Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
This is the percentage of pupils in state-funded primary schools meeting the expected standard in reading, writing, and mathematics (RWM) at key stage 2 (KS2). The expected standard in reading and mathematics is a scaled score of 100 or above. The expected standard in writing is a teacher assessment of 'working at the expected standard' (EXS) or 'working at greater depth within the expected standard' (GDS).
All children in state-funded primary schools, including most academies and free schools, are required to take part in KS2 national curriculum assessments before they move to secondary school. Tests and teacher assessments provide complementary information about pupils' attainment. The tests are designed to show what pupils have achieved in selected parts of a subject at the end of each key stage. Teacher assessment is the teachers' judgement of each pupil's performance in the whole subject over the whole academic year.
The description 'state-funded primary schools' refers to LA maintained schools, academies, and free schools. Excludes alternative provision and independent schools. The 'England state-funded schools' figures here may be slightly different from the 'England state-funded schools only' figures in the national tables. The figures presented here have been calculated on the same basis as the LA figures in this table (i.e., including pupils with missing results or pending maladministration).
Writing teacher assessment and reading, writing, and maths (combined) measures from 2018 onwards are not directly comparable to previous years due to changes in the writing teacher assessment frameworks. Data is not available for 2020 and 2021 as assessments were cancelled in these years due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Data is Powered by LG Inform Plus and automatically checked for new data on the 3rd of each month.
‘Key stage 4 destinations’ shows data on where pupils who finished key stage 4 in 2021 to 2022 went in the next academic year.
‘16 to 18 destinations’ shows data on where students who reached the end of 16 to 18 study in 2021 to 2022 went in the year after their institution attendance.
‘Progression to higher education or training’ includes a value-added score. It shows the proportion of A level and other level 3 students who progressed to higher education or training in the 2 years after completing their 16 to 18 study. These students reached the end of 16 to 18 study in 2020 to 2021.
‘Longer-term destinations: 2021 to 2022’ shows the longer term destinations of pupils who finished key stage 4 in 2016 to 2017 (1, 3 and 5 years following institution attendance).
The releases give breakdowns for specific student characteristics and institution types.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Out of all ethnic groups, pupils from the White Irish and Chinese ethnic groups were most likely to meet the expected standard in reading in 2018/19.
This report details the numbers, sources and types of allegations of maladministration reported to STA’s maladministration team throughout the 2018 test cycle across key stage 1 and key stage 2.
It also presents the numbers of amendments and annulments to results made in 2018.
Education Quality Improvement Programme in Tanzania (EQUIP-T) is a six-year (2014-20) Government of Tanzania programme, funded by the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID), which seeks to improve the quality of primary education and to improve pupil learning outcomes, especially for girls. The programme focuses on strengthening professional capacity and performance of teachers, school leadership and management, systems which support district management of education, and community participation in education. Initially, the programme was intended to run for four years, with activities targeted at seven of the most educationally disadvantaged regions in Tanzania. In 2017 the programme was extended for a further two years, and the extension introduced some new sub-components to the seven regions, and introduced a reduced package of interventions to two new regions.
The independent Impact Evaluation (IE) of EQUIP-T is a five-year study funded by DFID. It is designed to: i) generate evidence on the impact of EQUIP-T on primary pupil learning outcomes, including any differential effects for boys and girls; ii) examine perceptions of effectiveness of different EQUIP-T components; iii) provide evidence on the fiscal affordability of scaling up EQUIP-T post-endline; and iv) communicate evidence generated by the impact evaluation to policy-makers and key education stakeholders. The evaluation uses a quasi-experimental approach to quantitative estimation of impact that combines propensity score matching (PSM) with difference-indifferences (DID).
The research priorities for the quantitative endline IE are captured in a comprehensive endline evaluation matrix (see Annex C in the 'EQUIP-Tanzania Impact Evaluation. Endline Quantitative Technical Report, Volume I: Results and Discussion' under Reports and policy notes). The matrix sets out evaluation questions linked to the programme theory of change. It asks questions related to the expected results at each stage along the results chain (from the receipt of inputs to delivery of outputs, and contributions to outcomes and impact) under each of the programme's components. The aim is to establish: (i) whether changes have happened as expected; (ii) why they happened or did not happen (i.e. whether key assumptions in the theory of change hold or not); (iii) whether there are any important unanticipated changes; and (iv) what links there are between the components in driving changes.
