Mat Performance Tables 2017

Those with at least three schools that had results at either key stage 2 or key stage 4 as published in the 2017 school performance tables where 2.

Mat performance tables 2017. More than half of mats fell below the average for progress 8 performance measures last year despite a slight improvement on the year before. 5 not all schools that are able to teach pupils at the end of the key stage necessarily did so in 2017. Including the impact of a change to performance measures and a look at mat disadvantage figures. Number of 16 18 students included in 2019 mat performance measures academic qualifications cohort.

With the mat for at least 3 full academic years and have results in the 2016 school performance tables. Analysis on the performance of multi academy trusts mats. The government has today published its multi academy trust mat performance league tables based on 2017 exam results. Those schools had been with the mat for at least three academic years.

Mat havering child left at school policy 2017 21. City of norwich school an ormiston academy. It is based on measures of progress for mats with 3 or more academies that have been with the mat for at least 3 full academic years and have results in the 2017 school performance tables. Mat performance measures.

Hat exclusion policy mat complaints policy 2019 20. Schools or colleges covering 16 18 study in this mat s performance data. Please take care when drawing conclusions about a mat s improvement or fall in performance based on progress 8 alone. For example knowing a mat had a progress 8 score of 0 2 in 2018 and a score of 0 2 in 2019 tells you how the mat compared to the national average in those years but not whether its performance improved across years.

Number of 16 18 students included in 2019 mat performance measures applied general qualifications cohort.