individual needs when they join the school.Using PIE and PIM Digital to inform discussions on pupils’progress in English and maths plays an important role inhelping them to achieve this goal.

Sandy Gourlay says: “The online tests enable us to get aclear picture of our pupils’ strengths and weaknesses inEnglish and maths as they learn, without putting them underthe pressure of a traditional paper test.The ability to assess

pupils’ progress easily at the start of each year allows us tobe more effective in the way we allocate teaching resourcesand helps us to intervene early to address any concerns wehave with the achievement of individuals or groups ofpupils.”

Previously, the paper-based versions of PIE and PIM werebeing used at the school to test pupils’ understanding ofEnglish and maths.The decision to switch to online testinghas made it simpler for teachers to monitor pupils’ progressyear-on-year fromYears 1 to 6 and helped ensure the schoolcan tailor teaching and learning to get the best out of everychild.

The digital versions of PIE and PIM are simple to administerand schools are provided with a wealth of information onpupils’ comprehension of English and maths within minutesof their completion of the assessments.The tests enableschools to view pupils’ standard age scores and comparethe achievement of individuals or groups of children withnational levels of attainment. Detailed analysis of pupils’answers allows school leaders to clearly see if girls are outperforming boys in literacy, for example, or whether aparticular group of children are struggling with a specificarea of the maths curriculum.

The ability to scrutinise pupils’ scores quickly proved to beincredibly helpful to Christchurch and St Peters when resultsof the PIE test revealed that a significant number of childrenhad not reached the standard of achievement expected fortheir age at the start ofYear 4.The leadership team was ableto use this information to target additional learning supportwhere it was needed so that gaps in pupils’ knowledge ofthe subject could be addressed to boost attainment.

“Looking closely at pupils’ results year-on-year allows us tolet teachers know if individuals or groups of pupils who willbe joining their class from the previous year group are likelyto need help with areas of the English and mathscurriculum.This means that we can be one step ahead in

ensuring lessons are personalised to meet the needs ofevery child.”

“The reports we get from the online tests are excellent.They provide us with valuable data, such as group nationalscores and detailed information on how our pupils haveanswered the individual questions.This is data teachers canuse to shape their lessons and it also helps us todemonstrate the value added to pupils’ learning whilst theyare at the school,” says Sandy.

Christchurch and St Peters keeps a record of PIE and PIMresults for pupils from across the school and this informationplays an important part in the process of preparing for anOfsted inspection. Results are shared with Ofstedinspectors and they also help the school to carry out aneffective self-evaluation of its teaching and learning provisionthroughout the academic year.

“We have good teachers who teach well and the tests helpto confirm what they already know about their pupils’ ability.By examining the PIE and PIM online test scores inconjunction with national assessment results, we canensure there are no surprises in teachers’ understanding ofwhat pupils are capable of achieving.This helps ensure theycan provide every child with the best possible learningsupport throughout the essential primary years.”

April 2009

“The reports we get from the online testsare excellent. They provide us with valuabledata that teachers can use to shape their

lessons and it also helps us to demonstratethe value added to pupils’ learning whilst

they are at the school.”

“Looking closely at pupils’ results year-on-year allows us to let teachers know if

individuals or groups of pupils who will bejoining their class from the previous year

group are likely to need help with areas ofthe English and maths curriculum.”

GLP309.artwork:Layout 1 25/8/09 15:57 Page 2

12

GL Assessment, Chiswick Centre, 414 Chiswick High Road, London, W4 5TF Phone: 0845 602 1937 Fax: +44 (0) 20 8742 8767 www.gl-assessment.co.uk

Contact your local consultant for further information

GLA166