The main IE research areas are: -Impact of EQUIP-T on standard 3 pupil learning in Kiswahili and mathematics. -Impact of EQUIP-T on teacher absence from school and from classrooms. -Impact of EQUIP-T on selected aspects of school leadership and management.
The IE uses a mixed methods approach that includes: -A quantitative survey of 100 government primary schools in 17 programme treatment districts and 100 schools in 8 control districts in 2014, 2016 and 2018 covering: *Standard three pupils and their parents/caregivers; *Teachers who teach standards 1-3 Kiswahili; *Teachers who teach standards 1-3 mathematics; *Schools; *Head teachers; and *Standard two lesson observations in Kiswahili and mathematics.
-Qualitative fieldwork in a few treatment schools that overlap with a sub-set of the quantitative survey schools, in 2014, 2016 and 2019, consisting of key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) with head teachers, teachers, pupils, parents, school committee (SC) members, PTP members, region, district and ward education officials and EQUIP-T programme staff.
The endline data available in the World Bank Microdata Catalog are from the EQUIP-T IE quantitative endline survey conducted in 2018. The endline qualitative research will take place in mid-2019 with results available in early 2020.
The survey is representative of 17 EQUIP-T programme treatment districts. The survey is NOT representative of the 8 control districts. For more details see the section on Representativeness in 'EQUIP-Tanzania Impact Evaluation. Final Baseline Technical Report, Volume I: Results and Discussion' and 'EQUIP-Tanzania Impact Evaluation. Final Baseline Technical Report, Volume II: Methods and Technical Annexes' under Reports and policy notes.
-Dodoma Region: Bahi DC, Chamwino DC, Kongwa DC, Mpwapwa DC -Kigoma Region: Kakonko DC, Kibondo DC -Shinyanga Region: Kishapu DC, Shinyanga DC -Simiyu Region: Bariadi DC, Bariadi TC, Itilima DC, Maswa DC, Meatu DC -Tabora Region: Igunga DC, Nzega DC, Sikonge DC, Uyui DC
-Arusha Region: Ngorongoro DC
-Mwanza Region: Misungwi DC
-Pwani Region: Rufiji DC
-Rukwa Region: Nkasi DC
-Ruvuma Region: Tunduru DC
-Singida Region: Ikungi DC, Singida DC
-Tanga Region: Kilindi DC
Sample survey data [ssd]
Because the EQUIP-T regions and districts were purposively selected (see 'EQUIP-Tanzania Impact Evaluation. Final Baseline Technical Report, Volume I: Results and Discussion' under Reports and policy notes), the IE sampling strategy used propensity score matching (PSM) to: (i) match eligible control districts to the pre-selected and eligible EQUIP-T districts (see below), and (ii) match schools from the control districts to a sample of randomly selected treatment schools in the treatment districts. The same schools are surveyed for each round of the IE (panel of schools) and a cross section of standard 3 pupils and Standard 1-3 teachers will be interviewed at each round of the survey (no pupil panel or teacher panel).
Eligible control and treatment districts were those not participating in any other education programme or project that may confound the measurement of EQUIP-T impact. To generate the list of eligible control and treatment districts, all districts that are contaminated because of other education programmes or projects or may be affected by programme spill-over were excluded as follows:
-All districts located in Lindi and Mara regions as these are part of the EQUIP-T programme but implementation started later in these two regions (the IE does not cover these two regions); -Districts that will receive partial EQUIP-T programme treatment or will be subject to potential EQUIP-T programme spillovers; -Districts that are receiving other education programmes/projects that aim to influence the same outcomes as the EQUIP-T programme and would confound measurement of EQUIP-T impact; -Districts that were part of pre-test 1 (two districts); and -Districts that were part of pre-test 2 (one district).
To be able to select an appropriate sample of pupils and teachers within schools and districts, the sampling frame consisted of information at three levels:
-District; -School; and -Within school.
