Saturday, August 02, 2014

Llwyddiant addysg cyfrwng Cymraeg

Dwi'n meddwl fy mod wedi cynnwys y rhan fwyaf o'r tablau perfformiad ysgolion uwchradd sy'n ymddangos ar Wales Online a sydd yn berthnasol i awdurdodau sy'n cynnig addysg cyfrwng Cymraeg neu ddwyieithog.

Mae'r tablau yn siarad trostyn nhw eu hunain mewn perthynas a pherfformiad ysgolion cyfrwng cymrEg neu ddwyieithog.





28 comments:

J.Jones said...

All these league tables are quite misleading. As ever the main factor is how many pupils taking exams/assessments come from a deprived background. Welsh medium schools always look good in the raw data because no WM/Bilingual secondary has more than 18.4% on free school meals (the usual measure of deprivation. It's also the case that WM schools are much smaller than EM schools and more likely to be rural.
If you compare like with like (schools up to 18.4% on FSMs) then the GCSE figures look like this:
English: EM 72% average Level2. WM 69.1% average Level2.
Maths: EM 69%. WM 66.5%
Science: EM 79.9%. WM 79.4%.
Level2 inclusive: EM 61.3%. WM 60.8%
But Level2 inclusive favours WM schools because of the Either/or Welsh or English.
When the ACME (Lvel2 Eng, Maths +3 others) is used:-
EM 61.3. WM 57.6%. Of course the Western Mail and school banding is heavily dependent on Level2 inc.

Anonymous said...

WM schools tend to have a far greater percentage of middle class aspirational parents . There are instances with schools in Wales within 1/4 mile of each other with WM have less than 5 % Free School Meals and EM school have 20plus %
Money in the end talks

J.Jones said...

The bigger question is when will Estyn and the Welsh government start to tell the truth about WM schools. When will they start to reveal that pupils from non-Welsh speaking homes don't learn Welsh very well in WM primaries and as a consequence don't do well in the core subjects either.

In 2013 53% of pupils assessed in Welsh first language came from homes where Welsh wasn't spoken.
Those attaining below level4, 16% but those from Welsh speaking homes only 8%. At the other end of the scale, Level5+ those attaining from non Welsh speaking homes 22% those from Welsh speaking homes 41%.
Those from non Welsh speaking homes similarly underperform in English, maths and science.
But what is the rhetoric we hear from the Government? "Pupils from non Welsh speaking homes are equally as fluent as first language Welsh speakers at KS"

Oh no they aren't..they underperform in WM schools their entire school life.

Anonymous said...

J.Jones, your obsessive anti-Welsh stance diminishes the few good points that you make. If you are correct about the underachievement in WM schools of those from an English lang home environment, how do you explain the performance of the 2 C'diff WElsh medium schools. Both have a large majority from an Eng background but top the league in C'diff. Couldn't happen if EB children underperformed. the same patten persists for other WM schools in anglizised areas. don't let your personal baggage blind you
Haydn HughesPhoP

Cai Larsen said...

How would pupil background impact teaching standards & financial management?

J.Jones said...

Both of you, Haydn and Cai, assume that the algorithm that Clare Miller is using is a fair one. Cai in particular knows as well as I do that pupils from non Welsh speaking homes don't (on average not in every case) perform up to the standard of pupils from welsh speaking homes. In Gwynedd the situation is worse than in Wales as a whole. Pupils from Welsh speaking homes perform just below the all Wales average in Welsh but pupils from non Welsh speaking homes perform at a lower level than the same group across Wales.
2013 KS2 NWSAH Gwynedd below level4 is 21% as against 16% in Wales overall and 8% amongst Welsh at Home. At level5+ Non Welsh at home in Gwynedd is 17% against 22% in Wales and 41% amongst Welsh at home pupils.

J.Jones said...

