Tracking Progress from end of EYFS through to end of Key Stage 1
(the Hertfordshire Approach)
This guidance can be downloaded from the Hertfordshire Grid for Learning at:
www.thegrid.org.uk/learning/assessment/data/#guidance
The guidance refers to tracking sheets that have been jointly developed by Hertfordshire Standards &
School Effectiveness teams (Assessment Team, Early Years Team, SEND team, School IT System
Support team and Primary School Effectiveness team).
There are 2 ways in which schools could access and use these tracking sheets. They are available as
Microsoft Excel files, which can be downloaded from the link shown above, but have also been built into
SIMS Assessment Manager 7 as part of the HCC suite of AM7 reports. By running the reports from SIMS,
pupil names will automatically appear in the correct cells, and numbers will be automatically calculated.
The report in SIMS is called ‘AM7 – Progress Distribution across KS1’.
Scope – these tracking sheets have been produced for Reading, Writing and Maths (overall
subject only).
Rationale – the reason for producing these sheets is that we wanted schools to be able to
illustrate the progress of all pupils in a way that is consistent with best practice. The advice for
teachers of Year 1 children is that, if children are working below Level 1, it is appropriate for the
teachers to continue to assess their progress against the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile
– not to assess them against the P-scale descriptors. P-scales are only intended to be used
to assess children with Special Educational Needs and/or Disability. Many children
working below Level 1 in Year 1 will not have SEND, they are merely young or slightly later
developing.
Therefore, in these tracking sheets, there is the option to record pupils below level 1 either as
still completing EYFSP or using P-scales where appropriate. (P-scales are unlikely to be
appropriate before end of Year 1 – hence the cells being shaded in the illustration above,
although these cells can be used if it is genuinely appropriate.)
Pupils’ stage on EYFSP can be indicated as either:

they have achieved 1-3 points on the relevant strand of the EYFSP

they have achieved 4-5 points on the relevant strand of the EYFSP

they have achieved 6+ points on the relevant strand of the EYFSP
The ‘relevant EYFSP strand’ would be as follows:

on the Reading tracking sheet, the Reading strand of EYFSP

on the Writing tracking sheet, the Writing strand of EYFSP

on the Maths tracking sheet, the average of the child’s scores in the 3 strands of the
‘Problem Solving, Reasoning and Numeracy’ area of learning in EYFSP
1 of 5
NB, these reports will only be applicable for pupils due to complete Key Stage 1 in July 2014 or
earlier (i.e. completed EYFS in July 2012 or earlier). Pupils completing EYFS in July 2013 or
beyond will be assessed using the new EYFS Profile, which does not use the 1-9 scoring
system.
By the end of Year 2, any pupils still working below Level 1 should be recorded using the Pscales – or, in the case of children with English as an Additional Language, their assessment in
reading, writing or speaking & listening would be W if they do not have a special educational
need but are working below Level 1 because they are only beginning to acquire the English
language. (This is submitted to the DfE as ‘NOTSEN’.)
Progress Data – one recommended way of describing progress across KS1 is to compare the
percentages of the cohort working within or beyond the age-related expectation at the beginning
and at the end of the Key Stage. This may prove a more effective way of describing progress
than by using point scores, for reasons explored below. For example, if 70% of pupils were
working at age-related expectations or beyond at the end of the EYFS, and 80% are at agerelated expectations or beyond at the end of KS1, you could argue that progress is good.
The percentages at the end of each row of the tracking sheet illustrate the percentage of the
cohort working at or beyond age-related expectations (i.e. pupils in white or blue cells) and the
percentage working beyond A.R.E. (blue cells).
Average point scores – comparison of cohort APS across the Key Stage will only be an effective
way of measuring progress if all pupils are working within NC levels. This is for 2 reasons:
1. There is no possible means of allocating point scores to pupils who are being assessed
as still working on EYFSP. Attempts to create equivalences between EYFSP scores
and NC levels are unreliable and not considered to be good practice.
2. The P-scale points score system does not fit the formula that is used with NC levels, of
a 2-point increase per sub-level. (Instead an increase from P7 to P8 is represented with
an increase of 1 point, but is considered as progress of a whole level in the context of
pupils with SEND. However it cannot be interpreted in such a way if the P-levels have
been used inappropriately, i.e. for children who do not have SEND.)
These 2 facts therefore distort the picture when an average point score is produced, unless all
children are working at level 1c or above. When exploring progress, pupils who were below
Level 1 at the start of KS1 may need to be discussed on an individual basis, taking into account
their circumstances and context.
In the AM7 report ‘Progress Tracking across KS1’ there is a summary of the cohort’s progress,
which indicates the proportion of pupils who have made satisfactory, good or very good
progress. These measures have been based on the following guidelines:
(across the 5 terms from end of Autumn term Year 1 to end of Summer term Year 2):

increase of 4 ‘steps’ (eg. National Curriculum sub-levels) = broadly satisfactory*

