Understanding and Using Feedback from the Primary Information Systems
Dr Chris Jellis
PIPS and InCAS have Different Feedback
• PIPS feedback uses Standardised Scores– Good for comparing yeargroups and cohorts– Good for assigning pupils to ability groups– Good for measuring progress
• InCAS feedback uses age equivalent scores– Gives a good idea of how far ahead or behind
individual pupils are– Good to use diagnostically
PIPS Reception
• Provides initial information about pupils when they enter the school
• Provides progress information for the Reception year
• Most feedback is similar to later years PIPS, with a couple of exceptions
Start of Reception Box and Whisker
Standardised scores
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Early
Mat
hsEa
rly R
eadi
ng
End of ReceptionLine Graph
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Start End
Read
ing
Raw
Sco
res (
Star
t)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Read
ing
Raw
Sco
res (
End)
PIPS Feedback
• Standardised Scores Table• Grades Table• Value Added Scatter Plot• Key Stage Chances
Year 3 Scores TablePredictors
picture non verbalclass name vocabulary ability context prior maths reading
EXAMPLE Susan 72 42 60 * 41 33EXAMPLE Luke 38 61 49 43 43 32EXAMPLE John 47 45 46 * 35 42EXAMPLE Andrew 50 57 52 46 44 37EXAMPLE Sarah 49 42 46 47 51 34EXAMPLE Helen 46 45 45 42 45 44EXAMPLE Vicky 45 44 45 45 51 43EXAMPLE Harry 56 34 47 45 48 46EXAMPLE Kate 52 44 48 42 52 43EXAMPLE Christine 55 49 51 50 47 50EXAMPLE Stephen 56 49 53 * 45 52EXAMPLE Karen 53 61 56 46 52 48EXAMPLE Roger 50 33 42 35 56 45EXAMPLE Scott 53 60 56 45 56 49EXAMPLE Daniel 58 52 54 52 61 48EXAMPLE Michael 55 60 57 53 61 50EXAMPLE Christopher * * * 55 61 53EXAMPLE Faye 59 67 62 63 53 62EXAMPLE Chloe 50 71 57 * 58 58EXAMPLE Callum 55 67 60 53 55 65EXAMPLE Andrew 56 69 61 59 56 64EXAMPLE Brian 61 47 54 52 67 53EXAMPLE Nicole 58 63 57 * 63 63EXAMPLE David 61 70 64 59 65 62EXAMPLE Amanda 75 70 71 71 61 66
Attainment
Standardised Scores
• Mean of 50, Standard Deviation of 10
• Between 40 and 60 – Average (68%)• Between 30 and 40 – Below average (14%)• Below 30 – well below average (2%)• Between 60 and 70 – Above average (14%)• Above 70 – Well above average (2%)
Year 3 Grades TableAttitudes
name grade context prior grade context prior maths reading schoolSusan D -- * E -- * Luke D - 0 E -- -- John E -- * D - *
Andrew C - 0 E -- -- Sarah C 0 0 E -- -- Helen C 0 0 C 0 0 Vicky C + + D 0 0 Harry C 0 0 C 0 0 Kate C 0 + D - 0
Christine C 0 0 C 0 0 Stephen C - * C 0 * Karen C 0 + C - 0 Roger C ++ ++ C 0 + Scott C 0 ++ C - 0 Daniel B + ++ C - 0
Michael B + + C - 0 Christopher B * + C * 0
Faye C - - B 0 0 Chloe B 0 * B 0 *
Callum C 0 0 A + ++ Andrew C 0 0 A 0 + Brian A ++ ++ C 0 0 Nicole B + * A + * David A 0 + B 0 +
Amanda B - 0 A 0 0
value added value added
Achievementmaths reading
Grade BoundariesGrade %age
A 10%
B 15%
C 50%
D 15%
E 10%
Year 3 Scatter Plot
Context Score
Attai
nmen
t Sco
re
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 7025 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
2
