The stories we tell ourselves about results

Exams analysis can reveal all sorts. From flushing out trends in class behaviours to sticking points with particular exam papers. How much of that data actually tells the ‘story’ of KS4?

• Do grade boundary shifts and wider cultural trends mean that sticking with coursework is no longer a sound choice?

• Is your marking on par with an examiner’s? If not, what training do you need?

• Do you have access to the support hub - can you ask your Exams Officer nicely for a login?

  
  

Then there’s interpreting sub group data:

• Variations between CEM bands and which sub groups require specific interventions; are your SEN students getting the right kind of support?

• What about EAL students?

• Trends across year groups;

• How do certain teachers consistently affect strong outcomes?

• Which units of work are benchmarks for success? How can you replicate these elsewhere?

• What are your next steps as a HoD?

Be wary of your KS5 analysis. These are often smaller classes and the headline results tend to be skewed more easily. Better to look on a case by case basis.

All of the above are fairly standard filters used to fine tune teaching practices for upcoming cohorts. The data is incredibly useful - it helps us tell stories about our teams, teaching and confirms (or challenges) our predictions.

Stories are also fabrications that we tell ourselves to console or to condemn.

Before any flagellations around value added, it’s important to reflect on the intangibles too. The more opaque, mitigating factors that aren’t easily attributed to raw scores. Data doesn’t tell the whole story and the gaps are often filled with just as valuable information.

For instance, the personal struggles your students have faced and the fact that they got a grade, considering these, may have been a miracle. Your department may have had staffing issues throughout the year that necessitated timetable changes or pastoral considerations. These are bound to have had an impact on the smooth, clockwork that a HoD can only dream of.

You may have put hours into planning intervention sessions, emailing home and corralling students into classrooms at lunchtimes or after school. Attendance may have been lower than you expected. Other subjects may have had similar ideas and so there may have been struggles to prioritise. It might be that revision methods or approaches weren’t being adopted at home or on study leave. Was the cohort a particularly anxious one and did this lead to issues with panic in the exam room?

One cohort is not the same as another. Attitudes, approaches to learning, the culture within the cohort, these are all as important and much more difficult to quantify. Comparing one year group to another is useful but needs to be approached with caveats.

It’s worth considering, and noticing, how much growth your students have had in other ways throughout KS4; how much they’re contributing to the wider community, or the projects they’ve been involved in that have brought value to the school in terms of student leadership or social impact.

How much value was added in your subject in terms of enrichment of the subject itself, not just exam skills? Where and whom was the bulk of your attention focused on throughout the year? Did your students read more as a result of your guidance? Did they become more confident in discussions (did they channel this into their written work)?

Results tell us what happened with grades but not always with the students themselves. The challenge as a HoD comes with interpreting and articulating this - holding both of these in mind.