1. Main facts and figures
- overall, in 2016/17, 72% of pupils met the expected standard in reading by the end of key stage 2 (when they are usually aged 10 or 11 years), and 25% met the higher standard
- pupils from the Chinese ethnic group were most likely to meet both the expected standard and the higher standard, out of all ethnic groups
- pupils from the Irish and Chinese ethnic groups had the joint highest average scaled score; Irish pupils made the most progress in reading between key stage 1 and key stage 2 (between the ages of 7 and 11 years)
- Gypsy/Roma children were least likely to meet both the expected and higher standards; they also had the lowest average scaled score, and made the least progress in reading between key stage 1 and key stage 2
- across all ethnic groups, girls were more likely to meet the expected and higher standards in reading; they also had a higher average scale score and made more progress between key stage 1 and key stage 2 than boys
- the local authorities with the highest percentage of pupils meeting the expected standard were the City of London (where 88% did so) and Richmond upon Thames (86%); the data for the City of London is based on small numbers of pupils and is therefore highly variable over time
The ethnic categories used in this data
This data uses categories from the Department for Education’s school census, which is broadly based on the 2001 national Census, with 3 exceptions:
- Traveller of Irish Heritage and Gypsy/Roma children have been separated into 2 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:
- Sri Lankan
- Other Asian background
- Black African
- Black Caribbean
- Other Black background
Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups:
- White and Black Caribbean
- White and Black African
- White and Asian
- Other Mixed background
- White British
- White Irish
- Traveller of Irish Heritage
- Other White
Chinese Other ethnic group
Information is provided for both detailed and broad ethnic groups where possible and when the data is available.
The 6 broad categories used are as follows:
- Asian/Asian British
- Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
- Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups
- Other ethnic group
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 the local authority level.
The 5 broad categories are as follows:
- Asian/Asian British
- Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
- Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups
2. By ethnicity
|Ethnicity||Expected standard||Higher standard||Average scaled score||Progress score|
|Mixed White/Black African||73||25||104||0.4|
|Mixed White/Black Caribbean||69||20||103||-0.3|
|White Irish Traveller||35||5||97||0.0|
3. By ethnicity and area
|Barking and Dagenham||72||76||75||withheld to protect confidentiality||70||69|
|Bath and North East Somerset||78||82||38||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||78|
|Bedford||66||62||56||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||68|
|Bexley||75||81||77||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||73|
|Blackburn with Darwen||68||67||68||withheld to protect confidentiality||71||69|
|Blackpool||72||72||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||72|
|Bolton||69||69||57||withheld to protect confidentiality||79||70|
|Bournemouth||71||79||71||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||71|
|Bracknell Forest||71||79||78||withheld to protect confidentiality||81||70|
|Bradford||66||65||61||withheld to protect confidentiality||67||66|
|Brighton and Hove||77||63||74||65||77||79|
|Bristol, City of||72||69||56||withheld to protect confidentiality||72||74|
|Buckinghamshire||77||70||68||withheld to protect confidentiality||68||79|
|Calderdale||71||61||71||withheld to protect confidentiality||75||73|
|Camden||76||74||70||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||80|
|Central Bedfordshire||72||78||72||withheld to protect confidentiality||71||72|
|Cheshire East||76||78||79||withheld to protect confidentiality||82||76|
|Cheshire West and Chester||74||80||50||withheld to protect confidentiality||70||74|
|City of London||88||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||N/A*||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality|
|Cornwall||72||65||withheld to protect confidentiality||63||81||71|
|Cumbria||74||77||withheld to protect confidentiality||67||81||74|
|Darlington||72||74||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||79||71|
|Derby||65||62||64||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||65|
|Doncaster||63||57||50||withheld to protect confidentiality||70||64|
|Dudley||66||62||59||withheld to protect confidentiality||68||67|
|Ealing||73||70||69||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||80|
|East Riding of Yorkshire||73||75||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||80||73|
|East Sussex||71||73||58||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||71|
|Enfield||67||77||66||withheld to protect confidentiality||75||65|
|Hackney||78||81||75||withheld to protect confidentiality||81||81|
|Halton||69||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||69|
|Hammersmith and Fulham||82||79||81||withheld to protect confidentiality||86||83|
|Harrow||77||80||72||withheld to protect confidentiality||79||76|
|Hartlepool||72||77||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||60||72|
|Havering||80||80||81||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||80|
|Herefordshire, County of||73||100||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||74||73|
|Hillingdon||72||76||68||withheld to protect confidentiality||75||71|
|Isle of Wight||72||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||71|
|Isles of Scilly||82||N/A*||N/A*||N/A*||N/A*||82|
|Islington||74||81||67||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||77|
|Kensington and Chelsea||84||84||84||100||81||86|
|Kingston upon Hull, City of||71||79||60||withheld to protect confidentiality||85||71|
|Kingston upon Thames||77||74||80||withheld to protect confidentiality||80||77|
|Leicester||66||69||67||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||62|
|Luton||65||61||67||withheld to protect confidentiality||70||67|
|Medway||68||74||75||withheld to protect confidentiality||68||68|
|Newcastle upon Tyne||72||70||70||70||70||74|
|North East Lincolnshire||67||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||83||66|
|North Lincolnshire||67||75||54||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||66|
|North Tyneside||76||81||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||80||76|