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
AmandaDavid
Faye
Andrew
Callum
Susan
Nicole
Chloe
Michael
Scott
Karen
Brian
Daniel
StephenChristine
Luke
Kate
Harry
John
Vicky
Helen
Roger
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Predicted Key Stage 2 LevelsMaths level English level Science Level
class name <2 3 4 5 >6 3 4 5 3 4 5
1 30 48 21 0 1 29 51 18 0 1 23 54 22 0EXAMPLE Susan 2 49 43 6 - 2 48 45 5 - 1 40 52 7 -EXAMPLE Luke 4 59 33 3 - 4 59 35 2 - 3 52 42 3 -EXAMPLE John 4 59 33 3 - 4 59 35 2 - 3 52 42 3 -EXAMPLE Andrew 3 52 41 5 - 2 51 43 4 - 1 43 50 6 -EXAMPLE Sarah 3 52 41 5 - 2 51 43 4 - 1 43 50 6 -EXAMPLE Helen 2 49 43 6 - 2 48 45 5 - 1 40 52 7 -EXAMPLE Vicky 2 46 45 7 - 2 45 48 6 - 1 37 54 8 -EXAMPLE Harry 2 43 47 8 - 1 42 50 7 - 1 34 56 9 -EXAMPLE Kate 1 40 49 10 - 1 39 52 8 - 1 31 58 11 -EXAMPLE Christine 1 37 51 11 - 1 36 54 9 - 1 28 59 12 -EXAMPLE Stephen 1 34 52 13 - 1 33 56 11 - - 26 60 14 -EXAMPLE Karen 1 28 54 17 - 1 27 58 14 - - 21 61 18 -EXAMPLE Roger 1 40 49 10 - 1 39 52 8 - 1 31 58 11 -EXAMPLE Scott - 23 55 21 - - 22 60 18 - - 16 61 22 -EXAMPLE Daniel - 23 55 21 - - 22 60 18 - - 16 61 22 -EXAMPLE Michael - 18 55 26 - - 17 60 23 - - 13 59 28 -EXAMPLE Christopher - 16 54 29 - - 15 59 25 - - 11 58 30 -EXAMPLE Faye - 12 52 35 - - 12 57 31 - - 8 55 36 -EXAMPLE Chloe - 14 53 32 - - 14 58 28 - - 10 57 33 -EXAMPLE Callum - 11 51 38 - - 10 56 34 - - 7 53 39 1EXAMPLE Andrew - 11 51 38 - - 10 56 34 - - 7 53 39 1EXAMPLE Brian - 14 53 32 - - 14 58 28 - - 10 57 33 -EXAMPLE Nicole - 9 49 41 - - 9 54 37 - - 6 51 43 1EXAMPLE David - 6 43 50 1 - 6 48 46 - - 4 44 52 1EXAMPLE Amanda - 4 39 56 1 - 4 43 53 - - 3 38 58 1
Keystage Two Chances (%)
Year Group Average
InCAS Feedback
• Age Equivalent Scores Table• Differences Table• Box and Whisker Plots• Diagnostic data• Longitudinal plots• Standardised scores
Age Equivalent Scores
Age Differences
Box and Whisker Plot (single class)
Box and Whisker Plot (multiple classes)
Diagnostic Plots
Longitudinal Plot
Standardised Scores
Mean = 100, sd = 15
Standardised Scores
• Mean of 100, Standard Deviation of 15
• Between 85 and 115 – Average (68%)• Between 70 and 85 – Below average (14%)• Below 70 – Well below average (2%)• Between 115 and 130 – Above average (14%)• Above 130 – Well above average (2%)
Comparing InCAS and PIPS
• PIPS• Standardised scores are more difficult to
understand, but good for comparing children and groups
• InCAS• Age scores are clearer, but with no standard
deviation, it is difficult to tell what the range is
Administration
• InCAS– Administer at any time of year– CD (installed on school network)– Group assessment– Feedback
• Within 24 hours
• PIPS– Fixed assessment periods– Pencil and paper or CD (installed on school
network)– Group assessment– Feedback
• Approx 6 weeks for pencil and paper• Quicker for CD
So, which do you choose?
• To establish a baseline (particularly in the early years) and show progress - PIPS
• If the group is not average – InCAS• If you need diagnostic information – InCAS• Some schools do both
Any Questions?
Dr Chris JellisResearch Associate
CEM
Top Related