What’s Your Data Story? Maths

The use of how ‘school’ data is currently used in Australia has its origins dating back as far as 1990. In this year, New South Wales introduced testing of students in literacy and numeracy state-wide.

Within the following decade all the other states and territories had followed suit.

In 1999, as part of the Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the 21st Century, ministers agreed to report on national goals to compare states and territories.

All this was the pre-cursor to the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), which was first administered in 2008. This was the first time that Australian students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 sat the same tests at the same time.

The data obtained from the NAPLAN test can be seen on the My School website and can be used to compare a school’s performance against another school.

Arguably the most important piece of data to come out of NAPLAN were the School Comparison Reports, which are available from 2010 until 2021. These reports highlight the growth that a cohort of students made over the two years between tests, and this growth can be compared against the state, as well as nationally.

This is the main data used in this piece.

At Woori Yallock Primary School the introduction of NAPLAN turned a very bright spotlight on under performance for student learning outcomes.

In particular, it was the NAPLAN data from 2010 that brought the school to attention for all the wrong reasons.

The image below shows the National, State and School Means for both Year 3 in 2008 and Year 5 in 2010. This allows you to see how much growth students achieved across the two years between Years 3 and 5. You can also see how this growth compares to all students within the state, and nationally.

At this point in time the school was in the lowest third in the state of Victoria for disadvantage as measured by the school’s Student Family Occupation index (SFO). Therefore, it would be expected that the results for the school would be below the State Mean. However, there is no reason why the growth shouldn’t be comparable to the State and National means. In the image, the Difference (Diff) column highlights the growth (or lack of).

The alarming aspect to the data is the minimal growth the students demonstrated between Years 3 and 5. The School Mean in Numeracy being 61 below the State Mean.

The Matched School Mean was even worse, being 69 below the State Mean. The Matched School Mean includes the students who were at the school in both Years 3 and 5.

Since all schools sit the NAPLAN tests, students can be ‘tracked’ for growth even if they attended a different school for one of the tests.

The conclusion can be made that as a cohort the students barely moved in Numeracy across the two years between NAPLAN tests.

In response to this data, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development undertook an unprecedented move by imposing an Extended Diagnostic Review upon the school only two years into the school’s four year Strategic Plan.

Below is an extract from the school review in 2011:

“The review has been scheduled earlier than the completion of the current School Strategic Plan (2009-2012) as the data has indicated a concerning downward trend and a new principal has been appointed for the commencement of 2011. The review will enable the school to refocus on the school vision and map a strategic direction to implement changes that will be necessary to improve student outcomes.”

2011 was a year of big change for the school.

New leadership and a new direction.

So, what did the school do to address the under performance?

It is a long list, but the key actions are highlighted below:

●      The focus shifted from wellbeing (welfare) as the priority, to quality teaching and learning. Interestingly, this improved wellbeing as students were having success, became more engaged, wanted to be at school, and school became a positive experience. Whilst there were still wellbeing needs, they became more manageable.

●      High expectations and respect became the two values the school lived by. Underpinning this was a belief that all students can and will have success as learners.

●      A Leading Teacher was employed to lead the improvement in maths across the school. They quickly became the school’s Assistant Principal, and leading maths remained a key part of their portfolio.

●      Rigorous, collaborative planning was introduced.

●      All staff received coaching.

●      Changes were made to curriculum coverage. All year levels taught the same topic at the same time, providing authentic opportunities for professional learning and sharing of resources.

●      The introduction of a school wide automaticity of number facts ‘program’.

●      An increased emphasis on problem solving, which included a common language.

●      Practical professional learning that helped staff in the classroom the following day.

●      Teaching at point of need.

●      Regularly celebrating success with staff and students.

With NAPLAN being held in May, it was no surprise that there wasn’t a shift in the data in 2011. The growth (in red), while not as bad as 2010, confirmed the need for change.

However, 12 months on in 2012 there was much to celebrate.

Growth, the most important measure within the NAPLAN data sets, was comfortably higher than the State and National Means. You will also notice that the Matched School Mean for 2012 (in blue) is also above the State and National Average. Given the school’s SFO this is performing much higher than expected.

For every year from 2012 until 2021 the school had growth that was higher than the State and National Means in Numeracy.

This is an extraordinary achievement given the dire situation the school had found itself in prior to the turn around and is a real credit to all of the educators and students at the school.

Four years after the Extended Diagnostic Review the school had its next review.

From the 2015 School Review report:

“Woori Yallock Primary School has made significant gains in student achievement, engagement, wellbeing and in the school climate and professional learning of its staff over the life of the previous Strategic Plan.

The school has been successful in ensuring nearly all its students reach minimum standards in literacy and numeracy, achieved growth greater than the growth across the State, added value to achievement based on its intake and has improved performance across the years. In particular numeracy performance in absolute and growth terms has been excellent.”

The following image is of extra importance when compared to all of the other years.

Why?

Well, the students in the cohort below were in Foundation in 2011, the year when the school revolutionised what it was doing.

These students didn’t know any other way of working. They only ever experienced the new teaching and learning practices that were introduced. You will note that this cohort was above the State Mean in both Years 3 and 5 and still maintained growth that was also higher than the State Mean.

The school’s SFO indicates that they are achieving much higher than expected.

During 2016 the school was nominated for awards, as well as having leaders presenting at international conferences.

The end of 2016 brought about significant change in the form of staffing.

There was a change in principal, and assistant principal, and there were several new staff to cater for the ever-increasing enrolments the school was receiving.

Despite this, you will see that the school was able to maintain a level of growth that was higher than the State Mean in every year reported.

Cohorts vary, and this can sometimes be used as an excuse.

When you achieve above the State Mean for growth every year, the variability of cohorts doesn’t matter.

There are no reports for 2020 due to COVID.

Obviously COVID and remote learning was a challenging time for everyone. The level of disadvantage within the community meant that notable numbers of students didn’t engage with the remote learning that was set during this time.

Despite this the school was able to again achieve higher than the State Mean for growth in 2021 for Numeracy.

From 2022, how NAPLAN results were reported changed.

A greater emphasis was placed on the top 2 bands.

As you can see in the images below the school is significantly higher than ‘Similar schools’, and still above the State in both Years 3 and 5.

Given the level of disadvantage the school caters for, particularly at the start of the timeline, it is clear that the only variable causing these results are the educators teaching the students.

We hear a lot about needing to be evidence/research based in education. Surely the compelling and inspiring ‘evidence’ in this post is what all educators should be taking note of.

“Success leaves clues. Look for someone who has already achieved what you want, study their habits and methods, then model their behaviour.” (James Clear)

It is easier to replicate excellence than to try and produce it through your own trial and error. Focus your efforts on what has already worked.

In education, significant, sustained school improvement is rare.