School Education Department Government of Sindh
Standardized Achievement Test (SAT) - IV Subjects:Language, Maths & Science Class V & VIII
Technical & Statistical Analysis Report 2015-16
Conducted by:
Sukkur Institute of Business Administration (www.iba-suk.edu.pk)
This material is based on work supported by Reform Support Unit-School Education Department, Government of Sindh under Sindh Education Reform Program-II funded by World Bank Pakistan
II
Copyright © 2016 Reform Support Unit-School Education DepartmentGovernment of Sindh, Pakistan
All rights reserved. No part of the publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape,mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the permission in writing from the copyright holder.
The copies of the Standardized Achievement Test (SAT) IV, Subject: Language, Math and Science of class V & VIII, Technical & Statistical Analysis Report 2015-16 can be obtained from:
Office of the Chief Program Manager Reform Support Unit 47-E/1, 48th street, Block 6, PECHS Nursery, Shahrah-e-Faisal Karachi, Pakistan www.rsu-sindh.gov.pk Telephone: +92-21-99216400
Department of Education Sukkur Institute of Business Administration Airport Road, Sukkur-65200, Sindh, Pakistan www.satsindh.net.pk Telephone: +92 71 5644230 Email:
[email protected]
The soft copies of the report can also be accessed on www.rsu-sindh.gov.pk & www.satsindh.net.pk
III
Authors: Dr. Fida Hussain Chang (Ph. D - Education, Project Director SAT, Sukkur IBA)
Ms. Unaeza Alvi (MS Education, Assistant Professor Sukkur IBA)
Mr Hamid Ali Shaikh (MBA, Team Lead-Administration SAT, Sukkur IBA)
Support Staff Ms.Rakhi Batra – Software Engineer, SAT Project Sukkur IBA Mr. Syed Ali Hasnain Shah- Project Officer, SAT Project Sukkur IBA. Mr. Arslan Ali Channa - Project Officer, SAT Project Sukkur IBA. Mr. Raheel Ahmed Memon -Project officer, SAT Project Sukkur IBA. Mr. Muhammad Raees -Project Officer-IT Support, SAT Project Sukkur IBA. Mr. Bhagwan Das - Project Officer-IT Support, SAT Project Sukkur IBA. Mr. Sajid Ahmed - Project Officer-IT Support, SAT Project Sukkur IBA.
IV
Acknowledgements This study would not have been possible without the help of many people fromthe districts and regions we studied.
We appreciate and applaud the efforts of Minister for Education Sindh, Secretary Education Sindh, Chief Program Manager RSU, Deputy Program Manager RSU, Regional Director Education (All Regions), District Officer Education (All Districts), Taluka Education Officers (Male/Female-All Talukas), Supervisors, Head Teachers, Consultants and Coordinators of Local Support Unit (All districts) in the smooth execution of the project activities.
We are also thankful to faculty members of the Department of Education-Sukkur IBA for their assistance in technical work. Furthermore we are indebted to the Director Sukkur IBA Office, the Registrar Office, Offic of Research, Innovation & Commercialization – ORIC, IT Department, Procurement Office, Engineering Wing, Marketing Department, and all other units of Sukkur IBA for their profound support and cooperation.
V
Contents List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................ IX List of Figures........................................................................................................................................................ X Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................... XI Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ XII Graphical Overview of SAT IV ......................................................................................................................... XVI SECTION ONE: ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 TEST DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION ........................................................................................... 1 1.0 Overview of Standardized Testing ................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 Background of SAT Project.............................................................................................................................. 3 3.0 SAT IV Test Development Procedures and Processes ..................................................................................... 5 3.1 Test Specification Development and Structure ................................................................................................. 5 3.2 Test Construction .............................................................................................................................................. 5 3.2.1 Item Development and Test Booklet Construction ........................................................................................ 6 3.2.2 Pilot Testing and Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 8 3.2.3 Pilot Test Administration ............................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.4 Sample ......................................................................................................................................................... 11 3.2.5 Item Analysis: .............................................................................................................................................. 11 4.0 Actual Test development and analysis ............................................................................................................ 14 4.1 Item selecton ................................................................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Actual test booklet construction ..................................................................................................................... 14 4.3 Actual Test Administration ............................................................................................................................. 14 4.3.1 Test Printing ................................................................................................................................................ 14 4.3.2 Dispatching of Test Booklets ....................................................................................................................... 15 4.4 Selection and Training of Taluka/Town Coordinators and Test Invigilators .................................................. 16 4.5 Identifying Clusters of Centre Secondary Schools and Nearby Feeding Primary Schools ............................. 18 4.6 Preparing Test Field Plans .............................................................................................................................. 18 4.7 SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test Information Dissemination ........................................................................... 19 4.7.1Publication of Sample/Model Papers and Advertisements in Newspapers................................................... 19 4.7.2Regional Workshops ..................................................................................................................................... 19 4.7.3 Telephone Calls to Head Masters/Mistresses of Government Secondary and Primary Schools by SAT TCs 20 4.8Administration of SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test ........................................................................................... 20 4.9Monitoring Mechanism of Actual Test Administration ................................................................................... 21 4.9.1Monitoring by Reform Support Unit ............................................................................................................ 24 5.0 Preparing and Distributing Student Report Cards to the Parents .................................................................... 26 5.1 Distribution of Student Report cards .............................................................................................................. 26 5.2Regional Workshops for Dissemination of SAT Phase-IV (2015-16) Results ................................................ 27 6.0 SAT Project Website ...................................................................................................................................... 28
VI
6.1 Online Item Data Bank ................................................................................................................................... 29 6.2 Review of Uploaded Items ............................................................................................................................. 29 7.0 Challenges Faced During SAT IV (2015-16) ................................................................................................. 30 SECTION TWO: DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ........................................................................... 31 8.0 INTRODUCTION OF RESULTS AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 32 8.1 Province Level Overall and Content Strand Based Results ............................................................................ 32 8.2 Province Level Overall and Content Strand Based Student Scores Class VIII............................................... 34 8.3 Region Level Content Strand Based Results .................................................................................................. 35 8.3.1Region Level Content Strand Based Results of Class V .............................................................................. 35 8.3.2 Region Level Math Content Strand Based Results Class V ........................................................................ 36 8.3.3Region Level Science Content Strand Based Results Class V ..................................................................... 36 8.3.4 Region Level Language Content Strand Based Results Class VIII ............................................................. 37 8.3.5 Region Level Math Content Strand Based Results of Class VIII ................................................................ 38 8.3.6 Region Level Science Content Strand Based Results of Class VIII ............................................................ 39 9.0 District Level Content Strand Based Results Class V .................................................................................... 40 9.1 District Level Language Content Strand Based Results Class V .................................................................... 41 9.2 District Level Math Content Strand Based Results Class V ........................................................................... 43 9.3 District Level Science Content Strand Based Results Class V ....................................................................... 45 10.0 District Level Content Strand Based Results Class VIII .............................................................................. 47 10.1 District Level Content Strand Based Results of Language Class VIII ......................................................... 48 10.2 District Level Content Strand Based Results of Math Class VIII ................................................................. 50 10.3 District Level Content Strand Based Results of Science Class VIII ............................................................. 52 11.0 Gender based analysis of results ................................................................................................................... 54 12.0 Location based analysis of results ................................................................................................................ 55 13.0 SEF Schools District Based Results ............................................................................................................. 57 13.1 SEF School Districts’ Content Strand Based Results Language Class V ..................................................... 57 13.2 SEF School Districts’ Content Strand Based Results Math Class V ............................................................ 58 13.3 SEF School Districts’ Content Strand Based Results Science Class V ........................................................ 59 SECTION THREE: COMPARATIVE RESULTS .............................................................................................. 61 14.0COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ............................................................................................. 62 14.1 Province level language content strand based comparison between class V and class VIII scores .............. 62 14.2 Province level math content strand based comparison class V and class VIII .............................................. 64 14.3 Province level science content strand based comparison between class V and class VIII ............................ 67 15.0 District-based Inter-subject Comparisons ..................................................................................................... 69 16.0 Performance (grade) based analysis of districts’ scores ............................................................................... 72 16.1 Districts’ performance level based proportions of students in language ...................................................... 72 16.2 Districts’ performance level based proportions of students in math ............................................................. 75 16.3 Districts’ performance level based proportions of students in science ......................................................... 77 17.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SATI, SAT II, SAT III AND SAT IV RESULTS ................................ 80
VII
17.1 Province level comparison between SAT III and SAT IV ............................................................................ 80 17.2 District based comparison between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and IV language scores .................................. 81 17.3 District based comparison between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and SAT IV math scores ................................ 83 17.4 District based comparison between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and SAT IV science scores ............................ 85 18.0 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 87 18.1 Capacity Building of Teachers ..................................................................................................................... 87 18.2 Enhancing Quality of In-service Teacher Education and Teacher Preparation ............................................ 90 18.3 Research ....................................................................................................................................................... 91 19.0 References .................................................................................................................................................... 93 Appendix A (SAT Phase IV (2015-16) Actual Test Specification ....................................................................... 94 Appendix B (ToRs of Taluka/Town Coordinator) ................................................................................................ 97 Appendix C (Taluka/Town Coordinator Undertaking) ......................................................................................... 98 Appendix D (Manual for Taluka/Town Coordinators and Invigilators) ............................................................. 100 Appendix E (Monitoring Report Pro-forma) ...................................................................................................... 116 Appendix F (Development, Printing and Dispatch Plan for SAT IV (2015-16) Student Report Cards) ............ 118 Appendix G (District Profiles of Class V & VIII) .............................................................................................. 122 Appendix H (Gender Wise Content Strand Based Results) ................................................................................ 180 Appendix I (Location Wise Content Strand Based Results) ............................................................................... 182 Appendix J (School Type Wise Content Strand Based Results) ......................................................................... 186
