Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 (key stage 2)

Published

Last updated 11 October 2017 - see all updates

There is a new version of this page. View the latest version.

1. Main facts and figures

  • in 2015/16, there were 586,157 pupils in key stage 2 at state-funded mainstream schools in England, of which ethnicity was known for 581,278 pupils (99%)

  • 76% were White, 11% were Asian, 6% were Black, 5% were Mixed, 2% belonged to the Other ethnic group and 0.4% were Chinese

  • across all ethnic groups, 70% reached the expected standard for maths, 17% met the higher standard, and 103 was the average scaled score

  • Chinese children were most likely to meet the expected and higher standard, had the highest average scaled score and made the most progress in maths between key stage 1 and key stage 2

  • Gypsy/Roma children were least likely to meet both the expected standard and higher standard and had the lowest average scaled score

  • children from a Traveller of Irish Heritage background made the least progress in maths between key stage 1 and key stage 2

  • across all ethnic groups, boys and girls were equally likely to meet the expected standard, but boys were more likely than girls to reach the higher standard

Things you need to know

The Department for Education (DfE) has excluded, or ‘suppressed’, very small numbers (for example, values of 1 or 2, a percentage based on 1 or 2 pupils who achieved, or 0, 1 or 2 pupils who did not achieve a particular standard).

This is because, where the size of the ethnic group population is small enough that an individual’s identity could be revealed, information is suppressed to preserve confidentiality. This is consistent with DfE’s statistical policy statement on confidentiality (PDF opens in a new window or tab).

Pupil numbers for key stage 2 vary between measures of attainment for different subjects. This is because pupils who don't have a valid test result for a particular subject are excluded from the total. For more about valid test results, see Methodology.

What the data measures

This data measures the maths attainment of children in key stage 2 (years 3 to 6, when pupils are aged between 7 and 11).

The data covers the academic year 2015/16 (September 2015 to July 2016).

Key stage 2 test results range from 80 to 120 on a ‘scaled score’. (A ‘scaled score’ allows for variations in test difficulty year on year by standardising each pupil’s test results. This allows a clearer comparison between years.)

Standards in maths are divided into 2 categories:

  • expected standard

  • higher standard

To reach the expected standard, pupils must have achieved a scaled score of 100 or more in their key stage 2 maths tests.

To reach the higher standard, pupils must have achieved a score of 110 or more in their key stage 2 maths tests.

The measure also looks at:

  • average scaled score
  • progress score

The average scaled score measures the average attainment of pupils in key stage 2 maths tests. This data compares the average scaled score for all children in England with the score for particular ethnic groups.

The progress score measures the progress that pupils make from the end of key stage 1 to the end of key stage 2, when they leave primary school.

The pupils’ results are compared to the actual achievements of other pupils nationally with similar key stage 1 attainment. This data measures the average progress score of all children in England with the score for particular ethnic groups.

A progress score of 0 (the national average) means pupils are making the expected amount of progress. A positive score (0.1 and above) means they are making more progress than expected, and a negative score (-0.1 and below) less progress than expected.

The data is published in the Department for Education’s statistical publication, National curriculum assessments: key stage 2, 2016 (revised).

The ethnic categories used in this data

This data uses categories from the Department of Education’s school census, which is broadly based on the 2001 national census, with three exceptions:

  • Travellers of Irish Heritage and Gypsy/Roma children have been separated into two categories
  • Sri Lankan has been added to the Asian/Asian British group but is not reported separately
  • Chinese pupils have been assigned a separate category

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

The categories in the school census are as follows:

White:

  • White British
  • White Irish
  • Traveller of Irish Heritage
  • Gypsy/Roma
  • Other White

Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups:

  • White and Black Caribbean
  • White and Black African
  • White and Asian
  • Other Mixed background

Asian/Asian British:

  • Indian
  • Pakistani
  • Bangladeshi
  • Sri Lankan
  • Other Asian background

Black/African/Caribbean/Black British:

  • Black African
  • Black Caribbean
  • Other Black background

Chinese

Other ethnic group

Information is provided for both detailed and broad ethnic groups categories where possible and when the data is available.