As to Cardiff...Could Glantaff and Plasmawr come out on top if their "Non Welsh speaking at home" cohort underperform? Well obviously the answer is yes...no matter what algorithm is used in the calculation. Relative position in any league table depends not only on how GOOD a school is but how BAD other schools are in the comparison. In the case of all WM secondary schools in urban Wales (outside the Fro) there is a sorting of pupils throughout Primary and secondary so that only those who are coping well with instruction through the medium of Welsh remain at KS4. The same thing happens in Bangor with pupils who have struggled in WM primary travelling long distances in Gwynedd and Ynys Mon to get EM tuition in Friars. Throughout years 7-10 more pupils transfer from Tryfan, Sir Hugh Owen and Brynrefail to Friars as they struggle with Welsh. But these pupils have performed below their potential for years before transfer and the same applies in Cardiff...failure is exported to EM schools.

Cai Larsen said...

Mr Jones - a couple of quick points / questions

1). You use final key stage assessements in the primary sector to criticise an exercise that looks at the secondary sector. This is obviously a very narrow focus - & only a partially appropriate one. There is a wealth of other data available to you from the secondary sector - & indeed from the primary sector now we have numeracy & literacy testing.

2.). You explain the comparative success of the Welsh medium secondary sector in terms of 'seepage' of children who fail educationally at the end of KS 2 from the Welsh medium sector. Do you have any evidence to back this up in terms of data as opposed to anecdotal evidence?

3). I haven't bothered to look up the stats for 2013, but generally Gwynedd performs well compared to the rest of Wales at the end of KS 4. This measure includes everybody that's been through the whole system.

4). The Claire Miller stats are as fair or unfair as any other set of stats that compares institutions. They measure schools up according to certain criteria. It's rather broader than the set of criteria you use - but it does what it does - just like your own rather selective use of data.

Cai Larsen said...

Just one more point - how do you know from the KS2 stats who comes from an English speaking home? I wasn't aware that the particular linkage is made when stats are published - & I'm not clear as to how it could be made.

J.Jones said...

I'm happy to do analysis on KS3 data for you Cai but at each stage, as you know quite well, those failing in WM schools disappear and this is well documented by the WAG in its annual review:http://wales.gov.uk/docs/dcells/publications/140711-welsh-education-strategy-report-en.pdf

13.6% of Welsh learners assessed at age 11 are not assessed at age 13; that's 890 pupils in 2013...lower than usual. I can't believe that you are seriously contending this point but you know as well as I do that many pupils, even in Gwynedd, will have followed Welsh as a first language before taking the Welsh second language GCSE. In other words those in the final Welsh L1 GCSE cohort will be a refined elite...with far fewer FSM pupils and far fewer pupils from non Welsh speaking homes.

J.Jones said...

You are asking more questions than I can answer without looking at data tables but as to information about KS assessments and "Speaks Welsh at Home/Does not speak Welsh at home" you must know that YOU actually ask parents/pupils to fill in this document each year and the information is entered on SIMS and therefore is easily cross referenced against Key Stage data. I would use Literacy and numeracy test results but last year there was a statistical error by the Data dept which invalidates some comparison.

As to whether Claire miller's method is fair...I suspect not. Do a quick check of the free school meals profile of the top schools against the average. In the case of Cardiff the average FSM% for EM schools is 27.1% and for Glantaf and Plasmawr 7.25%. Do another check on EAL A-C pupils between mediums and percentage of pupils in the 20% most deprived areas. You begin to see what an elite group the WM schools are. Do they reach reasonable expectations of exam. performance? Not overall.

J.Jones said...

As I suspected, Claire Miller hasn't made much allowance for percentage of pupils eligible for free school meals. All 5 of her Cardiff top 5 are amongst the top 6 schools with low percentages of FSMs.
I have done a quick calculation of "Best" of those 6 schools using their ranking for English, Maths, Science GCSE in 2013 together with Level2 inclusive and Level 2 ACME plus Maths, Science and English in combination at A*-B.
Ist Cardiff High (1st in 4 measures second in 2)8 points.
2nd Radyr Comprehensive (1st in 1 measure, second in 3 third in 2) 13 points.
3rd.Bishop of Llandaf...20 points
4th Glantaf.....23 points
5th Plasmawr....30 points
6th Corpus Christi 32 points.

When it comes to things like Finance, Glantaf and Plasmawr have a sizeable "Welsh Medium supplement" over and above all other finance. This used to be £90,000 per annum (two teachers salaries) but the funding formula changed two years ago to an amount per head and a fixed supplement and so the amount, although still large, is more variable. It does show how ridiculous it is to try and compare the blessed with the underfunded though.