VIII
List of Tables Table 1:Region wise details of class V and VII I students, who appeared in SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test. ...... 4 Table 2:District-wise Number of Invigilators, Taluka Coordinators and Monitoring Officers .............................. 9 Table 3:Gender-Wise & Medium-Wise Sampled Students’ Appearance of Classes VI & IX for SAT IV Pilot Test. ...................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Table 4: Gender- wise Sampled Students Appearance in Pilot Test ..................................................................... 10 Table 5Pilot Test Student Sample based on District, Gender and Medium of Schools ........................................ 11 Table 6:The Reliability Statistics indicates that all the tests are highly reliable and would consistently give reliable results. ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Table 7: Details of SAT IV booklets printed ........................................................................................................ 15 Table 8: Taluka/Town Coordinators Training in different regions of Sindh ........................................................ 17 Table 9: Region based Number of test centers ..................................................................................................... 19 Table 10: Schedule of SAT Orientation Regional Workshops ............................................................................. 20 Table 11: Actual Test Administration .................................................................................................................. 21 Table 12: A Brief Summary of Region Wise Monitoring Coverage .................................................................... 25 Table 13: District Level Meeting for orientation of Distribution of Student Report cards ................................... 26 Table 14: Schedule of Regional Workshops for dissemination of SAT-IV Results ............................................. 28 Table 15: Province level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in class V ......................................... 33 Table 16: Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class VIII ....................... 39 Table 17: Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class VIII.................... 40 Table 18: Districts level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class V ...................... 42 Table 19: District Level Math Content Strand Based Results Class V ................................................................. 44 Table 20: District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class V .......................... 46 Table 21: District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class VIII ................... 49 Table 22: District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class VIII .......................... 51 Table 23: District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class VIII ...................... 53 Table 24: Provincial level gender based analysis of students’ scores in class V .................................................. 55 Table 25: Provincial level location based analysis of students’ scores in class V ................................................ 56 Table 26: Provincial level location based analysis of students’ scores in class VIII ............................................ 56 Table 27: SEF schools’ district wise content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class V ... 57 Table 28: SEF schools’ district wise content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class V ......... 58 Table 29: SEF schools’ district wise content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class V ..... 60 Table 30: Provincial District-wise Results vis a vis Language Content Strand of Class V and VIII.................... 63 Table 31: Provincial District wise results vis a vis Mathematics Content Strands of Class V & VIII ................. 65 Table 32: Provincial District-wise Results vis a vis Mathematics Content Strands of Class V & VIII ................ 66 Table 33: Provincial District-wise Results vis a vis Science Contents of Class V & VIII ................................... 68 Table 34: District-wise Inter-subject Comparison of Students of Class VIII ....................................................... 71 Table 35: District-based proportion of students at various language performance levels Class V ....................... 73 Table 36: District-based proportion of students at various language performance levels Class VIII ................... 74 Table 37: District-based proportion of students at various math performance levels Class V ............................. 75 Table 38: District-based proportion of students at various math performance levels of Class VIII ..................... 76 Table 39: District-based proportion of students at various science performance levels class V........................... 78 Table 40: District-based proportion of students at various science performance levels Class VIII ...................... 79 Table 41: Province level comparison between SAT III and SAT IV ................................................................... 81 Table 42: District-based comparative analysis of SAT-I, SAT-II, SAT-III & SAT-IV Language results............ 82 Table 43: District-based comparative analysis of SAT-I, SAT-II, SAT-III & SAT-IV Science results ............... 86
IX
List of Figures Figure 1. Monitoring Design & Reporting ........................................................................................................... 22 Figure 2District Level Subject Wise Results Class V........................................................................................... 41 Figure 3Districts Class V Language Difference from Province’s overall Language average Score .................... 43 Figure 4Districts Class V Math Difference from Province’s overall Math average Score ................................... 45 Figure 5Districts Class V Science Difference from Province’s overall Science average Score ........................... 47 Figure 6Scattered Representation of Districts’ Overall Scores Class VIII ........................................................... 48 Figure 7Districts Class VIII Language Difference from Province’s Overall Language Average Score .............. 50 Figure 8Districts Class VIII math Difference from Province’s overall math average Score ................................ 52 Figure 9Districts Class VIII Science Difference from Province’s overall Science average Score ....................... 54
X
Acronyms and Abbreviations ADOE: Assistant District Officer Education DC: District Coordinator DOE: District Officer Education GSTA: Government Secondary Teachers’ Association LSU: Local Support Unit PEC: Punjab Examination Commission PIRLS: Progress in International Reading Literacy Study PISA: Program for International Student Achievement PTALIF: Primary Teachers’ Association RSU: Reform Support Unit RDE: Regional Director Education SAT: Standardized Achievement Test SBA: Shaheed Benazir Abad SEF: Sindh Education Foundation SIBA: Sukkur Institute of Business Administration SPE: Supervisor Primary Education TEO: Taluka Education Officer TC: Taluka/Town Coordinator SRC: Student Report Card STAR: Standardized Testing and Reporting TIMSS: Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
XI
Executive Summary Standardized Achievement Test (SAT) Study was initiated by Reform Support Unit of Education and Literacy DepartmentGovernment of Sindh as a large scale population based study to assessachievement of the students at Govt schools in Language, Math, and Science at class V and VIII level. The SAT study started in 2012 and the consecutive fourth annual phase of SAT study (SAT IV) was completed in 2016. This report covers the technical processes of the test development, the administration of the test, and the statistical analysis of SAT IV results.
The underlying aim of the SAT Project is to assess performance of the students’ learning in three subject areas – Language, Math, and Science. The resultsof SAT are aimed to identify strengths and gaps in student achievement and to inform future educational reforms targeting improvement in education delivery at school, district and province level. On the basis of SAT results, various policies, research, curriculum, teacher development reforms are recommended to improve the quality of educational delivery, with purpose to improve the learning outcomes of students studying in the public sector schools ofSindh. This report has three main sections.Section one covers thetechnical and administrativedetails of the SAT IV project. It includes detailed description about overall planning of the project, test development procedures and processes, test administration, test monitoring and test grading (or e-marking) of pilot test as well asactual test. Moreover,
it also contains
descriptions about results dissemination and reporting (Student Report Cards), development and review of item data bank, and project website.
Section two presents various analysis of results, which include content strand-based analysis at province, region, and district levels as well as analysis of students’ achievement based on gender and location. Mostly descriptive statistics based analyses are provided such as averages, percentages,
comparative differences, standard deviations, and so on.
Averages(mean scores) are given as percentage scores as an alternative of actual score points to facilitate readers inunderstanding students’ performanceat various levels and comparisons clearly. Generally students’ overall language average scores at province level were found around 32% for class V and 37% for class VIII; whereas,the average score of Maths and Science was XII
around 24% for both classes. On a closer look at dispersion of school scores, many schools’ scores go beyond 60% score in Language and beyond 40% in Math and Science, which seems to be a strong area for further systematic exploration of students’ as well as schools’ achievement. Specific exploration should target understanding what makes many students and number of schools perform relatively higher and how knowledge about these students and schools can help improve low-performing schools. While students’ overall low scores in Math and Science suggest most of schools performed low; however, reasonably moderate variation in scores indicate some schools performed relatively higher than mean scores which could be a good area for further exploration.
Content strand based analysis at district, region, and province level for classes V and VIII revealed Language scores highest, followed by Maths and Sciencescores which is a consistent pattern in performance across the province. Moreover, reading scores were found higher for both grades (around 50% for grade V and 58% score for grade VIII) in contrast to very low writing scores (around 15% for class V and around 25% for class VIII) suggesting that there is too much emphasis on teaching reading comprehension and a little focus on developing students’ writing skills. Severely low performance in writing seems to be a result of note-dictating strategy traditionally used by teachers working in Govt. school to teach writing. In the traditionalstrategy,students copy a written piece (by teacher or someone else) and reproduce it on their fair copy. Traditionalstrategy to teach writing does not develop students' ability to write a piece of description or information or a story on their own. Engaging students to write on their own instead of note-dictating needs to be taught to the teachers. Math scores were generally found low in all content strands. students’ score in Algebra and Geometry was found severely low across the province. Geometry, being one of the last units in the grade based curriculum and in the textbooks seems to be less covered by teachers; however, reasons of severe low performance in Algebra and Geometry needs to be studied systematically along with low performance in other content strands. One plausible reason seems that teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge as well as pedagogical skills may not be up to the required level to teach the subject effectively. Science scores were also low, with few variations, in all content strands and relatively low in physical science. Generally smaller standard deviations in comparison to mean scores were found, which suggests small variations in scores, but there were several high-performing students and schools, which also needs to be explored further. XIII
Analysis based on gender and location showed that girls were slightly ahead in Language (particularly reading), whereas girls and boysperformed almost same in Math and Science.There seems to be a reasonable difference between rural and urban groups in Language scores at class VIII level, as urban students scored 5 percent points higher. Similar performance of students’ different groups in most of the subject areas suggests that schooling conditions are almost uniform across the province and most probably same strata of population attend these schools. In order to improve scores, schooling conditions need to be improved and schools should be able to attract students from all strata of the population.
Comparative analysis included comparison between class V and class VIII, inter-subject comparison, performance level comparisons, and comparison between results of different SAT phases. Class V and class VIII comparison in Language, Maths&, Science revealed that class VIII students scoredon average higher in language;slightlyhigher in reading comprehension and significantly higher in writing. While class VIIIwas found performing almost same in overall math scores, class Vscored higher in number and operations; whereas class VIII performed slightly higher in geometry and algebra. In science, class VIII students performed slightly higher in life science; whereas, class V students performed slightly higher in physical Science.
Inter-subject comparison revealed districts following a pattern: highest score in language, followed by math, and sciencescores. Most of the districts’ performance also was found moderately narrow as most of the districts’ scores varied maximum 8 percent points higher or lower from their highest ranked score in a subject. Moreover, districtsstudents’ scores were pooled in four performance level proportional groups: low, mediocre, high, and exceptional. Students across districts mostly performed at low and mediocre levels, but a reasonable number of students performed at high level in Language; whereas noneof themperformed at exceptional level. For Math and Science, relatively higher percent was found performing at low and mediocre levels. A small number of students were foundperforming athigherlevel in Math but a relatively tiny numbergot to high level in Science. Nonetheless, students and schools performing at high level need attention in further exploration as studying them may lead to breakthroughs in understanding and to work on school improvement and enhancing students’ achievement.
XIV
Comparative analysis of SAT III and SAT IV scores showed slightly higher scores in SAT IV but the differences are not significant statistically; therefore, comparison of results needs to be used and explained carefully. There was considerable variation among districts’ scores, as many of them scored higher in SAT IV but some of them scored less in SAT IV, and in some cases, a district scored higher in one subject area whereas lower in other subject area.
Graphical representations as followed provide an overall picture of class V and class VIII students’ performance across the province in three subject areas.
