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

Published 10 October 2017

Last updated 11 October 2017 - see all updates

This page has been archived.
It has been replaced by School results for 10 to 11 year olds.

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

Contents

1. Main facts and figures

• in 2015/16, there were 585,577 pupils in key stage 2 at state-funded mainstream schools in England, of which ethnicity was known for 580,730 (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

• looking at the national average for all children, 74% of pupils reached the expected standard for writing, and 15% met the higher standard

• the Chinese ethnic group had the highest percentage of children reaching both the expected and higher standard, at 84% and 29% respectively

• Gypsy/Roma children did least well, with 29% reaching the expected standard and 1% reaching the higher standard

• within every ethnic group, girls were more likely than boys to meet both the expected and the higher standard in writing

• Bangladeshi children made the most progress in writing between key stage 1 and key stage 2, whereas pupils from a Traveller of Irish Heritage background made the least progress

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 writing 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).

Standards in writing are divided into 2 categories:

• expected standard
• higher standard

To reach the expected standard, pupils must have been assessed as ‘working at the expected standard’ or ‘working at a greater depth within the expected standard’.

To reach the higher standard, pupils must have been assessed as ‘working at a greater depth within the expected standard’.

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 pupil’s results are compared to the actual achievements of other pupils nationally with similar key stage 1 attainment. This data compares 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. Writing attainments for children aged 7 to 11 by ethnicity

• Location: England
• Time period: 2015/16
• Source: National curriculum assessments: key stage 2, 2016 (revised)

Percentage of pupils meeting the expected and higher standard in writing and progress score by ethnicity

Ethnicity	Expected standard	Higher standard	Progress score
All	74	15	0.0
Asian	77	16	1.1
Bangladeshi	80	17	2.0
Indian	82	21	1.0
Pakistani	73	11	0.8
Asian other	79	19	1.4
Black	75	14	1.2
Black African	77	16	1.5
Black Caribbean	70	10	0.2
Black other	73	13	1.3
Chinese	84	29	1.8
Mixed	76	16	0.3
Mixed White/Asian	81	21	0.5
Mixed White/Black African	76	15	0.5
Mixed White/Black Caribbean	72	12	-0.2
Mixed other	77	18	0.6
White	73	15	-0.3
White British	74	15	-0.4
White Irish	79	21	0.4
White Irish Traveller	35	3	-1.4
White Gypsy/Roma	29	1	-0.6
White other	68	13	1.7
Other	71	13	1.6
Unknown	60	11	-0.4

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

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

The data shows that:

• Chinese pupils were most likely to meet both the expected and higher standards in writing – 84% met the expected standard and 29% met the higher standard

• Gypsy/Roma pupils were least likely to meet the expected and higher standards in writing – 29% met the expected standard and 1% met the higher standard

• Bangladeshi children made the most progress in writing between key stage 1 and key stage 2, with a score of 2.0, while Traveller of Irish Heritage pupils made the least progress, with a score of -1.4

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

• Location: England
• Time period: 2015/16
• Source: National curriculum assessments: key stage 2, 2016 (revised)

Percentage of pupils reaching the expected standard in writing by ethnicity and local authority

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

Data withheld to protect confidentiality

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

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

The data for expected standards in writing shows that:

• pupils in Hackney in London were most likely to meet the expected standard, with 85% doing so, while pupils in Calderdale in Yorkshire and the Humber were least likely to reach the expected standard, with 59% doing so

• Asian pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in the City of London in the region of London – outside this local authority, which only has one school of 28 pupils, the next best performing area was the City of Kingston upon Hull in Yorkshire and the Humber

• Asian pupils were least likely to meet the expected standard in Calderdale in Yorkshire and the Humber

• Black pupils were most likely to reach the expected standard in Cornwall in the South West, Wirral in the North West, and South Tyneside in the North East; they were least likely to meet the expected standard in Devon and in Bath and North East Somerset in the South West, Stockport in the North West, and Hartlepool in the North East

• 100% of Chinese pupils met the expected standard in 20 local authorities: 7 in London, 4 in the North West, 3 in the West Midlands, 2 in the South West, and 1 each in the North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, the East of England, and the South East

• Chinese pupils performed least well in Worcestershire in the West Midlands, and Bradford in Yorkshire and the Humber

• pupils from a Mixed ethnic background were most likely to meet the expected standard in Sefton in the North West and least likely meet it in Liverpool in the North West

• White pupils were most likely to meet the expected standard in the City of London – outside this local authority, which only has one school of 28 pupils, the next best performing area was Hackney in London

• White pupils were least likely to meet the expected standard in Swindon in the South West

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

• Location: England
• Time period: 2015/16
• Source: National curriculum assessments: key stage 2, 2016 (revised)

Percentage of pupils reaching the expected and higher standard in writing by ethnicity and gender

	Boys			Girls
Ethnicity	Boys Expected standard	Boys Higher standard	Boys Progress score	Girls Expected standard	Girls Higher standard	Girls Progress score
All	68	11	-0.8	81	19	0.8
Asian	72	12	0.5	83	20	1.8
Bangladeshi	75	12	1.3	85	22	2.6
Indian	77	17	0.4	87	27	1.7
Pakistani	67	8	0.1	79	14	1.5
Asian other	74	15	0.8	83	24	2.0
Black	69	10	0.5	82	18	1.9
Black African	72	12	0.9	83	19	2.2
Black Caribbean	63	7	-0.6	78	13	1.1
Black other	66	9	0.5	81	18	2.1
Chinese	79	21	0.8	89	37	2.7
Mixed	70	12	-0.5	83	21	1.2
Mixed White/Asian	75	16	-0.2	86	26	1.3
Mixed White/Black African	69	12	-0.5	83	19	1.6
Mixed White/Black Caribbean	64	8	-1.2	80	16	0.7
Mixed other	71	13	-0.3	83	22	1.4
White	67	11	-1.1	80	19	0.6
White British	68	11	-1.3	81	19	0.5
White Irish	72	15	-0.5	85	27	1.3
White Irish Traveller	25		-2.8	46		0.2
White Gypsy/Roma	22		-1.7	36		0.5
White other	62	10	0.9	73	17	2.6
Other	66	10	0.9	77	16	2.3
Unknown	55	8	-1.3	65	15	0.5

Data withheld to protect confidentiality

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

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

• overall, more girls than boys met both the expected and higher standard; girls also made more progress between key stage 1 and key stage 2

• 81% of girls met the expected standard, compared with 68% of boys; and 19% of girls met the higher standard, compared with 11% of boys

• girls made more progress than boys between key stage 1 and key stage 2; girls scored 0.8 and boys scored -0.8, against a national average of 0

• Chinese girls were the highest achievers: 89% met the expected standard, 37% met the higher standard, and the group also made the most progress, scoring 2.7

• Gypsy/Roma boys were the least likely to meet the expected standard (22% did 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

• Traveller of Irish Heritage boys made the least progress between key stage 1 and key stage 2, scoring -2.8

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.

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

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, tables and downloads 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

National curriculum assessments: key stage 2, 2016 (revised)

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

Progress score in writing - Spreadsheet (csv) 11 KB

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

Expected standard in writing - Spreadsheet (csv) 181 KB

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

Higher standard in writing - Spreadsheet (csv) 13 KB

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

Publication release date: 10 October 2017

Updated: 11 October 2017

full page history

1. 11 October 2017 Technical change: Updated url to match page title.
2. 10 October 2017 First published

From: Department for Education

---

Share this page

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn