Writing results for 6 to 7 year olds

Published

This page has been archived.
It has been replaced by School results for 5 to 7 year olds.

1. Main facts and figures

  • 69% of pupils in year 2 met the expected standard in writing in the 2018 to 2019 school year
  • 15% of pupils met the higher standard
  • pupils from the Chinese ethnic group were most likely out of all ethnic groups to meet both the expected and higher standards
  • White Gypsy and Roma pupils were least likely out of all ethnic groups to meet the expected standard - they were also least likely to meet the higher standard, along with White Irish Traveller pupils
  • in every ethnic group, girls were more likely than boys to meet both the expected and higher standards
  • in every ethnic group, pupils eligible for free school meals were less likely to meet the expected standard than other pupils
Things you need to know

In the 2018 to 2019 school year, 666,393 pupils were assessed for writing in year 2 (when they were 6 or 7 years old).

Ethnicity was known for 98.6% of pupils. Of those:

  • 74% were White
  • 11% were Asian
  • 6% had Mixed ethnic backgrounds
  • 5% were Black
  • 0.5% were from the Chinese ethnic group
  • 2% were from Other ethnic groups

At the end of year 2, teachers assess pupils in reading, writing, maths and science. Pupils also take tests in reading and maths. This data only includes teacher assessments, as schools don’t submit test data to the Department of Education.

Results for the Isles of Scilly and the City of London are not included in local authority breakdowns as they only have 1 school each.

There were 2,529 Gypsy and Roma pupils and 682 Traveller of Irish Heritage pupils. Please use caution when interpreting figures for these groups as they are based on small numbers of pupils.

This data only includes pupils in state-funded schools.

107,158 pupils (16%) were eligible for free school meals.

School-level data is not published for key stage 1 subjects.

What the data measures

This data measures the percentage of pupils who met the expected and higher standards in writing.

Teachers assess pupils at the end of key stage 1 (year 2), when children are 6 or 7 years old.

They assess each pupil against the following standards:

  • expected standard – pupils are 'working at the expected standard' or 'working at greater depth within the expected standard'
  • higher standard – pupils are 'working at a greater depth within the expected standard'
The ethnic categories used in this data

This data groups ethnicities from the Department for Education’s school census. These groupings are based on the 2001 Census of England and Wales, with 2 exceptions:

  • Traveller of Irish Heritage and Gypsy and Roma pupils are in separate categories
  • the Chinese ethnic group is a separate category from Asian

These changes were made after consultations with local authorities and lobby groups.

Local authority data is only provided for 6 ethnic groups:

  • Asian
  • Black
  • Chinese
  • Mixed
  • White
  • Other

2. By ethnicity

Location:
England
Time period:
2018 to 2019 school year
Source:
Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments: England 2019
Percentage of pupils meeting the expected and higher standards in writing, by ethnicity
Ethnicity Expected standard Higher standard
All 69 15
Asian 73 16
Bangladeshi 72 17
Indian 80 22
Pakistani 68 12
Asian other 74 18
Black 71 15
Black African 73 16
Black Caribbean 65 10
Black other 68 14
Chinese 83 28
Mixed 71 17
Mixed White/Asian 77 21
Mixed White/Black African 71 16
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 64 11
Mixed other 72 18
White 69 14
White British 69 15
White Irish 72 19
Gypsy/Roma 26 2
Irish Traveller 30 2
White other 67 13
Other 64 12
Unknown 51 10

Download table data for ‘By ethnicity’ (CSV) Source data for ‘By ethnicity’ (CSV)

Summary of Writing results for 6 to 7 year olds By ethnicity Summary

This data shows that:

  • 69% of pupils met the expected standard in writing in year 2 (when they were 6 or 7 years old)
  • 15% met the higher standard
  • 83% of pupils from the Chinese ethnic group met the expected standard and 28% met the higher standard, the highest percentages out of all ethnic groups
  • 26% of White Gypsy and Roma pupils met the expected standard, the lowest percentage out of all ethnic groups
  • 2% of White Gypsy and Roma, and White Irish Traveller pupils met the higher standard, the lowest percentage out of all ethnic groups
  • 69% of White British pupils met the expected standard, and 15% met the higher standard

3. By ethnicity and gender

Location:
England
Time period:
2018 to 2019 school year
Source:
Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments: England 2019
Percentage of pupils meeting the expected and higher standards in writing, by ethnicity and gender
Boys Girls
Ethnicity Boys Expected standard Boys Higher standard Girls Expected standard Girls Higher standard
All 63 11 76 19
Asian 67 13 79 21
Bangladeshi 66 12 79 21
Indian 75 18 85 27
Pakistani 61 8 75 15
Asian other 68 14 80 22
Black 64 11 78 18
Black African 67 12 80 20
Black Caribbean 57 8 73 13
Black other 61 10 76 18
Chinese 79 23 88 34
Mixed 65 13 78 21
Mixed White/Asian 72 17 82 25
Mixed White/Black African 65 12 78 21
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 57 8 72 15
Mixed other 66 15 79 22
White 62 11 75 18
White British 63 11 76 19
White Irish 64 14 79 24
Gypsy/Roma 22 1 30 3
Irish Traveller 21 2 38 3
White other 61 10 73 17
Other 59 9 70 14
Unknown 45 8 57 12