XV
Graphical Overview of SAT IV Graphical overview (stretched on eight pages) provides a concise and overall information about SAT IV student appearance and overall as well as content strand based results at province, region, and district level. Graphical overview is purposed to facilitate readers to get overall idea of appearance and results; whereas, main body of the report provides detailed and extensive analyses for a deeper understanding. Student Appearance Class V REGION WISE APPEARANCE OF STUDENTS IN CLASS V TOTAL 179,563
SBA, 28,555, 16%
SEF, 1,432, 1%
Sukkur, 28,078, 16%
Karachi, 22,852, 13% Larkana, 38,609, 21%
Hyderabad, 41,765, 23%
Mirpur Khas, 18,272, 10%
XVI
Student Appearance Class VIII REGION WISE APPEARANCE OF STUDENTS PERCENT AVERAGE IN CLASS VIII TOTAL 111,177 Sukkur, 12,854, SBA, 18,572, 12% 17% Larkana, 20,461, 18%
Karachi, 23,933, 22% Mirpur Khas, 10,541, 9% Hyderabad, 24,816, 22%
Overall and Content Strand Based Results Class V (% average) PROVINCIAL LEVEL CONTENT STRAND BASED AND SUBJECT WISE ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ PERCENT AVERAGE SCORES OF CLASS V Subject wise 50
Language
23.68
Math
Info Handling
Geometry
Algebra
Measurement
16.09 13.28
36.35 26.86
30.88 16.8
Science
Earth & Space Science
No & oper
36.76
33.6
Physical Science
26.96
life Science
24.09 15.61
Writing
32.8
Reading
60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Content Strand Based
Overall
XVII
Overall and Content Strand Based Results Class VIII(% average)
PROVINCIAL LEVEL CONTENT STRAND BASED AND SUBJECT WISE ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ PERCENT AVERAGE OF CLASS VIII Subject wise 60 37.57
35.97
30
24.922.36
24.5
No & oper
40
50.23
Writing
50
Content Strand Based
20
23.33
19.24 17.72
25.09 22.03 23.1727.75
10
Language
Math
Earth & Space Science
Physical Science
life Science
Info Handling
Geometry
Algebra
Reading
0
Science
Overall
Gender Based Results Class V (% average) PROVINCIAL LEVEL GENDER BASED ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ PERCENT AVERAGE SCORES OF CLASS V
MALE
OVERALL
25.88
SCIENCE
22.98
MATH
23.93
LANGUAGE
30.74
FEMALE
OVERALL
27.25
SCIENCE
23.53
MATH
23
LANGUAGE
35.22 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
XVIII
Gender Based Results Class VIII (% average) PROVINCIAL LEVEL GENDER BASED ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ PERCENT AVERAGE SCORES OF CLASS VIII
MALE
OVERALL
26.63
SCIENCE
22.73
MATH
22.69
LANGUAGE
34.48
OVERALL
29.49
FEMALE
SCIENCE
24.26
MATH
21.87
LANGUAGE
42.36 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Location Based Results Class V (% average) PROVINCIAL LEVEL LOCATION BASED ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ PERCENT AVERAGE SCORES OF CLASS V
50 40
32.87
32.1 23.54
30
23.05
26.23
23.76
23.48
26.71
20 10 0 Language
Math
Science Rural
Overall
Language
Math
Science
Overall
Urban
XIX
Location Based Results Class VIII (% average) PROVINCIAL LEVEL LOCATION BASED ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ PERCENT AVERAGE SCORES OF CLASS VIII
50 40
40.46
35.53 23.11
22.67
30
27.1
23.69
22.03
28.73
20 10 0 Language
Math
Science Rural
Overall
Language
Math
Science
Overall
Urban
XX
XXI
XXII
District Based Results
XXIII
District Based Results
XXIV
SECTION ONE: TEST DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
1.0 Overview of Standardized Testing The standardized achievement tests are designed and administered for a large student population under standard conditions and with standardized procedures. Students respond to identical questions under similar standard procedural conditions. Standardizedtesting iswidespread throughout the globe. Globally, TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) has been measuring trends in achievement of Math and Science at the fourth and eighth grades for past 20 years. It has been conducted on a regular 4-year cycle since 1995, making TIMSS 2015 the sixth assessment of Mathematics and Science achievement trends. TIMSS conducts comprehensive state-of the-art assessments of students’ achievement supported with extensive data about country, school, and classroom learning environments. More than 60 countries took part in TIMSS 2015. PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) was inaugurated in 2001 as a followup to International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(IEA) 1991 Reading Literacy Study. For the past 15 years, PIRLS has measured trends in reading comprehension at the fourth grade level. First assessed in 2001, PIRLS has been on a regular 5year cycle since then. Most recently, PIRLS was expanded in 2011 to include pre-PIRLS, which is a less difficult version of PIRLS. Over 60 countries and sub-national, benchmarking entities participated in PIRLS 2016, including many that have participated in previous assessment cycles since 2001. In general, participating countries use TIMSS and PIRLS in various ways to explore educational issues, including: monitoring system-level achievement trends in a global context, establishing achievement goals and standards for educational improvement, stimulating curriculum reform, improving teaching and learning through research and analysis of the data, conducting related studies (e.g. monitoring equity or assessing students in additional grades), and training researchers and teachers in assessment and evaluation (TIMSS & PIRLS, 2015). Likewise, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development launched Program for International Student Achievement (PISA) in 1997 to evaluate education systems worldwide, by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students. To date, students representing more 2
than 70 countries and economies have participated in the assessment (OECD: Program for International Student Assessment). In California, for example, Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) was established by Department of Education, whose sole task is to help schools improve academic excellence of their students (California Department of Education, 2012). In the context of Pakistan; the government of Punjab has established an autonomous body named Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) to assess students’ learning achievement at Class V and VIII levels in the province of Punjab. The data collected from all districts of the province provide feedback to the system, policy decision-making, educational managers and teachers for improving student learning (Secondary Analysis of Examination Results, 2010).
2.0 Background of SAT Project In 2012 Reform Support Unit-Education and Literacy Department, Government of Sindh announced SAT project for Sindh Province to evaluate performance of students studying in public sector schools in Class V and VIII. As Sukkur IBA applied to acquire this project, a competitive bidding process was carried out by RSU after which the project was won by Sukkur IBA. The focus of the project is to serve following main purposes: 1.
Knowing students’ achievement
2.
Linking educational reforms to output/outcome rather than input
3.
Informing parents, educational administration, civil society and government about the
status of education in the province The first, second, and third phases of the project, entitled as SAT I, SAT II, and SAT III were successfully completed by Sukkur IBA in 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15 respectively. The results of SAT I (2012-13), SAT II (2013-14), and SAT III (2014-15) were uploaded on the project dedicated website, www.satsindh.net.pk and were shared to the parents by sending individual Student Report Card to them, through school head masters/mistresses. The fourth phase of the project, entitled as SAT IV (2015-16) started in December 2015, after formal signing of the contract between RSU and Sukkur IBA on December 28, 2015.
3
In the fourth phase of SAT project, Sukkur IBA conducted the Pilot Test in January 2016 from the students of class VI and IX, as students in these grades had completed class V and class VIII curriculum. Whereas Actual test was conducted by the end of academic year (2015-16) so the participants were students of class V and VIII in the subjects of Language, Math and Science. Table 1 provides details of students appearance in SAT IV. Table 1 Region wise details of class V and VII I students, who appeared in SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test.
Expected Number of Students Region Class V
Class VIII
Total
Appeared Number of Students Class V
Class VIII
Total
Percentage of Students Appeared Class Class V Total VIII
Sukkur
41,135
31,049
72,184
27976
12,854
40,830
68.01%
41.40%
56.56%
Larkana
57,922
38,149
96,071
38273
20,460
58,733
66.08%
53.63%
61.13%
26,343
17,544
43,887
18266
10,541
28,807
69.34%
60.08%
65.64%
60,880
43,531
104,411
41655
24,816
66,471
68.42%
57.01%
63.66%
Karachi
27,928
36,186
64,114
22910
24,005
46,915
82.03%
66.34%
73.17%
SBA
38,958
31,249
70,207
28579
18,543
47,122
73.36%
59.34%
67.12%
SEF
5,616
0
5,616
1498
30
1,528
26.67%
258,782
197,708
456,490
179157
111,249
290,406
69.23%
Mirpur Khas Hydera bad
Grand Total
27.21% 56.27%
63.62%
The assessment results provide a base to identify and understand the gaps in the student achievement and lead to diagnose the real gaps and problems of public sector education standards in Sindh. The assessment results can help address the problems and issues affecting the quality education delivery process, by suggesting appropriate research-based scientifically driven reform initiatives.
The results of SAT are directly shared with the students, parents, teachers, head teachers/ principals and other educational stakeholders to create a grassroots level and mass awareness about students’ achievement. The results are also uploaded on project’s dedicated website i.e. http://www.satsindh.net.pk for the wider audience.
4
3.0 SAT IV Test Development Procedures and Processes Standardized achievement tests are designed and administered for a large student population under standard conditions and with standardized procedures. Students respond to identical questions under similar standard procedural conditions. The development of large scale assessments requires the adoption of a quality and standardized methodology, hence following quality procedures and processes were adopted and implemented in the development of the SAT IV actual test. 3.1 Test Specification Development and Structure The development of test specification involved the review of various national and international frameworks, review of the content strands, standards, benchmarks and students learning outcomes in the latest National Curriculum 2006. In this phase the textbooks currently in use at grade levels V and VIII in the public schools of Sindh were also reviewed to identify contents, topics and the learning outcomes translated into text. Next, it involves the categorization of the students learning outcomes in three cognitive levels - knowledge, understanding, and application - and the development of the table of specification for all the tests. (Refer to Appendix A). This phase also included the review of the specification and its validation by content and assessment experts. 3.2 Test Construction The development of Pilot Test was based on a developed framework for the SAT IV based on content strands, the three cognitive levels, and item types. Content strands and specific topics were identified by the integration of content suggested in National Curriculum Guidelines 2006, Revised Curriculum 2011 and class-specific textbooks, published by Sindh Textbook Board and implemented in the Public schools. The integrated use of national curriculum with textbook helps in covering “implemented curriculum” as teachers use content in textbooks that are based on National Curriculum version 2006/Revised Curriculum. The mathematics tests comprised thefive content strands at knowledge, conceptual understanding and problem solving level and the science test included the content strands at knowledge, conceptual understanding and application levels. The language tests included reading comprehension and narrative/descriptive writing, also assessed at three levels:knowledge/reading
5
for
information,
understanding/reading
for
forming
general
understanding,
and
application/reading for specific purposes and task completion. 3.2.1 Item Development and Test Booklet Construction The technical team lead, along with a team of subject experts and assessment experts was engaged in the construction and review of pilot test contents and items based on selective and important content areas in accordance with the weightages of the areas in the table of specification to ensure test validity. Then the constructed items were undertaken through a rigorous process of review based on the quality criteria for item review development (Refer to Appendix II). At this stage technical team also engaged experienced item developers and subject specialists, experts in developing items based on test specifications. Item developers and writers, who taught the subject at class levels specified in SAT IV (classes V and VIII), were engaged in developing items under the supervision of each subject specialist, expert and technical team lead. Items were developed at knowledge, understanding, and application level as per the weightages assigned in the specifications. For each topic/concept, four versions of items were developed in English, thus number of items developed were four times higher than required in actual test, as per the ToRs of SAT Project. Refined English versions of items were translated in Sindhi and Urdu. Items were not taken directly from textbooks; however, most of the items were structurally and conceptually parallel to content in curriculum and textbooks at the class levels. Language test is comprised of two sections including 50% reading comprehension and 50% writing competencies. Reading section is purposed to assess students’ skills in understanding, interpreting, and performing specific tasks in literary text and informative text. For each reading section of language test, 20 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) on 2 reading texts were developed. The writing section targeted assessing two main competencies, emphasized in the national curriculum, 1- Narrative Writing (telling story), and 2 – Writing for Performing Specific Tasks/ Informative Writing (informing the reader). A separate Extended Response Question (ERQ) was constructed to assess students’ each writing competency level. The number of items for both classes remained same; however, content and skill level was kept class-specific. Altogether, 80 MCQs and 8 ERQs were constructed for writing section for each Class (V or VIII), resulting in 160 MCQs, and 16 ERQs in a language subject test for both classes. Three 6
language test booklet versions (English, Urdu, and Sindhi) consisted of same number of items to keep the language test standardized. Hence, total of 480 MCQs, and 48 ERQs were developed for three versions of language pilot test. Refer to Appendix A for specifications of each language in pilot test for classes V and VIII. Mathematics pilot test covered content strands (Number and Operations, Algebra, Measurement, Geometry, Information Handling) and mathematical ability/skill levels – conceptual understanding, procedural knowledge, and problem solving. Each class level and language version test consisted of 24 MCQs and 4 CRQs, resulting in 96 MCQs, and 16 CRQs constructed at each class level. The number of items for each class level remained same; however, a small deviation was made in covering content strands for each class level. All Mathematics pilot test items were developed in English and translated into Urdu and Sindhi to develop Sindhi and Urdu versions of the test. Altogether, 576 MCQs and 96 CRQs were constructed for all Mathematics pilot test booklet versions. See Appendix A for detailed specifications. Science pilot test specifications were based on content strands, science learning skills, and question types. Life Sciences covered 35%, Physical Sciences covered 55%, and Earth and Space Sciences covered 10% of total items. Within each content strand, knowledge accounted for 40%, conceptual understanding accounted for 40%, and application accounted for 20%. 24 MCQs and 4 CRQs, accounting for 60%, and 40% of weight respectively, were included in each test version, resulting in 96, and 16 CRQs for each medium of science pilot test. Since specifications were same for both classes, number of items for each class level test remained same. All Science pilot test items were developed in English and translated in Urdu and Sindhi to develop Sindhi and Urdu versions of the test. Altogether, 576 MCQs, and 96 CRQs were constructed for all Science pilot test versions. See Appendix A for detailed specifications. Once
the
testbooklets are constructed, these weresentto the
committeeinordertogetanexpert
review
and
feedback
onalltest
RSU
review
booklets.Consequently,
theexperts reviewed the Pilot Test booklets andthe team of assessment experts, who have actually constructed the test, incorporated their feedback. The final Pilot Test booklets were then sent to TCS Private Limited for the printing in the second week of January, 2016, in a password protected folder. 7
3.2.2 Pilot Testing and Analysis The main purpose ofthisPilot Testing wasto establish pool of strong test items which are used to construct a strong actual test to execute at a large scalein the Public Schools of Sindh. Pilot Test contained four times moreitems than the actual test. The statistical analysis of the results of Pilot Test provided information regarding reliability, difficulty level and distractor analysis oftest items. This process resulted in the loss ofmany Pilot Test items, based on their Facility Value, Discrimination Index and frequency distribution of distracter. Finally, the statistical analysis leads to construction of two standardized large-scale actual test. 3.2.3 Pilot Test Administration The pilot test administration involved various processes including the identification of a representative sample, the sharing of the pilot test administration sampling criteria along with list of schools for pilot test with Reform Support Unit for review and feedback. The management of the Pilot Schools was informed by Sukkur IBA through phone calls to confirm the medium of instruction and the strength of students in Classes VI and IX. And it was also assured that the Local Support Unit had informed all the concerned Head Teachers about the SAT Pilot Test. The Reform Support Unit also issued letter of information regarding SAT Pilot Test to all Regional Directors of Education. The same letter was handed over to Head Teachers as Sukkur IBA teams arrived at test center. With joint efforts of Sukkur IBA and RSU, overall attendance ratio in Pilot test remained 97% To make this activity successful, SAT team hired 80 Invigilators, 13 Taluka Coordinators and 13 Monitoring officers. The invigilators and Monitoring Officers were then engaged in a rigorous and interactive one day training to make them familiar to the essentials of the administration of the test; standardized direction about the test, the type of the booklets, versions of the test booklets, codes of test booklets. unpacking, packing and dispatching of the test booklets after the tests are done. In this regard, a manual was prepared as a guideline for the invigilators. It contained important instructions about the test. Team Lead-Administration and Project Officers of SAT project conducted the training workshops in each of the selected sample districts of Pilot Test. The monitoring officers were also deputed at every test center, in order to ensure the quality and smooth running of the test
8
administration process. The details ofdistrict-wise number of the invigilators and monitoring officers are given in the table 2.