increase of 5 ‘steps’ = satisfactory/good*

increase of 6 ‘steps’ = very good
(‘Steps’ of progress are explained below.)
* Context of school must be taken into account. In some cases, 4 steps of progress (or 8 points) may not
be considered sufficient – the expectation might be 5 steps (10 points). However in some schools 5 steps
may be seen as good progress.
Why look at progress across 5 terms not 6?
We believe that good practice transition from the Early Years Foundation Stage to Key Stage 1
takes time, as children need to adapt to a new way of working and a new curriculum.
2 of 5
Practitioners will need to form a baseline assessment judgement using National Curriculum
level descriptors, as it is not possible to directly convert EYFSP scores into NC levels. This will
take time for these judgements to be made, on the basis of observing pupils and assessing the
work that they produce across a range of different learning situations. It would not be possible or
accurate to form these judgements within the first few weeks of Year 1. However, by half-term
(or by the end of the Autumn term at the latest) practitioners may have been able to form these
teacher assessments, which can then be used as a baseline for measuring progress across the
following 5 – 5½ terms, to the end of KS1. (Alternatively, progress across the whole 6 terms can
be described using percentages, as explained above.)
‘Steps’ of progress
NB for the purpose of the above progress calculations, each cell on the Progress Distribution
spreadsheet has been treated as a separate ‘step’ of progress – similar (but not equivalent) to
one third of a National Curriculum level.
i.e. each of these increments of progress is a ‘step’ in this model:
EYFSP 1-3  EYFSP 4-5  EYFSP 6+  1c  1b  1a  2c etc
Alternatively, each of these is counted as a ‘step’:
P6  P7  P8  1c  1b
etc
For example, a pupil who has moved from the EYFSP 4-5 cell in Autumn of Y1 to a Level 1a at
the end of Y2 would have made 4 steps of progress and would therefore be included within the
‘broadly satisfactory progress’ group. Similarly a P6 to a 1b would show up as broadly
satisfactory progress. However we do appreciate that there is a discrepancy here between this
approach and the ‘Progression Guidance’ document which states that, in the context of children
with SEND working within the P-levels, a movement from P6 to P8 should be considered as 2
whole levels progress. We have taken the decision not to reflect this within the calculations in
this dataset, but to take this simpler approach. However in interpreting this data and evaluating
progress, Headteachers should take into account the individual circumstances of pupils, such as
special educational needs.
Important Cautionary Message:
It should be noted that this data analysis is a starting point only when it comes to thinking
about judging progress. Other qualitative data, such as lesson observations, looking at
children’s work etc, must be taken into consideration to reach the judgement.
FAQs.
- Why have we not produced an equivalent tracking sheet for Science?
The reason for this is that the related EYFSP strand is Knowledge and Understanding of the World –
however only 5 of the first 8 scale points of this strand relate to science. This area of learning also
encompasses history, RE, ICT and D&T – therefore illustrating pupils’ progress in this area of learning
would not necessarily imply progress in science.
The decision has therefore been taken that schools wishing to produce tracking sheets for Science in
KS1 should continue to use the standard grades, so that any children working below Level 1 are recorded
using P-scales. We appreciate that this is not ideal and all users of the system should understand that
this use of the P-scales does not in this instance imply special educational needs, but is merely a
limitation of the system.
- How will this work if we want to produce overall English levels?
For pupils who have been assessed using National Curriculum levels in all areas of English, an average
NC level for English can be produced, using the usual methodology of averaging their levels in reading,
writing and (if data entered) speaking & listening.
3 of 5
However, where pupils have been assessed either using P-scales or using EYFSP assessments, AM7
will not be able to produce an average English level. This is because there is no equivalent points score
system for EYFSP that matches up with points scores used from Level 1 onwards.
- Can these reports be produced for each attainment target within maths?
No. Use the Maths Subject Only template to record pupils’ levels using EYFS grades.
recording children’s levels in each attainment target of maths, do not use EYFS grades.
If you are
Evaluating Progress from end of EYFS to end of KS1
In addition to the reports mentioned above, the Hertfordshire Assessment Team and SITSS
have developed a further report, designed to enable school self-evaluation of progress across
KS1. For schools using the Hertfordshire AM7 reports, this report is called ‘AM7 – KS1
Expected Progress Grid’.
NB this does not seek to convert end of EYFS Profile points into NC levels at the point of
transition into Year 1; however it does indicate pupils’ progress against likely expected
outcomes (shown by the pink shaded cells on the report) based upon their EYFSP scores. The
advantage of this is that it reflects progress across the whole 6 terms of KS1. However, this
approach should be seen as a guide to expected progress, not an exact science.
In this report the “End of EYFSP score”, used as the measure of prior attainment, is based on:
- average of Reading and Linking Sounds and Letters (tracked to KS1 Reading)
- average of Writing and Linking Sounds and Letters (tracked to KS1 Writing)
- average of all 3 strands of PSRN (tracked to KS1 Maths)
This can be used, in conjunction with the Ofsted evaluation schedule for ‘Achievement’, to
determine whether progress could be judged as outstanding, good, requires improvement or
inadequate.
For example, the descriptor for ‘Good’ states that “Taking account of their different starting
points, the proportions of pupils making and exceeding expected progress compare favourably
with national figures”. In the example figures shown above, 87% of pupils have made expected
progress or better, of which 20% made better than expected progress. From each level of prior
attainment, most children have made expected or better progress. (Ofsted consider ‘most’ to
mean 80% or more. Of the children finishing EYFSP on 4-5 points, only 75% have made
expected or better progress, but it should be borne in mind that the 25% below expected
equates to just one child.) Therefore I would suggest that in this example, the data indicates
that progress is good (provided other evidence supports this.)
Ben Fuller, Assessment Adviser, Hertfordshire Standards & School Effectiveness
www.thegrid.org.uk/learning/assessment
(updated Spring 2013)
© Hertfordshire County Council
4 of 5
5 of 5