The 6 broad categories used are as follows:

  • White
  • Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups
  • Asian/Asian British
  • Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
  • Other ethnic group
  • Chinese

However, local authority data is only provided for 5 broad ethnic groups. Information about the specific ethnic categories is excluded to preserve confidentiality and ensure individuals cannot be identified. Information about the Other ethnic group is not given because DfE does not publish data for this group at these levels.

The 5 broad categories are as follows:

  • White
  • Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups
  • Asian/Asian British
  • Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
  • Chinese

2. Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity

Percentage of pupils meeting the expected and higher standard in mathematics and average scaled score and progress score by ethnicity
Ethnicity Expected standard Higher standard Average scaled score Progress score
All 70 17 103 0.0
Asian 75 23 104 1.7
Bangladeshi 75 20 104 1.8
Indian 82 33 106 2.3
Pakistani 67 16 103 0.9
Asian other 81 32 106 3.0
Black 68 14 103 0.6
Black African 72 16 103 1.2
Black Caribbean 60 8 101 -0.8
Black other 65 12 102 0.2
Chinese 92 50 109 4.5
Mixed 70 18 103 0.0
Mixed White/Asian 78 24 105 0.7
Mixed White/Black African 69 15 103 -0.1
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 63 11 101 -1.1
Mixed other 72 20 104 0.4
White 69 16 103 -0.3
White British 69 15 103 -0.5
White Irish 75 22 104 0.6
White Irish Traveller 33 3 97 -1.4
White Gypsy/Roma 26 1 96 -1.0
White other 70 18 103 2.3
Other 73 20 104 2.4
Unknown 59 14 102 -0.2

Download table data for ‘Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity’ (CSV) Source data for ‘Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity’ (CSV)

Summary of Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 (key stage 2) Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity Summary

The data shows that:

  • across all ethnic groups, 70% of pupils reached the expected standard and 17% met the higher standard for maths

  • Chinese children were most likely to meet the expected and higher standard, with 92% and 50% doing so

  • Chinese children had the highest average scaled score, with a score of 109 compared to the national average of 103

  • Chinese children made the most progress in maths between key stage 1 and key stage 2, with a score of 4.5, compared to the national average of 0

  • Gypsy/Roma children were least likely to meet both the expected and higher standard, with 26% and 1% doing so

  • Gypsy/Roma children also had the lowest average scaled score, at 96, compared to a national average of 103

  • children from a Traveller of Irish heritage background made the least progress in maths between key stage 1 and key stage 2, with a score of -1.4, compared to a national average of 0

3. Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and area

Percentage of pupils meeting the expected standard in maths by ethnicity and local authority
Local Authority All Asian Black Chinese Mixed White
% % % % % %
Barking and Dagenham 77 87 79 100 72 71
Barnet 77 81 66 withheld to protect confidentiality 73 81
Barnsley 72 withheld to protect confidentiality 73 withheld to protect confidentiality 75 71
Bath and North East Somerset 68 78 43 withheld to protect confidentiality 74 68
Bedford 59 58 51 withheld to protect confidentiality 59 60
Bexley 75 86 80 100 80 72
Birmingham 66 67 62 94 65 65
Blackburn with Darwen 73 73 87 withheld to protect confidentiality 77 73
Blackpool 69 83 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 79 69
Bolton 74 81 66 withheld to protect confidentiality 77 72
Bournemouth 71 73 79 withheld to protect confidentiality 65 71
Bracknell Forest 66 78 51 withheld to protect confidentiality 70 65
Bradford 66 69 64 withheld to protect confidentiality 65 64
Brent 75 82 69 withheld to protect confidentiality 73 76
Brighton and Hove 70 68 49 withheld to protect confidentiality 71 71
Bristol, City of 68 70 55 81 64 71
Bromley 81 94 78 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 81
Buckinghamshire 72 73 58 100 71 73
Bury 72 70 51 withheld to protect confidentiality 68 73
Calderdale 67 67 58 withheld to protect confidentiality 72 67
Cambridgeshire 67 77 47 87 71 66
Camden 79 79 78 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 79
Central Bedfordshire 65 74 57 withheld to protect confidentiality 72 64
Cheshire East 72 87 withheld to protect confidentiality 100 73 72
Cheshire West and Chester 69 76 62 withheld to protect confidentiality 74 69
City of London 100 100 100 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 100
Cornwall 65 64 57 100 64 65
County Durham 75 93 withheld to protect confidentiality 100 77 75
Coventry 67 76 68 withheld to protect confidentiality 61 65
Croydon 70 81 65 100 68 71
Cumbria 67 83 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 83 67
Darlington 74 82 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 71 74
Derby 64 68 60 100 68 63
Derbyshire 70 76 83 100 69 70
Devon 69 73 61 withheld to protect confidentiality 72 69
Doncaster 64 67 83 75 67 63
Dorset 63 78 50 100 62 63
Dudley 66 71 64 withheld to protect confidentiality 62 65
Ealing 75 78 65 100 74 77
East Riding of Yorkshire 68 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 70 68
East Sussex 66 74 50 65 67 66
Enfield 72 83 68 100 68 72
Essex 71 83 73 94 74 71
Gateshead 76 73 88 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 76
Gloucestershire 70 79 59 withheld to protect confidentiality 68 70
Greenwich 78 88 81 100 76 72
Hackney 78 80 72 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 83
Halton 65 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 68 65
Hammersmith and Fulham 79 87 77 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 79
Hampshire 72 80 72 withheld to protect confidentiality 73 71
Haringey 74 77 65 81 78 79
Harrow 79 86 63 100 75 76
Hartlepool 72 88 50 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 71
Havering 77 85 79 100 75 76
Herefordshire, County of 67 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 66 67
Hertfordshire 73 83 66 94 73 72
Hillingdon 76 83 73 withheld to protect confidentiality 77 73
Hounslow 77 83 67 100 73 75
Isle of Wight 63 33 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 71 63
Isles of Scilly 55 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 55
Islington 75 79 73 withheld to protect confidentiality 72 76
Kensington and Chelsea 85 83 85 withheld to protect confidentiality 82 87
Kent 72 85 81 withheld to protect confidentiality 78 70
Kingston upon Hull, City of 69 84 64 withheld to protect confidentiality 75 69
Kingston upon Thames 79 85 63 100 74 77
Kirklees 67 68 59 100 57 68
Knowsley 67 89 78 withheld to protect confidentiality 81 66
Lambeth 80 88 76 withheld to protect confidentiality 77 84
Lancashire 70 69 58 91 69 70
Leeds 66 65 58 93 67 66
Leicester 71 77 71 100 65 64