Download table data for ‘By ethnicity and gender’ (CSV) Source data for ‘By ethnicity and gender’ (CSV)

Summary of Writing results for 6 to 7 year olds By ethnicity and gender Summary

This data shows that:

  • 76% of girls and 63% of boys met the expected standard in writing
  • 19% of girls and 11% of boys met the higher standard
  • in every ethnic group, girls were more likely than boys to meet both the expected and higher standards
  • girls from the Chinese ethnic group were the most likely to meet the expected standard (88%) and higher standard (34%)
  • boys from the White Irish Traveller ethnic group were the least likely to meet the expected standard (21%)
  • boys from the White Gypsy and Roma ethnic group were least likely to meet the higher standard (1%)
  • at the expected standard, the biggest gap between girls and boys was in the White Irish Traveller ethnic group, where 38% of girls and 21% of boys met the standard
  • the smallest gap was in the White Gypsy and Roma ethnic group, where 30% of girls and 22% of boys met the standard
  • at the higher standard, the biggest gap between girls and boys was in the Chinese ethnic group, where 34% of girls and 23% of boys met the standard
  • the smallest gap was in the White Irish Traveller ethnic group, where 3% of girls and 2% of boys met the standard
  • among White British pupils, 76% of girls and 63% of boys met the expected standard, and 19% of girls and 11% of boys met the higher standard

4. By ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals

Location:
England
Time period:
2018 to 2019 school year
Source:
Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments: England 2019
Percentage of pupils meeting the expected standard in writing, by ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals
Ethnicity FSM Non-FSM
% %
All 53 72
Asian 65 74
Bangladeshi 68 73
Indian 70 81
Pakistani 63 69
Asian other 63 75
Black 66 73
Black African 69 74
Black Caribbean 58 68
Black other 62 70
Chinese 83 83
Mixed 58 75
Mixed White/Asian 62 79
Mixed White/Black African 63 73
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 54 69
Mixed other 59 76
White 50 72
White British 50 73
White Irish 41 77
Gypsy/Roma 23 27
Irish Traveller 25 37
White other 54 67
Other 55 67
Unknown 47 51

Download table data for ‘By ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals’ (CSV) Source data for ‘By ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals’ (CSV)

Summary of Writing results for 6 to 7 year olds By ethnicity and eligibility for free school meals Summary

Eligibility for free school meals (FSM) in England is used as an indicator of deprivation.

The data for FSM-eligible pupils shows that:

  • 53% met the expected standard in writing, compared with 72% of non-eligible pupils
  • 83% from the Chinese ethnic group met the standard, the highest percentage out of all ethnic groups
  • 23% from the White Gypsy and Roma ethnic group met the standard, the lowest percentage
  • in every ethnic group except the Chinese ethnic group, they were less likely to meet the standard than non-eligible pupils
  • White Irish pupils had the biggest gap between FSM-eligible (41%) and non-eligible pupils (77%)
  • 50% of White British pupils met the standard, compared with 73% of non-eligible White British pupils

5. By ethnicity and area

Location:
England
Time period:
2018 to 2019 school year
Source:
Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments: England 2019
Percentage of pupils achieving the expected standard in writing, by ethnicity and area
Local authority All Asian Black Chinese Mixed White Other
% % % % % % %
Barking and Dagenham 69 73 75 78 69 63 75
Barnet 74 78 75 83 74 74 69
Barnsley 67 82 57 N/A* 69 67 78
Bath and North East Somerset 71 72 80 89 79 71 40
Bedford 61 59 66 100 58 62 48
Bexley 74 83 81 87 75 71 65
Birmingham 67 70 67 88 66 65 63
Blackburn with Darwen 68 69 58 67 74 68 71
Blackpool 65 81 45 80 71 65 30
Bolton 68 73 60 67 69 68 57
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 70 76 67 88 71 70 66
Bracknell Forest 72 81 87 83 80 71 78
Bradford 67 71 70 67 68 65 56
Brent 68 74 68 93 69 67 60
Brighton and Hove 70 65 80 79 75 70 48
Bristol, City of 68 65 62 100 65 70 57
Bromley 76 90 72 95 76 76 80
Buckinghamshire 71 70 69 88 70 72 71
Bury 66 61 67 80 68 68 61
Calderdale 64 60 48 70 59 65 56
Cambridgeshire 67 74 71 78 68 67 60
Camden 70 68 69 75 66 72 67
Central Bedfordshire 72 82 74 90 76 72 79
Cheshire East 70 73 63 78 76 70 60
Cheshire West and Chester 65 72 48 86 71 65 43
City of London withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality
Cornwall 65 78 43 55 71 65 48
County Durham 72 68 92 80 76 72 60
Coventry 65 73 66 84 62 63 59
Croydon 72 79 74 86 74 69 72
Cumbria 68 72 67 71 79 68 65
Darlington 68 66 91 100 82 68 55
Derby 66 74 74 74 64 65 58
Derbyshire 69 65 79 71 78 69 69
Devon 68 67 80 75 76 68 55
Doncaster 68 68 70 80 68 68 55
Dorset 68 79 58 100 70 68 47
Dudley 67 71 66 86 66 67 53
Ealing 70 73 65 74 77 72 63
East Riding of Yorkshire 70 82 100 100 75 70 63
East Sussex 72 78 67 68 75 72 53
Enfield 65 75 66 91 73 62 63
Essex 71 80 73 87 75 70 73
Gateshead 70 77 72 75 81 70 51
Gloucestershire 67 71 70 83 67 68 50
Greenwich 75 89 80 88 79 68 78
Hackney 76 82 76 81 74 76 69
Halton 66 80 100 N/A* 79 65 67
Hammersmith and Fulham 74 78 67 86 77 78 70
Hampshire 74 80 81 85 78 74 75
Haringey 72 81 74 83 77 72 62
Harrow 74 82 67 90 75 66 64
Hartlepool 70 66 83 100 73 71 44
Havering 72 78 75 92 74 71 69
Herefordshire, County of 73 63 85 100 82 74 60
Hertfordshire 71 77 69 79 73 70 64
Hillingdon 70 79 71 82 68 63 68
Hounslow 74 80 72 95 75 71 71
Isle of Wight 64 43 75 100 73 64 50
Isles of Scilly withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality
Islington 72 73 72 92 70 72 65
Kensington and Chelsea 75 73 74 75 75 77 70
Kent 71 79 81 90 78 70 69
Kingston upon Hull, City of 66 76 68 67 68 67 61
Kingston upon Thames 73 76 63 90 76 72 70
Kirklees 67 69 73 76 65 67 64
Knowsley 65 84 76 57 72 64 64
Lambeth 74 71 71 91 76 78 71
Lancashire 68 67 78 76 69 68 52
Leeds 63 63 62 78 66 64 58
Leicester 65 71 62 68 68 58 67
Leicestershire 70 80 71 69 70 69 66
Lewisham 70 73 70 87 70 71 78
Lincolnshire 67 84 69 72 72 66 71
Liverpool 64 69 66 74 62 65 51
Luton 64 70 66 82 63 57 71
Manchester 66 67 70 81 68 64 61
Medway 71 82 83 75 71 70 68
Merton 70 76 64 89 70 69 78
Middlesbrough 66 65 68 88 63 67 53
Milton Keynes 71 77 74 88 74 68 48
Newcastle upon Tyne 71 71 75 69 74 72 67
Newham 75 79 76 92 78 66 75
Norfolk 66 78 65 81 73 66 64
North East Lincolnshire 70 75 50 50 68 70 50
North Lincolnshire 70 72 79 100 73 70 38
North Somerset 71 79 63 60 79 70 67
North Tyneside 72 69 74 93 79 72 56
North Yorkshire 68 68 62 73 74 68 55
Northamptonshire 68 77 72 83 69 68 53
Northumberland 73 82 60 100 73 73 70
Nottingham 64 66 72 84 67 61 58
Nottinghamshire 68 72 69 89 68 68 60
Oldham 65 64 64 88 66 66 51
Oxfordshire 70 71 74 88 69 70 62
Peterborough 62 62 65 92 63 62 50
Plymouth 66 85 65 62 67 66 58
Portsmouth 66 74 59 76 72 66 56
Reading 65 70 65 67 64 64 59
Redbridge 74 78 74 79 80 68 62
Redcar and Cleveland 73 88 100 100 67 73 33
Richmond upon Thames 76 78 74 91 79 76 69
Rochdale 64 64 70 81 64 65 58
Rotherham 68 69 68 88 79 68 54
Rutland 74 67 67 100 63 75 75
Salford 68 76 69 100 76 68 64
Sandwell 66 70 70 87 69 63 58
Sefton 68 61 54 90 66 68 24
Sheffield 67 67 72 73 63 68 60
Shropshire 67 58 100 50 70 67 63
Slough 71 76 76 100 67 64 71
Solihull 72 79 66 100 71 70 78
Somerset 71 76 83 100 74 71 54
South Gloucestershire 74 90 77 95 69 74 70
South Tyneside 70 74 71 100 71 70 90
Southampton 67 68 76 94 68 66 66
Southend-on-Sea 69 73 83 83 66 69 57
Southwark 73 77 74 83 71 75 64
St. Helens 69 69 73 54 74 69 20
Staffordshire 72 76 71 100 70 72 59
Stockport 69 70 61 76 70 69 66
Stockton-on-Tees 74 80 77 89 73 73 57
Stoke-on-Trent 65 69 64 76 64 66 51
Suffolk 66 77 71 86 66 66 68
Sunderland 72 70 72 84 73 72 60
Surrey 72 76 74 94 76 71 74
Sutton 76 86 76 93 78 72 68
Swindon 70 74 79 92 72 70 74
Tameside 67 70 45 75 68 68 66
Telford and Wrekin 71 65 67 89 73 72 33
Thurrock 69 80 82 77 75 65 76
Torbay 69 91 50 67 83 69 80
Tower Hamlets 72 73 70 81 76 70 55
Trafford 72 74 67 85 70 73 65
Wakefield 67 64 71 89 69 67 69
Walsall 67 74 60 77 69 65 60
Waltham Forest 75 79 73 89 78 74 75
Wandsworth 75 73 69 88 73 82 64
Warrington 73 77 75 64 76 72 69
Warwickshire 71 78 79 96 72 71 63
West Berkshire 69 76 57 71 76 69 62
West Sussex 68 73 56 81 70 67 69
Westminster 71 78 74 76 69 72 67
Wigan 70 72 76 91 78 70 62
Wiltshire 68 67 70 75 67 68 79
Windsor and Maidenhead 71 70 72 100 73 72 62
Wirral 66 75 70 95 71 65 50
Wokingham 74 83 69 75 75 72 80
Wolverhampton 69 78 68 61 73 66 59
Worcestershire 69 68 59 76 72 69 67
York 71 76 73 83 79 71 47