|Northumberland||72||83||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||72|
|Oldham||67||60||69||withheld to protect confidentiality||72||71|
|Oxfordshire||74||66||63||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||75|
|Peterborough||63||64||65||withheld to protect confidentiality||64||62|
|Poole||69||79||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||75||68|
|Portsmouth||67||72||68||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||67|
|Reading||70||68||71||withheld to protect confidentiality||68||71|
|Redcar and Cleveland||77||60||N/A*||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||77|
|Richmond upon Thames||86||79||73||71||89||87|
|Rochdale||66||61||64||withheld to protect confidentiality||73||68|
|Rotherham||69||68||64||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||69|
|Rutland||76||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||76|
|Salford||71||79||73||withheld to protect confidentiality||70||72|
|Sandwell||66||70||60||withheld to protect confidentiality||67||65|
|Sefton||74||71||withheld to protect confidentiality||63||74||74|
|Shropshire||75||65||50||withheld to protect confidentiality||76||75|
|Slough||70||74||69||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||64|
|Solihull||75||77||73||withheld to protect confidentiality||66||75|
|Somerset||73||75||60||withheld to protect confidentiality||75||73|
|South Gloucestershire||74||86||73||withheld to protect confidentiality||69||74|
|South Tyneside||73||72||64||withheld to protect confidentiality||79||73|
|Southampton||74||72||82||withheld to protect confidentiality||78||74|
|Southend-on-Sea||75||82||80||withheld to protect confidentiality||78||73|
|St. Helens||69||86||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||72||68|
|Stockton-on-Tees||72||63||77||withheld to protect confidentiality||85||73|
|Sunderland||76||68||withheld to protect confidentiality||100||71||76|
|Telford and Wrekin||73||66||70||100||75||73|
|Torbay||72||75||withheld to protect confidentiality||withheld to protect confidentiality||72||72|
|Wandsworth||76||71||69||withheld to protect confidentiality||74||84|
|Warrington||78||78||80||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||77|
|West Berkshire||74||84||82||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||74|
|Wigan||75||79||70||withheld to protect confidentiality||80||75|
|Wiltshire||72||85||39||withheld to protect confidentiality||71||73|
|Windsor and Maidenhead||78||76||58||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||80|
|Wirral||70||69||withheld to protect confidentiality||67||78||70|
|Wokingham||82||87||81||withheld to protect confidentiality||84||81|
|Wolverhampton||70||71||74||withheld to protect confidentiality||71||68|
|Worcestershire||70||63||74||withheld to protect confidentiality||72||70|
|York||73||73||75||withheld to protect confidentiality||77||73|
4. By ethnicity and gender
|Ethnicity||Expected standard||Higher standard||Average scaled score||Progress score||Expected standard||Higher standard||Average scaled score||Progress score|
|Mixed White/Black African||69||21||104||0.0||78||29||105||0.9|
|Mixed White/Black Caribbean||64||17||102||-0.7||74||24||104||0.2|
|White Irish Traveller||33||3||97||-0.6||37||7||98||0.6|
The key stage 2 datasets are compiled using information matched together from 3 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. 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 75% 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 and regional statistics is state-funded mainstream schools only in England. This includes schools and academies but excludes hospital schools, pupil referral units and alternative provision.
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
- not achieved the expected standard
- special consideration
- working below the standard of the test
- unable to access the test
Confidence intervals are available for the ‘progress score’ if you download the data. These confidence intervals are calculated for a school based on a specific group 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, it is best to interpret these school scores alongside their associated confidence intervals.
A 95% confidence interval around progress scores means that if the progress scores of 100 random schools were taken, then 95 times out of 100 their progress score would fall between the upper and lower confidence interval. But 5 times out of 100 it would fall outside this range.
School scores are interpreted alongside their associated confidence intervals in the following manner: If the lower 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 confidence interval is below zero, then the school has made less than average progress. Where the 95% confidence intervals overlap zero, this means that the school’s progress score is not significantly different from the national average.
Changes to assessment:
Because of a change in the way pupils are assessed, data published before 2016 is not comparable to 2015/16 and 2016/17 data.
The system of national curriculum levels is no longer used by the government to report on end of key stage assessment.
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.
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 statement on confidentiality (PDF).
Regional eligible pupil figures are rounded to the nearest 10 so that it is not possible to derive figures for these local authorities by summing the figures for the other local authorities in the region.
In the school level data, any figures relating to a cohort of 5 pupils or fewer are 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).
Percentages given in charts, tables and downloads are rounded to the nearest whole number. Progress scores are given to 1 decimal place.
6. Data sources
Type of data
Type of statistic
Department for Education
Note on corrections or updates
Revised figures were published by the Department for Education on 25 January 2018.
Purpose of data source
The main purpose is to measure schools' and pupils' progress and performance from key stage 1 to key stage 2, in order to monitor and improve standards and inform parental choice when applying to local schools.
7. Download the data
This file contains the following variables: Measure, Ethnicity, Ethnicity_Type, Time, Time_Type, Region, Local_Authority, Local_Authority_Code, Value, Value_Type, Denominator.
This file contains the following variables: Measure, Ethnicity, Ethnicity_Type, Time, Time_Type, Geography (England), Geography_Code, Gender, Value, Value_Type, Denominator, Lower_CI, Upper_CI.