The sampling frame data at the district and school levels was compiled from the following sources: the 2002 and 2012 Tanzania Population Censuses, Education Management Information System (EMIS) data from the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT) and the Prime Minister's Office for Regional and Local Government (PMO-RALG), and the UWEZO 2011 student learning assessment survey. For within school level sampling, the frames were constructed upon arrival at the selected schools and was used to sample pupils and teachers on the day of the school visit.
Because the treatment districts were known, the first step was to find sufficiently similar control districts that could serve as the counterfactual. PSM was used to match eligible control districts to the pre-selected, eligible treatment districts using the following matching variables: Population density, proportion of male headed households, household size, number of children per household, proportion of households that speak an ethnic language at home, and district level averages for household assets, infrastructure, education spending, parental education, school remoteness, pupil learning levels and pupil drop out.
In the second stage, schools in the treatment districts were selected using stratified systematic random sampling. The schools were selected using a probability proportional to size approach, where the measure of school size was the standard two enrolment of pupils. This means that schools with more pupils had a higher probability of being selected into the sample. To obtain a representative sample of programme treatment schools, the sample was implicitly stratified along four dimensions:
-District; -PSLE scores for Kiswahili; -PSLE scores for mathematics; and -Total number of teachers per school.
As in stage one, a non-random PSM approach was used to match eligible control schools to the sample of treatment schools. The matching variables were similar to the ones used as stratification criteria: Standard two enrolment, PSLE scores for Kiswahili and mathematics, and the total number of teachers per
Background:
The Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) is a large-scale, multi-purpose longitudinal dataset providing information about babies born at the beginning of the 21st century, their progress through life, and the families who are bringing them up, for the four countries of the United Kingdom. The original objectives of the first MCS survey, as laid down in the proposal to the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) in March 2000, were:
Further information about the MCS can be found on the Centre for Longitudinal Studies web pages.
The content of MCS studies, including questions, topics and variables can be explored via the CLOSER Discovery website.
The first sweep (MCS1) interviewed both mothers and (where resident) fathers (or father-figures) of infants included in the sample when the babies were nine months old, and the second sweep (MCS2) was carried out with the same respondents when the children were three years of age. The third sweep (MCS3) was conducted in 2006, when the children were aged five years old, the fourth sweep (MCS4) in 2008, when they were seven years old, the fifth sweep (MCS5) in 2012-2013, when they were eleven years old, the sixth sweep (MCS6) in 2015, when they were fourteen years old, and the seventh sweep (MCS7) in 2018, when they were seventeen years old.Millennium Cohort Study: Linked Education Administrative Datasets (KS1-KS4), Wales: Secure Access
These datasets include education administrative records for Wales up to age 16 to survey data for cohort members in the MCS. The main aim of this data linkage exercise is to enhance the research potential of the study, by combining administrative education records with the rich information collected in the surveys.
Datasets include anonymised Local Education Authorities (LEA) to allow comparison of results across LEA. The data were obtained only for children whose parents/carers gave consent to data linkage, and who were successfully matched.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
This is the percentage of pupils in state-funded primary schools meeting the expected standard in reading, writing, and mathematics (RWM) at key stage 2 (KS2). The expected standard in reading and mathematics is a scaled score of 100 or above. The expected standard in writing is a teacher assessment of 'working at the expected standard' (EXS) or 'working at greater depth within the expected standard' (GDS).
All children in state-funded primary schools, including most academies and free schools, are required to take part in KS2 national curriculum assessments before they move to secondary school. Tests and teacher assessments provide complementary information about pupils' attainment. The tests are designed to show what pupils have achieved in selected parts of a subject at the end of each key stage. Teacher assessment is the teachers' judgement of each pupil's performance in the whole subject over the whole academic year.
The description 'state-funded primary schools' refers to LA maintained schools, academies, and free schools. Excludes alternative provision and independent schools. The 'England state-funded schools' figures here may be slightly different from the 'England state-funded schools only' figures in the national tables. The figures presented here have been calculated on the same basis as the LA figures in this table (i.e., including pupils with missing results or pending maladministration).
Writing teacher assessment and reading, writing, and maths (combined) measures from 2018 onwards are not directly comparable to previous years due to changes in the writing teacher assessment frameworks. Data is not available for 2020 and 2021 as assessments were cancelled in these years due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Data is Powered by LG Inform Plus and automatically checked for new data on the 3rd of each month.