READING
Main Messages - Reading
- reading attainment at all stages remained at a similar level between 2005, 2006 and 2009
- at P3, over 75 per cent of pupils were estimated to have 'well-established' or better skills at the expected level in reading, and over half demonstrated 'well-established' or better skills at a higher than expected level
- the proportion of pupils attaining the expected levels in reading decreased through primary and into secondary
- at S2, around 40 per cent of pupils were 'well-established' or better at the expected level for the stage
- in general girls performed better than boys in reading across all stages
- the proportion of pupils in the most deprived areas with 'well-established' or better reading skills at the expected level was around 20 percentage points less than for pupils in less deprived areas, across all stages. One of the largest differences was at S2 where pupils from less deprived areas were about twice as likely to be 'well-established' or better at the expected level.
Reading - National Attainment Estimates
Chart 1 National reading attainment estimates
Estimated percentage of pupils classified into attainment bands by 5-14 level
Sample: approximately 3,200 pupils per stage
Chart 1 shows that at P3, three-quarters of pupils had 'well-established' or better skills at the expected 5-14 level in reading. However, attainment relative to the expected level falls as the stage increases, with just over 40 per cent of pupils showing 'well-established' or better skills at S2.
The chart shows a spread of attainment across the 5-14 levels assessed, with some pupils not yet having made a 'good start' at the lowest level assessed while some were 'well established or better' at levels beyond those expected.
For instance, at P3 just over 10 per cent of pupils had yet to make a 'good start' at Level A while more than a half of pupils had 'well-established' or better reading skills at the higher than expected Level B, and nearly 20 per cent of P3 pupils had 'well-established' or better reading attainment at Level C.
Likewise, at S2 nearly 20 per cent of pupils had 'well-established' or better reading skills at the higher than expected Level F, while over a third of pupils had not yet made a 'good start' at the expected Level E, and just over 15 per cent of pupils at S2 had not yet made a 'good start' at Level D.
Reading - Attainment Estimates by Gender
Chart 2 National reading attainment estimates, by gender
Estimated percentage of pupils having 'well-established' or better skills at the given level
Sample: approximately 1,600 boys and 1,600 girls per stage
Chart 2 shows that girls generally had better reading attainment than boys across all stages. At P3, girls' attainment was significantly higher than boys at the expected level, whereas at S2 the difference in attainment at the expected level was marginal.
For both girls and boys, there was an underlying pattern of decreasing attainment relative to expected levels through the four survey stages.
Reading - Attainment Estimates by Deprivation
Chart 3 National reading attainment estimates, by deprivation
Estimated percentage of pupils having 'well-established' or better skills at the given level
Sample: approximately 2,500 'less deprived' and 600 'most deprived' per stage
Chart 3 shows that pupils in less deprived areas had significantly higher reading attainment than pupils in the most deprived areas at every stage and level. The proportion of pupils in the most deprived areas with
'well-established' or better reading skills at the expected level was around 20 percentage points less than for pupils in less deprived areas, across all stages. One of the largest differences was at S2 where pupils from less deprived areas were about twice as likely to be 'well-established' or better at the expected level.
The overall pattern of falling attainment against the expectations as the stage increases remained the case for pupils in both the most and less deprived areas.
Reading - Teachers' Judgements
In addition to the direct assessment of pupils' reading skills, teachers were invited to submit a 5-14 level judgement in reading for each pupil in the survey. Judgements were based on a range of knowledge and evidence that the classroom teacher had gathered about each pupil over a period of time. Chart 4 illustrates the resulting level distributions for each stage.
Chart 4 Teachers' judgements of reading attainment
Estimated percentage of pupils judged to be at indicated level by their teachers
Sample: approximately 3,400 pupils per stage
At P3, almost all pupils were judged to be at Level A or above, the expected level for P3. Just over half of P3 pupils were judged to be higher than the expected level. At P5 there is no expected level, but over 70 per cent of P5 pupils were judged to be at Level C or above (Level C is the expected level for P6). At P7 and S2, the vast majority of pupils (around 80 and 70 per cent respectively) were judged to be at their expected level or above.
Why do teachers' judgements differ from assessment results?
The teachers' judgements and the SSA assessments differ in their purpose and nature. Assessments are based on pupil performance over a limited number of tasks on a given day, whereas teachers' judgements are based on a range of evidence gathered over a period of time. Also, teachers will judge pupils based on what they have taught them whereas the SSA applies broad level-based expectations of pupils and includes assessment material drawn from across the curriculum.
Reading - Changes in Attainment over time
Reading attainment at all stages remained at a similar level between 2005, 2006 and 2009.
Reading attainment was measured in the SSA in 2005, 2006 and 2009. When quantifying change over time it is important to ensure that differences in performance are not due to the variations in the questions asked. It is therefore often helpful to consider both the figures from each survey and the performance on 'common tasks' which are repeated in each survey. The common task analysis allows an assessment which is based on the same questions and thus any change is unaffected by question choice. However given the relatively small number of common tasks, it is not appropriate to use the common tasks analysis as a representation of reading attainment in any given year.
Chart 5 Reading attainment in 2005, 2006 and 2009
Estimated percentage of pupils having 'well-established' or better skills at the given level
Chart 5 shows a comparison of the full reading attainment results for 2005, 2006 and 2009, which at first glance might suggest there have been changes over time. However, analysis was also carried out on the 15, 14, 15 and 13 tasks at P3, P5, P7 and S2 respectively (30 to 40 per cent of all tasks) that were common to all three surveys. The results of the common task analysis show that while there are fluctuations in the attainment estimates over the period, there is no evidence that attainment has changed significantly at any stage. Full results of the common task analysis are published in the supporting evidence document.