Leicestershire 68 77 73 83 66 68
Lewisham 73 85 69 withheld to protect confidentiality 74 74
Lincolnshire 67 88 63 100 64 67
Liverpool 65 82 66 withheld to protect confidentiality 62 65
Luton 64 64 60 100 60 65
Manchester 71 71 73 89 70 70
Medway 65 80 79 withheld to protect confidentiality 66 63
Merton 76 86 68 100 67 74
Middlesbrough 71 67 82 withheld to protect confidentiality 69 71
Milton Keynes 72 91 69 100 69 69
Newcastle upon Tyne 72 76 64 80 70 72
Newham 80 84 76 withheld to protect confidentiality 73 76
Norfolk 62 80 53 84 68 62
North East Lincolnshire 69 75 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 74 69
North Lincolnshire 67 64 45 withheld to protect confidentiality 81 68
North Somerset 70 83 57 withheld to protect confidentiality 69 70
North Tyneside 73 69 50 100 76 73
North Yorkshire 66 79 55 100 83 66
Northamptonshire 66 75 62 79 65 66
Northumberland 69 72 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 64 69
Nottingham 70 75 69 100 67 68
Nottinghamshire 70 73 66 86 72 70
Oldham 68 67 73 withheld to protect confidentiality 60 70
Oxfordshire 69 67 62 withheld to protect confidentiality 70 69
Peterborough 61 68 56 withheld to protect confidentiality 54 60
Plymouth 69 71 80 100 74 69
Poole 69 89 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 60 68
Portsmouth 64 80 55 100 58 63
Reading 68 80 59 withheld to protect confidentiality 64 67
Redbridge 76 81 65 100 73 70
Redcar and Cleveland 78 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 89 78
Richmond upon Thames 82 87 70 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 82
Rochdale 70 68 56 100 67 72
Rotherham 72 75 74 100 78 71
Rutland 68 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 58 68
Salford 75 82 72 withheld to protect confidentiality 77 75
Sandwell 70 76 64 withheld to protect confidentiality 67 69
Sefton 74 73 56 withheld to protect confidentiality 81 74
Sheffield 69 70 63 withheld to protect confidentiality 65 69
Shropshire 69 75 57 100 72 69
Slough 73 79 67 withheld to protect confidentiality 73 65
Solihull 72 76 77 100 71 71
Somerset 68 76 58 withheld to protect confidentiality 74 68
South Gloucestershire 69 90 61 withheld to protect confidentiality 69 69
South Tyneside 75 91 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 73 74
Southampton 71 72 83 withheld to protect confidentiality 74 70
Southend-on-Sea 71 78 66 withheld to protect confidentiality 72 70
Southwark 74 86 70 100 69 78
St. Helens 71 85 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 83 70
Staffordshire 69 73 60 89 69 69
Stockport 74 72 57 79 81 74
Stockton-on-Tees 72 75 73 100 71 72
Stoke-on-Trent 63 66 62 100 67 63
Suffolk 64 79 60 withheld to protect confidentiality 67 64
Sunderland 75 82 withheld to protect confidentiality 100 53 75
Surrey 74 79 66 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 74
Sutton 80 94 80 100 81 76
Swindon 70 81 75 withheld to protect confidentiality 67 69
Tameside 70 71 66 withheld to protect confidentiality 77 69
Telford and Wrekin 71 72 61 withheld to protect confidentiality 70 71
Thurrock 68 78 79 withheld to protect confidentiality 63 65
Torbay 69 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 100 72 68
Tower Hamlets 79 81 72 100 69 74
Trafford 81 85 80 withheld to protect confidentiality 79 80
Wakefield 67 64 57 withheld to protect confidentiality 67 67
Walsall 67 70 68 100 70 66
Waltham Forest 76 78 73 100 73 77
Wandsworth 75 77 67 withheld to protect confidentiality 69 80
Warrington 76 76 55 100 87 75
Warwickshire 71 84 57 withheld to protect confidentiality 70 70
West Berkshire 70 77 74 100 74 69
West Sussex 63 72 54 63 66 63
Westminster 76 80 73 100 81 79
Wigan 74 74 60 100 69 75
Wiltshire 67 69 49 100 66 67
Windsor and Maidenhead 73 73 53 withheld to protect confidentiality 81 72
Wirral 64 80 withheld to protect confidentiality 78 61 64
Wokingham 77 88 82 withheld to protect confidentiality 72 76
Wolverhampton 70 77 64 withheld to protect confidentiality 66 69
Worcestershire 64 69 54 60 69 64
York 69 83 withheld to protect confidentiality withheld to protect confidentiality 81 69

Download table data for ‘Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and area’ (CSV) Source data for ‘Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and area’ (CSV)

Summary of Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 (key stage 2) Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and area Summary

This data for expected standards for maths shows that:

  • overall, the best performing local authority was the City of London in the region of London, where 100% of pupils met the expected standard – however, because there is only one school of 28 pupils in the City of London, this result should be treated with caution

  • the worst performing local authority overall was the Isles of Scilly in the South West, where 55% of pupils met the expected standard – however, because there is only one school of 20 pupils on the Isles of Scilly, this result should be treated with caution

  • White pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in the City of London and Kensington and Chelsea in London, and least likely to meet it in the Isles of Scilly in the South West and Bedford and Peterborough in the East of England

  • Asian pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in the City of London, Bromley and Sutton in London, and least likely to meet it on the Isle of Wight in the South West

  • 100% of Chinese pupils met the expected standard in maths in 47 local authorities; they were least likely to meet the expected standard in Worcestershire in the West Midlands

  • Black pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in the City of London and Gateshead in the North East, and least likely to meet it in Bath and North East in the South West

  • pupils from a Mixed ethnic background were most likely to meet the expected standard in Redcar and Cleveland in the North East and least likely to meet it in Sunderland in the North East

4. Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and gender

Percentage of pupils meeting the expected and higher standard in mathematics and average scaled score and progress score by ethnicity and gender
Boys Girls
Ethnicity Boys Expected standard Boys Higher standard Boys Average scaled score Boys Progress score Girls Expected standard Girls Higher standard Girls Average scaled score Girls Progress score
All 70 18 103 0.6 70 15 103 -0.6
Asian 75 25 105 2.4 75 21 104 1.1
Bangladeshi 75 22 104 2.5 75 19 104 1.1
Indian 82 35 107 2.9 83 31 106 1.7
Pakistani 68 17 103 1.6 67 14 102 0.3
Asian other 81 34 106 3.7 81 30 106 2.3
Black 67 15 103 1.0 70 13 103 0.2
Black African 71 17 103 1.6 73 15 103 0.7
Black Caribbean 58 9 101 -0.4 61 8 101 -1.1
Black other 64 13 102 0.8 66 11 102 -0.4
Chinese 92 53 110 5.4 92 48 109 3.6
Mixed 70 19 103 0.6 71 16 103 -0.6
Mixed White/Asian 77 26 105 1.3 78 22 104 0.0
Mixed White/Black African 69 17 103 0.4 70 14 103 -0.5
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 62 12 102 -0.5 63 10 101 -1.7
Mixed other 72 21 104 1.0 73 18 103 -0.2
White 69 17 103 0.3 69 14 103 -1.0
White British 70 17 103 0.1 69 14 103 -1.1
White Irish 74 23 104 1.1 76 21 104 0.0
White Irish Traveller 30 withheld to protect confidentiality 96 -1.2 37 withheld to protect confidentiality 97 -1.6
White Gypsy/Roma 26 withheld to protect confidentiality 96 -0.5 25 withheld to protect confidentiality 96 -1.6
White other 71 20 104 2.9 69 16 103 1.7
Other 73 22 104 3.0 73 18 104 1.7
Unknown 59 15 103 0.5 58 12 102 -0.9

Download table data for ‘Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and gender’ (CSV) Source data for ‘Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and gender’ (CSV)

Summary of Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 (key stage 2) Maths attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity and gender Summary

This data shows that:

  • boys and girls were equally likely to meet the expected standard for maths, with 70% of each group doing so

  • boys were more likely to reach the higher standard, with 18% doing so compared to 15% of girls

  • Chinese boys performed best, with 92% reaching the expected standard and 53% reaching the higher standard

  • Chinese boys made the most progress in maths between key stage 1 and key stage 2, with a score of 5.4 compared to the national average of 0

  • Chinese boys had the highest average scaled score, with a score of 110, compared to national average of 103

  • Gypsy/Roma girls were least likely to meet the expected standard, with 25% doing so

  • the percentage of Gypsy/Roma boys and girls and Traveller of Irish Heritage boys and girls meeting the higher standard has been excluded from the results to protect the identity of individual pupils

  • Gypsy/Roma pupils and boys from a Traveller of Irish Heritage background also had the lowest average scaled score, at 96

  • girls from the Gypsy/Roma and Traveller of Irish Heritage groups made the least progress in maths between key stage 1 and key stage 2, with a score of -1.6

5. Methodology

The key stage 2 datasets are compiled using information matched together from three data sources:

  • prior attainment records (key stage 1 results)

  • school census records

  • qualification entries and results collected from awarding bodies

Key stage assessment data received from the Standard Testing Agency (STA) is combined with information on pupil's characteristics from the school census and prior attainment by the department's contractor.

Records are matched, using fields such as surname, forename, date of birth, UPN (unique pupil number), gender and postcode. This successfully matches around 60% to 70% of pupils.