* Not applicable Data withheld to protect confidentiality

Download table data for ‘By ethnicity and area’ (CSV) Source data for ‘By ethnicity and area’ (CSV)

Summary of Writing results for 6 to 7 year olds By ethnicity and area Summary

This data shows that:

  • out of all local authorities, White pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in Wandsworth (82%) and least likely to in Luton (57%)
  • figures for other ethnic groups are based on small numbers of pupils, so reliable generalisations can't be made

6. Methodology

Local authorities collect key stage 1 data from 16,400 schools and submit it to the Department for Education.

This data is matched to school census records to identify pupils’ ethnicities and free school meal eligibility.

The data only covers state-funded schools in England. This includes local authority-maintained schools, academies and special schools. It excludes pupils in independent schools, alternative provision and those who are home schooling.

Some data is broken down by pupils' eligibility for free school meals (FSM). To be eligible, their families must:

  • have applied for FSM at the time of the school census in January
  • be receiving a qualifying benefit like Jobseeker’s Allowance

We refer to pupils who are not eligible for FSM (or whose eligibility is unknown) as ‘non-FSM’.

Only pupils with a valid outcome are included in the calculations for that subject.

The valid outcomes for writing are:

  • working at greater depth within the expected standard
  • working at the expected standard
  • working towards the expected standard
  • foundations for the expected standard
  • below the pre-key stage standard
  • absent
  • disapplied
  • maladministration

Suppression rules and disclosure control

Figures for the Isles of Scilly and City of London are not included as these local authorities have 1 school each.

The Department for Education (DfE) does not publish school-level information for writing.

You can also read DfE’s statistical policy statement on confidentiality (PDF opens in a new window or tab) (PDF).

Rounding

Percentages given in charts, tables and downloads are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Related publications

Schools, pupils and their characteristics: June 2019

Quality and methodology information

Further technical information

2019 key stage 1: assessment and reporting arrangements (ARA)

7. Data sources

Source

Type of data

Administrative data

Type of statistic

National Statistics

Publisher

Department for Education

Publication frequency

Yearly

Purpose of data source

This data provides results for the 2019 key stage 1 national curriculum assessments. The results are used to monitor pupils’ attainment in reading, writing, maths and science.

8. Download the data

KS1 Writing -- National - Spreadsheet (csv) 76 KB

This file contains the following: measure, ethnicity, ethnicity_type, time, time_type, geography, geography_type, geography_code, gender, age, FSM, value, value_type, denominator and numerator

KS1 Writing -- Local Authority - Spreadsheet (csv) 548 KB

This file contains the following: measure, ethnicity, ethnicity_type, time, time_type, geography, geography_type, geography_code, gender, age, value, value_type, denominator and numerator

Publication release date: 20 April 2020

full page history
  1. Updated with the latest figures for the school year 2018 to 2019.

From: Department for Education

Previous editions:
  1. Edition published on 29 July 2019
  2. Edition published on 14 May 2019
  3. Edition published on 4 March 2018
Contents

Share this page