Table 2:District-wise Number of Invigilators, Taluka Coordinators and Monitoring Officers
No of Monitoring Officers
No of Invigilator Sr No
District
Taluka Coordinators
1.
Karachi
14
05
05
2.
Hyderabad
14
04
2
3.
Sukkur
12
04
2
4.
Shaheed Benazirabad
14
02
2
5.
Tharparkar
14
02
2
6.
Kashmore
12
03
2
80
23
15
Total
TheprintingofSAT-IVPilottest booklets was carried out by TCS under the 24 hours surveillance of
the
monitoring
officers
ofSATprojectteam.TCScompletedtheprintingandthensentthetestbookletstotheidentified sixdistrictsofSindh.The authorized persons, designated by SAT office, collected these test booklets, one day before the test administration day in the respective districts, from TCS offices. In
consultation
with
PilotTestofSAT-IV(2015-16)
RSU, SukkurIBA in
conducted
classesVIandIX,asstudents
the had
administration
of
the
completedthecoursesof
theseclassesinthe academicsessionof2014-15,whilethecurrentstudentsofclassesV andVIIIhad only completed around 50% to 60% of the course.Consequently, on the recommendations of RSU thePilotTestwasconstructedfrom theNationalCurriculum 2006 ofclassVandVIIIand administered on students of classes VI and IX.
9
The gender-wise distribution indicates that the total number of 805 girls and total number of 1140 boys appeared in the pilot test.
Table 3:Gender-Wise & Medium-Wise Sampled Students’ Appearance of Classes VI & IX for SAT IV Pilot Test.
S.No
District
Gender Wise no. of Schools as per Pilot Test Plan B G T
Gender Wise Appearance of Class VI and IX B G T
Medium Wise Pilot Test Appearance of Class VI and IX S U E T
1
Karachi
4
3
7
183
154
337
0
193
144
337
2
Hyderabad
4
3
7
189
148
337
95
186
56
337
3
Sukkur
4
2
6
165
124
289
151
138
0
289
4
Tharparkar
4
3
7
200
140
340
340
0
340
5
Shaheed Benazirabad Kashmore
4
3
7
205
140
344
262
82
0
344
4
2
6
198
99
298
298
0
0
298
Total
24
16
40
1140
805
1945
1146
599
200
1945
6
Percentage Appearance
97%
*B for Boys---------- *G for Girls---------- *T for Total *S for Sindhi-------- *U for Urdu---------- *E for English Table 4: Gender- wise Sampled Students Appearance in Pilot Test
Language/Math/Science
Number of Boys Responded
Number of Girls Responded
Total
Booklet Version
A
303
235
538
Booklet Version
B
283
189
472
Booklet Version
C
283
191
474
Booklet Version
D
271
190
461
1140
805
1945
Total Booklets
At the completion of pilot testing the test booklets in sealed boxes were sent back to Sukkur IBA for e-marking, data entry and analysis.
10
3.2.4 Sample Keeping in view the guidelines mentioned in the ToRs of SAT IV project, theSAT office Sukkur IBA selected a representative sample schools based on following strata: •
Urban and Rural areas
•
Male and Female students
•
Mediums of schools suchas Sindhi, Urdu and English
Table 5 Pilot Test Student Sample based on District, Gender and Medium of Schools
S.N o
District
Gender Wise no. of Schools as per Pilot Test Plan *B *G *T
Gender Wise Enrollment of Class VI and IX
Medium Wise Pilot Test Enrollment of Class VI and IX
B
G
T
*S
*U
*E
T
1
Karachi
4
3
7
200
150
350
0
250
100
350
2
Hyderabad
4
3
7
200
150
350
100
150
100
350
3
Sukkur
4
2
6
200
100
300
150
150
0
300
4
Tharparkar
4
3
7
200
150
350
350
0
350
5
Shaheed Benazirabad Kashmore
4
3
7
200
150
350
300
50
0
350
4
2
6
200
100
300
300
0
0
300
Total
24
16
40
1200
800
2000
1200
600
200
2000
6
*B for Boys----- *G for Girls------ *T for Total *S for Sindhi------*U for Urdu ----- *E for English
In this way, a representative sample totaling 2,000 students were selected from40 schools (constituting approximately 50 students per school, 30 students of class VI and 20 students of Class IX) of six districts, three fromUrban Sindh (Karachi, Hyderabad, and Sukkur)and three from Rural Sindh (Kashmore, Shaheed Benazirabad & Tharparkar). The details ofthe selected sample are given in Table 5. 3.2.5 Item Analysis: Pilot Test SAT IV (2015-16) was constructed in three mediums (English, Sindhi, and Urdu) for each class level, totaling 24 test booklets(A,B,C,D) versions with parallel form of tests for classes V and VIII. Along with these marking keys and analytical marking rubrics were developed in alignment with the content, skills and cognitive levels consistent with National Curriculum 2006, Revised Curriculum 2011 and in integration with the textbooks. 11
A qualitative review of item was undertaken to match items with the students’ learning outcomes, content strands and cognitive levels. This stage also included pretesting of items with small group of children in public school and modification of the text, language and structure of items to the level and context. Qualitative item analysis also included language editing, language simplification, word count in the text, stems and options to match the class level. Items were reviewed to avoid double negatives, resultantly non-distractors and negatives were removed/replaced, long stems and non-parallel or long options were modified. Special care was taken toinclude only contextually and culturally unbiased items in the test. The pictures included in the tests were reviewed for clarity and visibility. A quantitative review of items included Facility Value (FV), also known as Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index (DI) and Reliability Measures. Also Frequency Distribution on the distractors and keys was undertaken to analyze and address miss-keying and non-distractors. Similar to previous years, the response rate on MCQs for Mathematics, Sciences and Languages (English, Urdu and Sindhi) was appropriate to carry out item analysis; however, response rate on CRQs was significantly low in Sciences and Mathematics but appropriate in languages. Similar to previous SAT phases, SAT IV, revealed significantly low performance of students in both subjects, which indicates that low response rate on questions with increasing level of complexity of knowledge and skills (such as CRQs) was expected. Hence, item analysis was done for MCQs only. Since the test booklets contained parallel forms of tests and items were selected for actual test on the basis of subject and medium hence item analysis was undertaken on similar basis. However, based on comparative analysis, best performing items from in any medium and particularly Sindhi medium (with highest number of students, 1155) formed the basis for the selection of items for the actual test. Overall items analysis shows that a significant proportion of MCQs piloted in all subjects falls within the desirable range (.2 to .8) of Facility Value and Discrimination Index. Overall, 53% to 98% MCQs in all subjects scored between .2 and .8 on both analysis indicators. The proportion of items within appropriate values was enough to construct the SAT IV actual test. Table 6 provides an overview of MCQ items performance in SAT IV Pilot test. Overall, item analysis of SAT IV pilot test items show a significant number of statistically strong items, that could be included in the actual test. 12
Table 6:The Reliability Statistics indicates that all the tests are highly reliable and would consistently give reliable results.
A
English 0.97
Sindhi
Class 5 Urdu
0.95 0.97 B
0.98 0.95 0.97
C
0.98 0.97 0.96
D
0.96 0.95 0.95
A
English 0.98
Sindhi
Class 8 Urdu
0.94 0.93 B
0.98 0.95 0.97
C
0.98 0.98 0.95
D
0.96 0.95 0.98
Math 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.98 0.95 0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.98
Science 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.96 0.96
Math 0.97 0.96 0.98 0.95 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.94
Science 0.95 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.97 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96
13
4.0 Actual Test development and analysis The finalization of the actual test was based on the item analysis data, including item difficulty, discrimination index and frequency distribution of options A to D and test reliability statistics. 4.1 Item selecton The items with desirable item values and discrimination indices were selected for inclusion and the issue of mis-keying (more number of test takers selecting) a distracter , ambiguity (equal number of test takers selecting a distractor and key) and non-distractor (no test taker selecting a distracter) based on frequency distribution data was addressed by reviewing the options.
4.2 Actual test booklet construction The Actual Test SAT IV (2015-16) were constructed in three mediums (English, Sindhi, and Urdu) for each class level, totaling 12 test booklets (A&B versions for each medium) with parallel form of tests for classes V and VIII through a quality and standardized test development process. Along with these marking keys and analytical marking rubrics have been developed in alignment with the content, skills, and cognitive levels consistent with National Curriculum 2006, revised Curriculum 2011 and in integration with the textbooks. 4.3 Actual Test Administration 4.3.1 Test Printing Sukkur IBA, being a public sector institute, adapted the Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (SPPRA) rules and regulation in procuring the services for printing and dispatch of test booklets. Sukkur IBA published tender for printing and dispatch of test booklets in leading Newspapers of Pakistan i-e: Daily Dawn, Daily Jung, Daily Kawish, Daily Sobh, Daily Awami Awaz on January 08, 2016. The bids were invited on single stage two envelope bases. After competitive bidding, TCS Pvt Limited won the printing and dispatch of test booklets project. The booklet-wise printing details are provided in Table 7.
14
Table 7: Details of SAT IV booklets printed
S#
Class
1
5
2
Medium
Booklet
Booklet ID
No of A4 Pages
English
A
511
36
5
English
B
512
36
3
5
Urdu
A
521
36
4
5
Urdu
B
522
38
5
5
Sindhi
A
531
38
6
5
Sindhi
B
532
40
7
8
English
A
811
38
8
8
English
B
812
40
9
8
Urdu
A
821
36
10
8
Urdu
B
822
36
11
8
Sindhi
A
831
36
12
8
Sindhi
B
832
36
4.3.2 Dispatching of Test Booklets The tender for dispatch of test booklets was published together with the tender for printing on January 08, 2016 as mentioned earlier in Section 3.1 (Printing of Test Booklets). After a competitive bidding process TCS Private limited won dispatch project for SAT test booklets. The dispatch and distribution mechanism of test booklets were in following order,
Sharing final test field plans to TCS by SAT office Sukkur IBA
Finalizing the dispatch plan by TCS
Packaging of Centre boxes, by keeping Centre school test papers box/es and feeding
primary schools boxes.
Dispatching the Centre boxes to each taluka/town TCS office in entire Sindh province
on daily basis. 15
Handing over the center boxes to identified SAT Taluka/Town Coordinators (TCs)
(after verifying their names and CNIC numbers) by TCS taluka/town offices.
Distribution of test booklets to identified test centers as per test field plan by SAT
TCs before 10 am (test start time).
Collecting the filled test booklets boxes, unfilled test booklets and attendance sheets
from centers by TCs.
Dispatching the collected filled test booklets boxes, unfilled test booklets and
attendance sheets to SAT office Sukkur IBA by TCs on daily basis. 4.4 Selection and Training of Taluka/Town Coordinators and Test Invigilators SAT office Sukkur IBA selected local qualified individuals for the positions of Taluka/Town Coordinators (TCs) from every taluka/town of entire Sindh province. The preference was given to those Taluka Coordinators who have worked with SAT Office in previous phases. Later on, these TCs, in coordination with SAT Project Officers, selected a team of local UC and taluka/town based invigilators in their respective talukas/towns on a ratio of one invigilator for 25 students. After completing the selection process, SAT office Sukkur IBA organized day-long training workshops for TCs and Test Invigilators. The focus of TCs training workshops, which were conducted by Team Lead-Administration was on following important elements,
Introduction and purpose of SAT project
Test administration mechanisms
ToRs of TCs during test administration (Please see Appendix B)
Undertaking by TCs (Please see Appendix C)
After TCs’ training workshops, which were conducted at Sukkur, Hyderabad, and Karachi, SAT Team Lead-Administration & project officers offered training workshops to selected invigilators by visiting every district of Sindh province. The training workshops were organized along with the respective TC of the taluka/town. SAT office prepared a comprehensive manual for taluka coordinators and test invigilators, which were also shared with them during the training program (Please see Appendix D)
16
Table 8: Taluka/Town Coordinators Training in different regions of Sindh
S No
District
TCs
SAT IV Invigilators
1
Sukkur
4
76
2
Khairpur
8
127
3
Ghotki
5
96
4
Naushero Feroze
5
104
5
Larkana
4
128
6
Qambar Shahdadkot
7
124
7
Shikarpur
4
100
8
Jacobabad
3
85
9
Kashmore
3
66
10
Mirpur Khas
6
83
11
Sanghar
6
134
12
Umerkot
4
81
13
Tharparkar
4
80
14
Thatta
4
40
15
Sujawal
4
34
16
Hyderabad
4
84
17
Badin
5
98
18
Tando Muhammad Khan
3
35
19
Matiari
3
59
20
TandoAllahyar
3
44
21
Shaheed Benazir Abad
4
99
22
Jamshoro
4
73
23
Dadu
4
113
24
Karachi
18
357
Total
119
2,320
17
4.5 Identifying Clusters of Centre Secondary Schools and Nearby Feeding Primary Schools The SAT Project Officers were engaged to identify and prepare the clusters of Centres secondary schools and nearby feeding primary schools in every taluka/town of entire Sindh province. In order to facilitate the students of primary schools, SAT Office developed a clear strategy to link feedingprimary schools with a secondary school within radius of about 1.5 kilometers. In each taluka/town, the workshops were conducted for two days in which Taluka Education Officer (M/F) along with respective School Supervisors identified and developed linkages of primary schools to specific secondary school to appear in SAT IV. As per policy, all secondary/higher secondary/Middle & Elementary schools were taken as test center by default. However, some primary schools were also made test centers in those Union councils where there was no secondary school available. The signature and official stamp of Supervisors and TEO (M/F) were also taken on hard sheets for office record. After this, SAT Taluka Coordinator visited each & every center highlighted by TEO (M/F) physically in order to validate the data. This activity was performed so that Sukkur IBA can ensure that highlighted test centers are functional and SAT can be conducted easily keeping in view the infrastructure of schools. The list of test center identified through workshops and physical survey are as under: 4.6 Preparing Test Field Plans SAT office Sukkur IBA organized workshops in every region of Sindh province in order to prepare the final test field plans. TCs, SAT Project Officers and Team Lead Administration carried out this activity. The test field plans were prepared by keeping in mind the criteria that the test should be completed in every taluka/town in maximum ten (10) days. Consequently, on an average 4 to 5 test centers were included in the test field plan on every test day. These test centers were finalized with the close coordination of respective local TC, keeping in mind two important criteria of their distance from one to each other and being on same route. As soon as the final field plans were prepared, they were sent to TCS as it could prepare the printing & dispatch plan accordingly. The details of region-wise selected test centers during SAT IV (201516) Actual Test are given in Table 9.
18
Table 9: Region based Number of test centers
S. No
Region
Number of Test Centers
1
Sukkur
868
2
Larkana
869
3
Hyderabad
4
Mirpur Khas
809
5
Shaheed Benazirabad
833
6
Karachi
1,021
Total
5,962
1,562
4.7SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test Information Dissemination SAT office Sukkur IBA devised strong communication mechanism to inform parents, teachers, head teachers, supervisors, Taluka Education Officers, District Education officers, Regional Directors and Coordinators/Consultants of Local Support Unit so that the test schedules may be communicated at all levels in order to increase appearance ratio. Three modes of communication were adapted by Sukkur IBA which are described as follows. 4.7.1Publication of Sample/Model Papers and Advertisements in Newspapers Sukkur IBA published advertisements about the administration of SAT Actual Test in leading local and national newspapers including, Daily Dawn, Daily Jang, Daily Awami Awaz, Daily Ibrat, Daily Kawish and Daily Sobh on January 18, 2016 in English, Urdu & Sindhi content. The information in these Advertisement contained sample papers of Language, Math & Science along with necessary information pertaining to parents and teachers regarding SAT. 4.7.2Regional Workshops Regional workshops for educational managers were also organized in all six regions of Sindh in which Regional Directors (Primary/Secondary), District Education officers (Primary/Secondary), Taluka Education officers (M/F), and School Supervisors on respective region participated. Apart from Education department hierarchy, Coordinators and Consultants of local Support Unit also took part in the workshop. The workshop contained full orientation program about SAT project, subjects included, type of questions with examples, mechanism to execute the test, 19
recommendation from Sukkur IBA and cooperation required from Education Managers to implement the SAT successfully. The detailed field plans of region, district and taluka were also handed over to Regional Directors, DEOs, TEOs and coordinators/Consultants of local Support Unit so that
these
stakeholders could pre-inform the head masters/mistresses of secondary, elementary and primary schools about the actual days and dates of test administration. The schedule of Regional workshops conducted is as under: Table 10 Schedule of SAT Orientation Regional Workshops
S# 1 2 3 4 5
Date 3-Feb-16 11-Feb-16 12-Feb-16 22-Feb-16 24-Feb-16
Region Sukkur & Larkana Hyderabad Mirpurkhas Shaheed Benazirabad Karachi
Venue Main Campus, Sukkur IBA Auditorium, Sindh Museum, Hyderabad GGHS Bhan Singabad, Mirpurkhas Gymkhana Restaurant, Nawabshah Auditorium, Scout Head Quarter, Karachi
4.7.3 Telephone Calls to Head Masters/Mistresses of Government Secondary and Primary Schools by SAT TCs Phone calls were made to all head teachers of primary & secondary schools by SAT Taluka/Town Coordinators one week before inception of test. The incumbent told the Head Teachers about specific date, day, and test center where students of class V and VIII were required to appear in SAT test. 4.8Administration of SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test SAT office Sukkur IBA started administration of the Actual Test after completing above mentioned tasks. Following process was followed by SAT office Sukkur IBA for the administration of Actual Test. The TCs collected test booklets from their respective TCS offices in the evening or morning of the test day; they kept the test booklets in a safe and secured place. Then, the TCs dispatched the test booklets to test centers on the day of test before test starting time. After handing over the test booklets to head invigilator on one Centre, TC moved to next center and so on. Thus, after completing the distribution, TC used to pay monitoring visits to test 20
centers. As soon as test completed, the TC again visited every center and collected filled test booklets, unfilled test booklets and attendance sheets from the centers and dispatched them to the SAT office Sukkur IBA on the same day through TCS courier services. The SAT office Sukkur IBA provided transport allowance to every TC to hire a taxi car/van/jeep to perform all above mentioned activities. The test was conducted region-wise in following order: Table 11Actual Test Administration
S#
Regions
Schedule of SAT
1
Sukkur & Larakana
February 08, 2016 to February 18, 2016
2
Hyderabad & Mirpurkhas
February 19, 2016 to March 1, 2016
3
Karachi & Shaheed Benazirabad
March 2, 2016 to March 12, 2016
In this way, The SAT office Sukkur IBA completed the test in entire Sindh province in 30 working days from February 08, 2016 to March 12, 2016. 4.9Monitoring Mechanism of Actual Test Administration SAT office prepared an effective monitoring mechanism to ensure the quality and transparency of the actual test. Doing so, a monitoring team, based on SAT Project Director, Team LeadAdministration, Team Lead-Technical Analysis & Assessment,
project officers, faculty
members and Alumni of Sukkur IBA and selected competent Taluka Coordinators (of those talukas where test was already administered) was formulated. SAT office offered training to the monitoring team members, before sending them to the field. SAT office prepared a “Monitoring Report Proforma” and shared to all monitoring officers, during the training program(Attached in Appendix E).
21
Figure 1. Monitoring Design & Reporting
Project Director
Team LeadAdminstration & Coordination
Alumni, Staff, Faculty of Sukkur IBA
District Focal Person (Senior Project Officer)
Taluka Coordinator
Taluka Coordinator
Team LeadAssessment & Analysis
Monitoring Officer
Taluka Coordinator
Moreover, an independent team of monitoring officers comprising of faculty members, staff members and Alumni of Sukkur IBA was formulated for administering the actual test administration in each district. The team reported directly to Team Lead-Administration & Project Director and worked independently and reported all issues to concerned authorities. Apart from it, SAT Senior Project Officers were assigned one specific district to keep in touch with Local Support Unit, District Education officers (Primary & Secondary), Taluka Education Officers (TEOs), Supervisors and other stake holders of Education Department to ensure the adequate enrollment on test days and also were responsible to tackle all test related issues in the district. Along with that Senior Project officer also paid monitoring visits to test centers in order to ensure the quality. As per ToRs of job, SAT Taluka Coordinators spent 20% of their time to pay monitoring visits to test centers in order to verify that tests were being executed as per the plan.
22
Monitoring Officer
Taluka Coordinator
Team LeadAssessment & Analysis
Project Director
District Focal Person
Test Centers
Team LeadAdministration
In order to ensure the quality of test administration, the monitoring officers were required to make a proper check of the following aspects at thetest centers they visited:
Invigilators’ team arrived on time
Test started on the specified time
Students were given proper instructions by the invigilators before the start of the test
Students were sitting in a proper sequence
Students properly filled up the face sheets
Students were provided Pencil, Eraser and sharpener
Attendance sheets were signed by the Head Teachers and respective invigilators
Invigilators were performing their duties as per the instructions
Environment at the test center was smooth, without having any physical distraction or
having involvement of school administration Using the above mentioned monitoring proforma, Monitoring officers collected field issues and other relevant information during their monitoring visits. Following this, SAT Project Officers collected the identified field issues from the Monitoring Officers on daily basis, consolidated them and shared the issues to their respective Taluka Coordinators. The purpose was that the issues should be minimized on the next day of the test. Moreover the consolidated field 23
monitoring issues were also sent to the office of Project Director & Team Lead-Administration on daily basis, along-with the suggested solution of the identified issues. Some of the key field issues reported by the monitoring officers are as under, •
Non-cooperation of government head teachers and teachers at some center schools
•
Less number of students turnout on the test day.
•
Students from unlisted schools (in RSU provided data file) turned out to take test
•
Lack of information about the test schedule to head masters/mistresses by their respective
DEO and ADOE/TEO (M &F) offices •
Teachers misbehaved Sukkur IBA team in Kashmore and Shaheed Benazirabad and
instigated the team to allow them inside the test blocks for supporting the students. SAT office reported these issues on daily basis to RSU and got its support to address these issues effectively. The test at all those centers was cancelled and re-arranged if misappropriation were reported on a center. 4.9.1Monitoring by Reform Support Unit Reform Support Unit also worked hand-in-hand with Sukkur IBA in order to monitor the actual test administration in the entire Sindh. Chief Program Manager RSU, Deputy Program Manager RSU, representatives of Local Support Unit, District Education Officers (Primary & Secondary) and Taluka Education officers and Supervisors monitored the test administration in entire Sindh.
24
District Education Officer
Local Support Unit Deputy Program Manager
Center Incharge
RSU
Test Centers
Chief Program Manager RSU
Taluka Education Officer
Table 12 A Brief Summary of Region Wise Monitoring Coverage
Summary of Monitoring Coverage No. of Districts
No. of Talukas
No. of Monitoring officers
Sukkur
3
18
16
Taluka wise coverage in terms of Percentage 89%
Larkana
5
21
12
Mirpurkhas
3
14
Hyderababd Shaheed Benazirabad Karachi
9
Region
Taluka Coordinator Monitoring**
Total Monitoring Coverage
20%
110%
57%
20%
77%
8
57%
20%
77%
36
21
58%
20%
78%
3
15
9
60%
20%
80%
6
18
13
72%
20%
92%
Total 29 122 79 66% 20% 86% **As per Job ToRs of Taluka Coordinator, he/she spends 20% of total time in monitoring the test administration in concerned taluka, while 80% of his/her time is spent in administration process.
The above table shows an average of 86% of the monitoring coverage during SAT Phase-IV 2015-16 Test Administration. In other words, the monitoring officers have accessed 86% of the
25
test centers across Sindh which indeed shows the efficiency and effectiveness of the monitoring strategy by Sukkur IBA.
5.0 Preparing and Distributing Student Report Cards to the Parents Student Report cards are generated from main data base file in which scores and biographic data of all students who appeared in test is stored. The student report card contains following information
Student details with Father's Name
Class with Medium
School Name & SEMIS
UC, Taluka & District Information
Content-strand based score in language, Math & Science
Overall student subject averages
overall school subject averages
Grading scale
SAT related information
5.1 Distribution of Student Report cards In order to effectively execute this activity, district level meeting was arranged by Sukkur IBA and RSU in which all education officers of district including DEO (Primary & Secondary) & Taluka Education Officers (Primary & Secondary) M/F participated. The Orientation regarding distribution mechanism of report cards was given Sukkur IBA district Focal person in details. The region wise schedule of such meetings is as under: Table 13: District Level Meeting for orientation of Distribution of Student Report cards
S# 1 2 3 4 5
Date August 30, 2016 September 07, 2016 September 20, 2016 October 04, 2016 October 06, 2016
Region Sukkur Larkana Shaheed Benazirabad Mirpurkhas Karachi
6
October 17, 2016
Hyderabad
Districts Sukkur, Khairpur Mirs, Ghotki Larkana, Jacobabad, Shikarpur, Kashmore, Qamber SBA, Naushero Feroze, Sangharv Mirpurkhas, Umerkot, Tharparkar East, West, South, Central, Korangi, Malir Hyderabad, Matiari, Tando Muhammad Khan, Tando Allahyar, Dadu, Badin, jamshoro, Thatta, Sujawal,
26
The report cards of girls Primary, Middle and Elementary schools are sent to Taluka Education Officer Primary Female while report cards of Boys Primary, Middle and Elementary Schools are sent directly to office of Taluka Education Officer Primary Male. While report cards of Secondary & Higher secondary schools are sent directly to office of District Education Officer Secondary. This exercise is adapted because inaccessibility of schools address by any postal service in Pakistan. The report cards are dispatched to above mentioned Education Officers with a list of schools and a covering letter which suggest to invite Head Teachers (As mentioned in list of schools) to concerned office and discuss school results and hand over report cards of all students who appeared in test. Report cards of each school are packed in envelopes. Along with report cards of students, Sukkur IBA has also issued School Performance Report for Head Teachers, so that they can bring reforms at school level by keeping in view SAT results. The letter to Head Teacher suggests celebrating parents’ day at school or organizing parent-teacher meeting at school in which the teacher will discuss SAT results of students with parents and suggest areas of improvement. The Head teachers will take receiving of report card from Parent on given sheet which is included in each envelope of school. The Head teacher will submit the same receiving with official stamp of school to concerned Taluka Education officer with in 10 working days as a proof that Head teacher has distributed all report cards among parents.
5.2Regional Workshops for Dissemination of SAT Phase-IV (2015-16) Results In order to disseminate and share the results with education leaderships, Sukkur IBA organized regional workshop in all six regions of Sindh in which whole mechanism of SAT along with final results of Region, District and Taluka are discussed in detail. The results are summarized in performance wise and in contend-strand forms. Moreover, the recommendation and areas of improvement at taluka level are also discussed. The regional workshops are conducted in the month of October& November 2016. Below is schedule of regional workshops conducted in order to share the results of SAT-IV with education managers of Sindh province.
27
Table 14: Schedule of Regional Workshops for dissemination of SAT-IV Results
S# 01 02 03 04 05 06
Region Sukkur Larkana Shaheed Benazirabad Mirpurkhas Karachi Hyderabad
Date October 04, 2016 October 05, 2016 October 18, 2016 October 19, 2016 October 31, 2016 November 01, 2016
Venue Sukkur IBA, Main Campus Sir Shahnawaz Bhutto Library, Larkana Royal Taj Hotel, Nawabshah Sufyana Hotel, Mirpurkhas Reform Support Unit Office Royal Taj Hotel, Hyderabad
6.0 SAT Project Website A
separate
domain
for
SAT
project
has
been
purchased
with
domain
address
www.satsindh.net.pk. Website has following features;
Online data bank from class V to class VIII in the subjects of Language, Math and
Science
SAT Project brief
Students can attempt online test (MCQs) and measure their efficiency
The data of each subject is available class wise, and medium wise
Teachers can make their own user name and password to use the data as per their
requirement.
After log in, teachers can prepare question papers of Languages, Math and Science for
classes V to VIII
Newsletters, events, updates and announcements about SAT are available
Final Reports of SAT-I (2012-13), SAT II (2013-14) & SAT III (2014-15) are uploaded
User counter enabled which helps RSU and Sukkur IBA to measure the reach and
frequency of target users
School profiles have been activated
28
School wise, taluka wise, District wise, region wise, and subject wise results of SAT-I
(2012-13), SAT II (2013-14), SAT III (2014-15) & SAT IV ( 2015-16) have been uploaded on website. Moreover, comparative analysis of results i-e: comparison of schools within same UC, comparison of taluka with in same district, and comparison of districts within same regions is also available on the website
Sample papers of SAT tests are also available in Sindhi, Urdu and English mediums,
which help the teachers, head masters/head mistresses and educational stakeholders to prepare/guide students for SAT tests
Facebook page of SAT has been linked to SAT website
Quick links of RSU, NTS, Govt of Sindh and Sukkur IBA are also activated
Logo of Government of Sindh is included
SAT team profiles have been updated
Contact us option is available on website
6.1 Online Item Data Bank Sukkur IBA has developed a test data bank from class V to class VIII in the subjects of Languages (Sindhi, Urdu and English), Math and Science. The items in these three subjects are developed in three mediums including, Sindhi, Urdu and English. For each subject in each class, 1000 test items consisting of MCQs and CRQs are developed. Following the ToRs, SAT office has added 1500 more items of Languages, Math & Science subjects to already developed item data bank, during SAT project phase IV (2015-16). Doing so, Item Development Workshops were arranged at Sukkur IBA under the leadership of assessment experts to develop the items. The subject specialists of IBA Community Colleges and Sukkur IBA Alumni under the supervision of assessment experts of Sukkur IBA Department of Education developed these items. After development of the items, these were reviewed by the assessment experts of Sukkur IBA and after review, these items are uploaded on SAT website, www.satsindh.net.pk. 6.2 Review of Uploaded Items SAT office Sukkur IBA has conducted an online review of all items of Languages, Math and Science from classes V to VIII, which are uploaded during the first and second phase of the SAT project.
29
7.0 Challenges Faced During SAT IV (2015-16) During the implementation of SAT Project Phase IV (2015-16), Sukkur IBA faced following challenges,
The educational stakeholders including RDEs, DOEs, ADOEs/TEOs (M&F) &
Supervisors did not inform the head masters/mistresses of center schools as well as feeding primary schools about SAT IV (2015-16) test schedule in some cases, despite the fact, that SAT office Sukkur IBA provided them the test schedules of SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test about 10 days before the test administration in Orientation Regional Workshops.Resultantly, student turn out ratio on test day remained low.