Additional, more complex, routines are then applied to match as many of the remaining pupils as possible, up to around 98%. The coverage of the local authority (LA) and regional statistics is state-funded schools only in England.

Confidence intervals for progress results are calculated for a school based on a specific cohort of pupils. A school may have been just as effective, but have performed differently with a different set of pupils.

Similarly, some pupils may be more likely to achieve high or low results, independently of which school they attend. To account for this natural uncertainty, 95% confidence intervals around progress scores are provided as a proxy for the range of scores within which each school’s underlying performance can be confidently said to lie.

School scores should be interpreted alongside their associated confidence intervals. If the lower bound of the school’s confidence interval is greater than zero, it can be interpreted as meaning that the school has achieved greater than average progress compared to pupils with similar starting points nationally.

Similarly, if the upper bound is below zero, then the school has made less than average progress. Where a confidence interval overlaps zero, this means that the school’s progress score is not significantly different from the national average.

The system of national curriculum levels is no longer used by the government to report on end of key stage assessment.

For this reason, the previous 'expected progress' measure, based on pupils making at least two levels of progress between key stage 1 and key stage 2, will not appear in the performance tables or Analyse School Performance (ASP) in 2016.

This measure has been replaced by 'value added' progress measures in reading, writing and mathematics.

There is no 'target' for the amount of progress an individual pupil is expected to make, and any amount of progress a pupil makes contributes towards the school's progress scores.

Because of the changes to the curriculum, figures for 2016 are not comparable to those for earlier years.

Any pupils who do not have a valid result for a subject are excluded from the calculations for that subject and do not appear in the number of eligible pupils or in the outcome percentages for that subject.

Valid results for the national test figures are: achieved the expected standard (AS), not achieved the expected standard (NS), special consideration (CA), absent (A), working below the standard of the test (B), or unable to access the test (T).

Suppression rules and disclosure control

Values of 1 or 2 or a percentage based on 1 or 2 pupils who achieved, or did not achieve, a particular standard are suppressed. Some additional figures may be suppressed to prevent the possibility of a suppressed figure being revealed. This suppression is consistent with DfE’s statistical policy on confidentiality.

Figures for the Isles of Scilly and City of London are suppressed in DfE’s key stage 2 provisional Statistical First Release as these local authorities have a single school and DfE do not publish school level information in the performance tables at the time of the provisional release. These figures become unsuppressed in the revised release as school level figures are already published in the performance tables.

Regional eligible pupil figures are rounded to the nearest 10 so that it is not possible to derive figures for these LAs by summing the figures for the other LAs in the region.

In the school level data, any figures relating to a cohort of 5 pupils or fewer will be suppressed. This applies to sub-groups of pupils as well as the whole cohort, for example, if there were five boys and three girls in a school, DfE would not publish attainment for boys or girls separately but would publish attainment for all pupils as this is based on 8 pupils. The Code of Practice for Official Statistics requires DfE to take reasonable steps to ensure that their published or disseminated statistics protect confidentiality.

For more information about DfE’s disclosure control procedures for its statistical releases please see DfE’s statistical policy statement on confidentiality (PDF opens in a new window or tab)

Rounding

All charts and tables are rounded to the nearest whole number. Progress scores are given to 1 decimal place

Related publications

Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2016

Quality and methodology information

6. Data sources

Source

Type of data

Administrative data

Type of statistic

National Statistics

Publisher

Department for Education

Publication frequency

3 times a year

Purpose of data source

The main purpose is to measure schools' and pupils' progress and performance from key stage 1 to key stage 2 to monitor and improve standards and inform parental choice when applying to local schools.

7. Download the data

Expected standard in maths - Spreadsheet (csv) 176 KB

This file contains the following: ethnicity, year, region, local authority, gender, value and denominator

Average scaled score in maths - Spreadsheet (csv) 14 KB

This file contains the following: ethnicity, year, gender, value and denominator

Higher standard in maths - Spreadsheet (csv) 15 KB

This file contains the following: ethnicity, year, gender, value and denominator

Progress score in maths - Spreadsheet (csv) 11 KB

This file contains the following: ethnicity, year, gender, value and confidence intervals