Cai Larsen said...

I'm a little concerned that you're trying to use simplistic & narrow data sets to justify a pre determined narrative.

You seem to think that Foundation Phase & KS2 end of phase assessment data is a better way of coming to conclusions about the effectiveness of secondary schools than does the CM model - which seems to be highly sophisticated. For example the Teaching component of the model compares the way specific groups of pupils perform in relation to expectation. The Outcomes component doesn't just use attainment - it also uses current attainment in relation to past attainment.

You also make assumptions to fit you narrative. For example it could be argued that middle class pupils are exported to Friars, rather than under achievement. If your children travel a long way to school you pay for that. Those at the bottom of the social pyramid would be far less likely to pay.

Do you know that seepage from the Welsh medium sector is because of under achievement, or are you assuming that in order to back your narrative?

I'll take your word that Cardiff WM schools get a boost via their funding formulas, but schools with high FSM rates get a far bigger boost via direct grants. Yet their financial robustness is in general inferior to that of WM schools.

Cai Larsen said...

I'm a little concerned that you're trying to use simplistic & narrow data sets to justify a pre determined narrative.

You seem to think that Foundation Phase & KS2 end of phase assessment data is a better way of coming to conclusions about the effectiveness of secondary schools than does the CM model - which seems to be highly sophisticated. For example the Teaching component of the model compares the way specific groups of pupils perform in relation to expectation. The Outcomes component doesn't just use attainment - it also uses current attainment in relation to past attainment.

You also make assumptions to fit you narrative. For example it could be argued that middle class pupils are exported to Friars, rather than under achievement. If your children travel a long way to school you pay for that. Those at the bottom of the social pyramid would be far less likely to pay.

Do you know that seepage from the Welsh medium sector is because of under achievement, or are you assuming that in order to back your narrative?

I'll take your word that Cardiff WM schools get a boost via their funding formulas, but schools with high FSM rates get a far bigger boost via direct grants. Yet their financial robustness is in general inferior to that of WM schools.

J,Jones said...

"The Outcomes component doesn't just use attainment - it also uses current attainment in relation to past attainment."

Is this logical? Banding does the same thing for schools. So if you take Ysgol Aberaeron (just out of special measures) the number one school in Wales, they have an average 11% eligible for FSMs and so would be expected to score consistently in the mid to high 60% at Level2 inclusive.
Their actual scores for the last 5 years have been 41.9%,43.1%,49.6%,45.5% and, after being put in special measures...69%.

Is this then a good school? Do you just forget the years and years that this school, this group of teachers, have let their pupils down?

"simplistic and narrow data to justify a predetermined narrative" The narrative is out there Cai; you tout it, MH touts it,Cneifiwr touts it, Owen Donovan, RHAG touts it, ESTYN touts it and of course Carwyn touts it. It is the only narrative ever heard in Wales....the raw data,examination results, without any caveat about the socio-economic circumstances between EM and WM schools, is used endlessly and tirelessly to sell the idea that WM schools are best.
I am one of the few who points out that WM schools have been underperforming for a decade. If you now want to disregard the examination and assessment results go ahead. Estyn did it for years, regularly saying that Welsh L1 was the best taught subject in schools, oblivious to the fact that that subject underperformed all others in assessments.
"For example it could be argued that middle class pupils are exported to Friars"
Some undoubtedly are and I can see that in the literacy and numeracy figures but those pupils in the poorer schools like Glancegin come to Friars because they couldn't cope with Welsh medium instruction in Tryfan. Those pupils should have been in English medium instruction in Primary to give them the best chance. Test the hypothesis: which school has the highest % of FSMs, Tryfan or Friars? Which school has the highest percentage of pupils from the 20% most deprived areas? For two schools a few hunderd metres apart the difference in profile is stark...although I predict that any improvement in Bangor area primaries will iron out the difference.

Cai Larsen said...

Well yes, it is logical. Parents who choose schools will be sending sending their children to school in the future - not in the past. Thus present performance & direction of travel is more important than past achievement - or failure.

I have no doubt that you're correct that there is a class difference between the two secondaries in Bangor, but it doesn't really alter the point that there is an alternative narrative to the one you offer about the nature of the out of catchment area influx into Friars - if such an influx still exists.

In the same way there is an alternative narrative to explain the reduction in numbers in Welsh medium over the first few years in secondary that you say happens. If families move, they move schools as well. Welsh medium isn't easily available over much of the country.

Now either could be correct - or there might be yet another reason. But if we just jump at narrow sets of numbers & use them to feed political narratives we leave ourself open to the charge of using data thoughtlessly to back up prejudices.

Griff said...

The vocal minority who oppose WM schools always talk about the "premium" or extra money that WM achools receive per pupil.

I have looked and looked and looked for any source confirming that this is true and never found it. J Jones, you seem to be talking about exact figures for this premium so can you please help me out and provide a source for it?

J.Jones said...

"Now either could be correct - or there might be yet another reason. But if we just jump at narrow sets of numbers & use them to feed political narratives we leave ourself open to the charge of using data thoughtlessly to back up prejudices"

All you are saying Cai is that you want only your own particular prejudices to hold sway...and rest assured, the very narrow narrative of WM superiority has held sway for decades despite some thorough analysis suggesting that no such superiority exists. Prof.Stephen Gorard of Durham university produced a paper in 2000 that showed that, when Socio economic profiles of schools were taken into account, there was no difference in outcomes between WM and EM schools. That was then, when there were fewer pupils in WM schools and more of them were first language Welsh speakers,now WM schools have slipped behind as more and more pupils from non Welsh speaking homes go into WM schools.
The logical position of Estyn and the Dept of Ed. would be to acknowledge the failing, target that particular group and look seriously at the whole immersion system. That can't happen for political reasons...the next best thing is to change the way outcomes are measured to favour WM schools even more. This I believe will be the way forward....
"there is an alternative narrative to the one you offer about the nature of the out of catchment area influx into Friars - if such an influx still exists."

I would suggest that Friars' intake from out of catchment and out of county is self evident. Just 3% of pupils have Welsh as a home language and Friars is still taking an awful lot of pupils from the "Dual Stream" primary at Caergeiliog.

But enough of this...you have first hand experience so YOU tell me, in your experience as a teacher in Primary can you honestly say that the average attainment of pupils from Welsh speaking homes and those from English speaking homes is equal?

J Jones said...

Griff. I made FOI requests to all 22 LAs asking them to give me two sets of figures for WM (broad definition) schools and what the SAME schools would get if they were designated EM schools. For some LAs the answer is no difference, for some the amount is not of major significance (VOG gives £4000 PA to help with translation costs) others again have major allocations of extra funding, (Denbighshire Cardiff). The best way to see how Cardiff is allocating its funds is to ask for the 2014-2015 funding formula and allocation per school. I have done this for two years but not this year.

Cai Larsen said...

The difference is this - I don't grab at small data sets to try to prove a pre set narrative. I just pointed to a wide ranging an sophisticate exercise which happened to show that Welsh medium secondaries out perform English medium one. You came up with primary end of phase assessments.

As regards your personal question I don 't have data one way or the other, but in my personal experience I'd be surprised if there was much difference - one way or the other.

J.Jones said...

Nevertheless Cai the data sets show a different picture to YOUR belief...Try working out relative performance in groups of schools with the same FSM percentages. I usually use 0-6%, 6-9%, 9-12%, 12-15% and 15-18.4% (for 2013 GCSE)

http://wales.gov.uk/about/foi/responses/dl2014/janmar/education/atisn8038/?lang=en

Try a scatter graph with exponential trend lines.

As for your personal evaluation..it doesn't fit with the statistics for Gwynedd...ask Cynnal.

Cai Larsen said...

Surely you don't expect me to do your number crunching for you?

Still interesting to see how close Tryfan & Friars are in terms of FSM.

Cynnal no longer gather & collate data - it's mainly an IT concern nowdays.

J.Jones said...

Of Course I've done my own number crunching Cai...I just wondered whether you would do the comparisons or would be afraid to burst your own bubble. Back to burying your head in the sand I guess. Cynnal are still on contract to provide data analysis for Gwynedd, Ynys Mon and Conwy. Just contact the relevant LEA and they submit information requests to Cynnal.