Teachers misbehaved Sukkur IBA team in Kashmore and Shaheed Benazirabad and
instigated the team to allow them inside the test blocks for supporting the students.
Non-cooperation of Karachi Metropolitan Corporation schools (KMC) in Karachi on test
day. Majority of school teachers did not allow Sukkur IBA team to conduct SAT exam, reasoned that they had not been informed by line authorities. Sukkur IBA later on discussed the matter with Reform Support Unit and then after 5th day of test, KMC schools were tested which rose administration cost for Sukkur IBA heavily.
Change of medium issue was observed very frequently in whole Sindh. Data File of RSU
suggested one medium, but on the ground, Sukkur IBA team found another or mix mediums. This created lots of trouble in test administration; however, required medium wise test booklets were arranged and all students having different medium of instructions were tested on the same day or another day.
In some test centers, teachers tried to enter test blocks to help students cheat and guide
them in taking the test . They also forced the invigilators to get out of test block, and made students write responses. Such cases were reported to Sukkur IBA and their test booklets were discarded and not included in the main results.
30
SECTION TWO: DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
31
8.0 INTRODUCTION OF RESULTS AND ANALYSIS Analysis are based on descriptive results of SAT IV Test. SAT IV Test aimed to assess and understand multiple dimensions of students’ achievement at class V and class VIII level. The test focused on assessing class V and class VIII students’ achievement in the subjects of Language, Math, and Science as these are considered three main areas of learning. Each subject test comprised of a number of content strands or main areas of learning, which were same for both the classes. Content strands of Language were Reading Comprehension and Writing. Math test comprised of five content strands such as Numbers and Operation, Algebra, Measurement, Geometry, and Information Handling. Science test was based on content strands of Life Science, Physical Science, and Earth and Space Science. This section presents various types of descriptive analysis of student results such as provincebased, region-based, and district-based statistics. In order to understand overall performance in terms of student background markers, further analysis consist of gender based (female and male), location based (rural and urban), and school type based (boys schools and girls schools) comparison of student achievement. Apart from analysis of overall achievement in each subject area, several analyses present content strand based achievement of students to highlight strengths and shortcomings in specific main learning areas within each subject. In various analyses, differences in relation to overall scores at each level are also provided to indicate positive or negative difference from overall scores at province, region, and district level. The section comprises of six categories of results and analysis. It comprises of general results of SAT IV which indicate overall percent averages for each subject as well as content strand based percent averages of students’ performance in each subject at province, region, and district levels. Next three categories provide analysis of overall province level performance of students in the three subjects, based on gender of students, location of schools, and school type. Last part of the section provides district based analysis of students’ performance for Sindh Education Foundation (SEF) managed schools. 8.1 Province Level Overall and Content Strand Based Results Overall results at province level show highest achievement in Language followed by student scores in Math and Science at class V level. Table 15 shows overall as well as content 32
strand based province level scores. While overall averages in all subject areas are significantly low, content strand based analysis of averages shows that student scores are relatively higher in Reading Comprehension; which could be a reflection of traditional priority assigned to reading lessons (based on textbooks) across the schools. Compared to 50% overall score of Reading Comprehension, writing overall average score is drastically low; less than half of province’s overall language score. Math content strand based scores, similar to previous trends, are relatively higher in Measurement and Information Handling, whereas lower in Geometry and Algebra; however, overall Math scores are severely low. Science overall scores are also significantly low with lowest scores in Physical Sciences. Table 15: Province level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in class V
Content Subject
Content Strand
Subject& Overall Average (%)
Strand Average (%)
Language
Reading
49.02*
Writing
15.62†
Number & Operation Measurement Math
Science
Standard Deviation (Overall Average)
32.32
17.87
23.61
15.27
23.18
13.03
26.37
12.66
26.54 32.49
Algebra
15.80 †
Geometry Information Handling Life Science
12.82
Physical Science Earth & Space Science
16.41†
36.34* 30.21
35.84
Overall Students’ Score (%)
*
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class v across province 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class v across province
33
8.2 Province Level Overall and Content Strand Based Student Scores Class VIII Grade VIII students’ overall average scores at province level were found higher in Languagewhereasthe scores in Math and Science were found significantly low. Table 16 provides details of overall as well as content strand based scores in the three subject areas. The pattern of overall scores is similar to Class V - highest in Language followed by Science and Math scores. Content strand based students’ achievement at class VIII was found significantly higher in reading comprehension and moderately higher in Information Handling; whereas, geometry and algebra were found significantly low at province level. Analysis shows writing scores lower to half of the reading scores, which seems a strong indication of low emphasis on teaching and learning of writing. Student scores in all three content strands of Science are low and similar – between 22% and 25% - indicating almost low variance among main learning areas of science.
Table 16: Province level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
Content Strand Average (%)
Reading
50.24*
Writing
24.92†
Number & Operation
24.50
Algebra
19.24
Geometry
17.72†
Information Handling
35.97*
Life Science
25.09
Physical Science
25.44*
Language
Math
Science
Earth & Space Science Overall Students’ Score (%)
23.17
Subject& Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation(Overall Average)
37.58
19.55
22.37
13.55
24.87
11.97
28.27
11.76
†
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class v across province 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in
34
8.3 Region Level Content Strand Based Results While all regions performed moderately high in reading comprehension, students’ overall performance across the six regions of the province was found low in all subject areas. Performance in Math and Science was found severely low. 8.3.1Region Level Content Strand Based Results of Class V Analysis of content strand based results of class V revealed that Karachi led in both reading and writing score whereas Shaheed Benazirabad, Mirpur Khas, and Hyderabad regions performed on mediocre levelon reading, and Larkana and Sukkur regions performed low on the two language skills. Writing scores were found slightly higher for Karachi region; however, for all other regions writing scores were severely low. Low writing scores across the regions indicate that there is low emphasis on developing genuine writing skills in the schools across the province as traditionally it has been observed that students are usually provided a written piece to copy on their notebooks rather than engaging them in producing their own piece of writing. In contrast, reading scores across regions are higher, which means that there is relatively high emphasis on reading lessons as it has been observed that most of the teachers regularly start with reading lessons based on language textbooks. Writing skill also seems to be negligibly covered in language textbooks while textbook is the only resource of teaching and learning in most of the schools. Table 17:Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class V
Writing Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation (Overall Average)
S No
Region
Reading Average (%)
1
Karachi
57.95*
23.58*
40.76*
8.45
20.56
2
Shaheed Benazirabad
53.92
15.85
34.89
2.57
17.27
3
Hyderabad
51.80
14.52
33.16
0.84
17.46
4
Mirpurkhas
46.90
12.80
29.85
-2.47
16.58
5
Larkana
45.09
12.18†
28.64
-3.68
15.94
6
Sukkur
39.53†
17.10
28.32†
-4.00
17.13
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class V across regions 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class V across regions
35
8.3.2Region Level Math Content Strand Based Results Class V Content strand based analysis of class V Math scores revealed that Mirpur Khas led the regions with a significant difference from province’s overall score. Nonetheless, overall averages range between 21.9% and 27.6%, which shows significantly low scores across the regions. Content strand based analysis also shows similar patterns of student achievement among the regions such as relatively higher scores in information handling and measurement and very low scores in geometry and algebra. Small differences, mostly around 6 percent points between lowest performing region and highest performing region indicate a low variation among regions suggesting similar public sector schooling conditions across the regions.
Standard Deviation (Overall Average)
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%)
Measurement Average (%)
Number & Operation Average (%)
Table 18: Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class V
27.91
33.43
16.23
14.96*
26.31†
24.36
0.75
12.08
2
Shaheed Benazirabad
28.24
35.40
17.63
14.03
38.22
25.38
1.77
16.90
3
Hyderabad
25.64
33.89
14.62
11.67
33.27
22.75
-0.86
14.59
4
Mirpurkhas
31.09*
37.15*
20.83*
13.53
41.44
27.60*
3.99
16.97
5
Larkana
25.17
30.22
12.50†
10.94†
42.64*
22.16
-1.45
13.21
6
Sukkur
23.96†
26.83†
16.60
13.66
35.13
21.90†
-1.71
17.42
Overall Average (%)
Karachi
Information Handling Average (%)
1
Geometry Average (%)
Region
Algebra Average (%)
S. No
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class V across regions 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class V across regions
8.3.3Region Level Science Content Strand Based Results Class V Although Karachi region scored highest as compared to overall result as well as in content strand based averages of life science and physical science, overall science achievement was found low in all regions. All of the regions performed relatively higher in Life Science and Earth and Space Science compared to Physical Science. There seems to be a small variation among the regions as difference between lowest performing and highest performing regions is
36
around 6 percent points. Small variation across the regions suggests consistency of schooling conditions and resulting student achievement in grade V science. Table 19: Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class V
Physical Science Average (%)
Earth & Space Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation (Overall Average)
S. No
Region
Life Science Average (%)
1
Karachi
35.24*
18.97*
36.64
26.43*
3.25
11.68
2
Shaheed Benazirabad
30.60
16.16
35.12
23.11
-0.08
13.27
3
Hyderabad
31.22
15.72
32.91†
22.86
-0.32
12.75
4
Mirpurkhas
32.79
18.75
38.97
25.68
2.50
13.84
5
Larkana
27.85
15.39†
39.02*
22.11†
-1.07
12.10
6
Sukkur
25.85†
15.52
33.88
20.97
-2.21
14.11
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class V across regions 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class V across regions
8.3.4Region Level Language Content Strand Based Results Class VIII Analysis of class VIII language scores revealed that Karachi region led overall language average scores, while Sukkur and Mirpur Khas regions fell to the bottom. Hyderabad region scored highest in reading, Shaheed Benazirabad and Karachi scored slightly lower; whereas, Sukkur and Mirpur Khas scored significantly low. Consistent with class V language content strand based scores, all regions scored higher in reading compared to writing (almost double of writing scores), which is an strong indication of less focus on developing students writing skills. There seems to be a moderate variation within regions, as indicated by standard deviations, and among the regions, which suggests some schools might have performed higher than overall averages as well as content strand based regional averages. Analysis and further understanding of such schools (or other units) may lead to finding out solutions to address issue of consistent low achievement of students in the province as reflected by students’ scores of all four phases of SAT project.
37
Table 20: Region level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class VIII
S.No
Region
Reading Average (%)
Writing Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%)
1
Hyderabad
55.55*
22.68
39.11
1.53
19.38
2
Karachi
53.14
36.40*
44.77*
7.19
19.20
3
Larkana
45.51
20.10†
32.80
-4.78
16.36
4
Mirpurkhas
47.58
20.33
33.96
-3.62
20.14
5
Shaheed Benazirabad
54.81
25.19
40.00
2.42
19.45
6
Sukkur
37.68†
18.85
28.26†
-9.32
18.57
Standard Deviation
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class VIII across regions 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class VIII across regions
8.3.5Region Level Math Content Strand Based Results of Class VIII Similar to class V math regional scores, at grade VIII level, the six regions scored higher in Information Handling followed by Numbers and Operation; whereas, comparatively lower in Algebra and Geometry. This pattern holds across the regions and content strand scores. Larkana region stood top in three content strands as well as in overall scores; whereas, Hyderabad scored lowest. However, based on overall average scores, the difference between highest and lowest scoring regions is only 5 percent points, which suggests slight variation between regions. Consistency and similarity of regional scores in all content strands of class VIII math suggests similarity of instructional conditions in Govt. schools across the province. Moreover, standard deviations of regions ranged from 9 to 19, which means that there is different level of variation of scores within each region.