There is of course more to the difference between Friars and Tryfan than just FSM%. You have to take into account EAL A-C pupils,(Tryfan don't have any...ever) % from 20% most deprived areas and SEN %.

Size of cohort also makes a big difference as Tryfan found out between 2011 and 2012. In 2011 they had a tiny GCSE cohort of 48. None of them were eligible for FSMs and there were more girls than boys. Tryfan was declared the best school in Wales and in band 1. It all went pear shaped in 2012 with a cohort of 80 and their fair share of FSMs.Tryfan dropped to band 4.

Watkin said...

J. Jones - you seem to have access to quite pertinent data, and to have a good grasp of educational attainment in Wales, and particularly NW Wales. May I ask (and this is for illumination rather than provocation) whether you work in, or with schools, or are a parent ?
I would be more than willing to discuss the perceived weaknesses and strengths of WM education, as I've always believed strongly in it, and fought for it. However, I've personal and professional experience of both sectors- which can temper enthusiasm at times. There are weak points in WM education which are glossed over (To be fair to Cai, these tend to be in the secondary sector, and not evident ) but these can only be addressed by discussion with someone who wants to improve and extend WM education. I rather suspect from your tone, and from postings on other sites, that you would rather it was diminished.

J.Jones said...

Watkin...as far as I believe anything about WM schools it is this: They are the right and proper place for pupils from Welsh speaking homes. The data shows those pupils attaining well in them.
They should be freely available to any parent who wants their child to learn Welsh.
Welsh is not well taught in WM schools...at any key stage. The data shows this.
Pupils who do not learn Welsh and in particular are not able to attain to level 4 in Welsh writing by the end of KS2 should be advised to switch to EM secondary...that option should alwys be open to them even in Gwynedd.

Estyn and the Dept of Ed should stop hiding their heads in the sand, commission proper, objective analysis of WM schools and pupil attainment in them and publicise the honest pros and cons of WM schooling. English medium schools should be available to any parent who wants their child educated through that medium.
In the 1970s when Anglesey and Gwynedd went all WM a very large majority of pupils had Welsh as a first language. In Ynys Mon it is now a minority and in Gwynedd the % fell from 69% in 2012 to 67% in 2013 at KS2.
If WM schools actually were successful at teaching Welsh then much of the problem would disappear. WM schools would attain as well as EM schools on average when socio-economic deprivation was taken into account. Without confronting that weakness WM teaching will go from bad to worse.

William Dolben said...

J Jones:

You assert

"In the 1970s when Anglesey and Gwynedd went all WM a very large majority of pupils had Welsh as a first language. In Ynys Mon it is now a minority and in Gwynedd the % fell from 69% in 2012 to 67% in 2013 at KS2."

I disagree. Anglesey native speakers in primary were under 40% in the mid 70`s and in all of Gwynedd including Anglesey in 1975 the native speakers were only 45%. That is hardly "a very large majority". Since then there has been some reduction but even in 1975 55% of children in Gwynedd were not native.

J.Jones said...

Where did you get those figures from William? I can go back to 2004 with statswales (49% Anglesey, 67% Gwynedd) but in the 1970s (I think that it was 74) ability to speak Welsh in Anglesey and Gwynedd was much higher. On your assertion 55% of school age children were not speaking Welsh at home in Gwynedd even though over 70% of all people spoke Welsh and over of those 80% were fluent in Welsh.

Griff said...

So the "WM Premium the anti-WM voices complain about exists only in a few corners of Wales?

So many different issues affect funding that I'd find it nigh on impossible to claim that WM schools are on a better footing because of this semi-mythical premium.
For example I tried to make a direct comparison between two Caerphilly schools with similar needs and the gap was the other way round.

Ysgol Ifor Bach (208 chn)
23.11 Child per teacher
31% Free School Meals
30% Special educational needs
2951 pounds per pupil

Cwm Aber Infants and Juniors (265 pupils)
21.2 cpt
34% FSM
18% SEN
3460 ppp

While there should always be discussion about the benefits and difficulties of WM and EM education schools, it's very unhelpful to such a discussion to have people believe that all WM schools get more money (I know plenty of EM teachers who believe this is true)