38
Table 16: Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class VIII
S. N o
Region
Number &Operati on Average (%)
1
Hyderabad
23.04
17.08†
15.53†
30.64
20.39
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%) -1.98
2
Karachi
22.75†
18.09
19.07
33.49
21.41
-0.95
9.95
3
Larkana
28.36*
21.38*
18.35
53.25*
25.78*
3.42
11.46
6
Mirpurkhas
25.05
20.19
15.61
29.58†
22.06
-0.31
15.62
Shaheed Benazirabad Sukkur
25.01
20.03
18.21
33.49
22.78
0.42
14.85
23.28
20.20
19.45*
32.23
22.17
-0.19
19.68
4 5
Algebra Average (%)
Geometry Average (%)
Information Handling Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation
11.60
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class VIII across regions 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class VIII across regions
8.3.6Region Level Science Content Strand Based Results of Class VIII All of the regions scored below 30% average score in all content strands of class VIII science, which is a significantly low score.Further,region based class VIII content strand wise science scores do not show a significant variation between regions as most of the content strand based scores fell in twenties. Nonetheless, Larkana scored higher in Life science and Physical Science; whereas, Karachi region scored highest in Physical Science. Difference between highest and lowest performing district was only 5 percent points on overall averages scores, which suggests similar schooling conditions across the province. Standard deviations also fell between 9 and 14 suggesting a different but moderate variation of scores within each region.
39
Table 17 Regional level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class VIII
S No
Region
Life Science Average (%)
Physical Science Average (%)
Earth & Space Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation
1
Hyderabad
25.18
25.14
20.55
24.24
-0.63
11.10
2
Karachi
24.31
28.16*
25.65
26.31
1.44
9.79
3
Larkana
28.06*
25.28
27.55*
26.71*
1.84
10.64
4
Mirpurkhas
24.43
26.84
19.66†
24.56
-0.31
14.92
5
Shaheed Benazirabad
25.05
24.96
21.47
24.29
-0.57
11.88
6
Sukkur
22.29†
20.77†
21.99
21.55†
-3.32
15.33
Notes: 1. * represents the content strand wise highest score attained in class VIII across regions 2. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in class VIII across regions
9.0District Level Content Strand Based Results Class V Figure 2 represents patterns in districts’ overall scores in Language, Maths, and science for class V. Comparatively; language scores of all districts are quite significantly higher than math and science scores. With an exception, most of the districts appear to be performing between 25% and 40% language average scores. With few variations, districts’ math and science scores fell between 20% and 30% average scores. More detailed district based comparisons and district level content based achievements are discussed in later parts. Moreover, detailed profile for each district based on its performance in different content strands and taluka-based is provided in Appendix J.
40
Figure 2District Level Subject Wise Results Class V
45 40 35 30 25
Overall Language
20
Overall Math
15
Overall Science
10 5 0 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
9.1 District Level Language Content Strand Based Results Class V Analysis of language content strands (main areas of learning) at class V level shows that reading average scores of all districts were significantly higher than their writing scores. Table 23 gives details of district based scores. All six districts of Karachi scored higher in the language overall as well as content strand based scores, indicating a consistent performance in the region. While reading scores are encouraging as 18 out of 29 districts scored in fifties, writing scores are significantly low for all districts as districts’ scores range between 11% and 24% average writing scores. Narrow difference between lowest and highest performing districts in writing suggest similar instructional conditions in the schools across the province. Difference of 22 percent points between highest scoring and lowest scoring districts in reading suggests a significant variation among the districts. Standard deviations of districts mostly fall between 15 and 20 which means that there is moderate variation of scores within as well as between districts, and some schools may have performed significantly higher in each district.
41
Table 18 Districts level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class V
S.N o
District
Writing Average (%)
Reading Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
1 2 3
Korangi Karachi Central Karachi West Karachi East Karachi
24.68 24.75 22.81 23.03
58.55 57.27 59.19 58.21
41.61 41.01 41.00 40.62
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%) 9.30 8.69 8.69 8.30
South Karachi Malir Karachi Jamshoro Sujawal Shaheed Benazirabad Naushero Feroz
23.54 20.04 17.08 16.20 15.88 17.22
56.05 58.97 55.75 56.53 55.61 52.57
39.79 39.51 36.41 36.36 35.75 34.90
7.48 7.19 4.10 4.05 3.43 2.58
20.69 19.15 16.91 17.26 18.01 16.99
Badin Mitiari Sanghar Tando Allah Yar Dadu Tando Mohd Khan
15.95 13.95 13.96 16.53 12.77 13.86
52.54 54.02 53.82 50.49 54.02 51.33
34.24 33.98 33.89 33.51 33.40 32.59
1.93 1.66 1.57 1.19 1.08 0.28
17.85 17.27 16.72 17.55 16.23 17.43
Thatta Umerkot Kambar-Shahdadkot Kashmore Tharparkar SUKKUR
14.34 15.31 13.44 12.85 11.85 12.34
50.04 48.95 50.39 48.95 47.15 45.25
32.19 32.13 31.92 30.90 29.50 28.79
-0.13 -0.19 -0.40 -1.42 -2.82 -3.52
17.39 15.81 17.07 17.28 14.12 18.03
Mirpur Khas Ghotki Hyderabad Khairpur Mirs Jacobabad Larkana
12.12 18.23 12.73 18.87 14.10 11.31
45.36 38.86 44.17 36.98 40.87 43.06
28.74 28.55 28.45 27.93 27.48 27.19
-3.58 -3.77 -3.87 -4.39 -4.84 -5.13
18.94 16.27 17.99 17.15 12.43 16.58
Shikarpur
9.94
43.02
26.48
-5.84
14.40
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Standard Deviation
20.69 21.13 20.23 20.55
Notes: 1. Districts are ranked from 1 to 24 (highest to lowest) based on overall average score. 2. *represents the content strand wise highest score attained in Language of class V across districts 3. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in Language of class V across districts
In column 6 of Table 23, positive difference means district performance above provincial average score, whereas negative difference means district performance below provincial average 42
score. Figure 3 illustrates more clearly the districts’ differences from the province’s mean score. More districts have positive difference from provincial mean scores; however, only 8 districts scored 4 or more percent points higher than mean score. Figure 3Districts Class V Language Difference from Province’s overall Language average Score
12 10 8 6 4 2
-2 -4 -6 -8
Korangi Karachi West Karachi Central Karachi East Karachi South Karachi Malir Karachi Jamshoro Sujawal Shaheed Benazirabad Naushero Feroz Badin Mitiari Sanghar Tando Allah Yar Dadu Tando Mohd Khan Thatta Umerkot Kambar-Shahdadkot Kashmore Tharparkar SUKKUR Mirpur Khas Ghotki Hyderabad Khairpur Mirs Jacobabad Larkana Shikarpur
0
9.2 District Level Math Content Strand Based Results Class V Content strand based analysis of districts’ class V math scores show that most of the districts scored higher in Measurement and Information Handling compared to Algebra and Geometry; whereas, Number and Operations scores fell in the middle. Geometry was scored lowest among the content strands across the districts, which is a strong indication of less emphasis on teaching and learning of Geometry. Although districts scored relatively higher on Information Handling and Measurement, overall scores fell between 18% and 30%, which indicates significantly low achievement of all districts in class V math. Small differences between lowest performing and highest performing districts on all content strands, suggests that there was a little variation among the district scores. Moreover, standard deviation of districts ranged between 10 and 20, which suggests moderate variation of performance within districts that may be studied further to gain more insights into learning and achievement of students.
43
District
Measurement
Algebra
Geometry
Information Handling
Overall
Standard Deviation(Overall Average)
S.No
Number & Operations
Difference From Province's Overall
Table 19 District Level Math Content Strand Based Results Class V
1 2 3 4 5 6
Tharparkar
34.90
39.88
22.05
13.67
55.49
30.79
7.18
14.95
Jacobabad Naushero Feroz Umerkot Malir Karachi Sujawal West Karachi
34.00 31.18 31.36 29.73 28.92 29.74
31.48 35.44 35.79 42.00 41.70 36.20
18.29 20.73 22.50 19.51 19.86 14.90
13.91 17.82 16.88 14.52 13.68 16.53
65.44 42.58 36.07 36.39 37.28 28.16
29.45 28.27 28.18 27.10 26.59 25.77
5.84 4.66 4.57 3.48 2.98 2.16
10.54 19.00 18.31 13.83 16.42 12.82
Badin Shaheed Benazirabad Ghotki Mirpur Khas Korangi Karachi South Karachi
28.46 27.21 26.71 27.28 27.66 27.77
37.39 36.11 29.03 35.40 31.90 31.48
18.11 16.73 19.01 18.59 16.67 16.79
12.31 12.20 14.14 11.25 14.88 14.79
35.24 35.86 40.97 31.41 25.45 24.26
25.31 24.33 24.30 24.19 24.09 24.05
1.70 0.72 0.69 0.58 0.48 0.44
16.50 16.00 16.29 17.26 11.48 12.19
Mitiari Dadu Central Karachi Jamshoro East Karachi Sanghar
26.66 26.57 26.89 26.33 26.58 25.40
36.29 35.28 31.74 32.98 31.51 34.55
15.78 14.82 15.86 13.58 13.29 14.44
11.92 11.80 14.76 11.21 14.23 10.98
35.06 34.77 24.45 34.59 22.85 34.96
23.83 23.51 23.48 22.85 22.73 22.62
0.22 -0.10 -0.13 -0.76 -0.88 -0.99
15.34 15.50 11.78 13.46 10.37 14.00
Shikarpur Thatta Khairpur Mirs Tando Allah Yar Kashmore Kambar-Shahdadkot
25.04 24.27 24.02 24.49 23.16 23.10
29.37 35.68 24.42 31.03 34.19 32.22
11.99 15.16 18.43 14.06 12.38 11.18
11.48 10.64 14.81 10.89 9.26 9.73
46.13 33.77 33.38 30.55 32.77 34.11
22.20 22.13 22.08 21.50 20.69 20.43
-1.41 -1.48 -1.53 -2.11 -2.92 -3.18
12.46 14.29 20.10 12.18 13.47 13.30
Tando Mohd Khan Larkana SUKKUR Hyderabad
22.72 22.79 20.61 20.88
31.80 26.76 28.89 24.61
10.39 10.64 10.22 9.21
10.48 10.62 10.90 11.22
34.25 38.59 31.62 26.05
20.21 20.02 18.73 18.07
-3.40 -3.59 -4.88 -5.54
12.18 13.40 11.74 10.04
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Notes: 1. Districts are ranked from 1 to 24 (highest to lowest) based on overall average score. 2. *represents the content strand wise highest score attained in Math of class V across districts 3. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in Math of class V across districts
44
Looking at another indicator of distribution of districts’ scores, which shows a pattern in difference from province’s average score, four districts appear performing significantly above and four districts below the province’s average; whereas, rest of the districts fall somewhere in the middle. This pattern indicates somewhat symmetry in distribution or districts’ class V math scores. See Figure 4 for clear illustration of districts’ differences from the provinces’ mean score. Figure 4Districts Class V Math Difference from Province’s overall Math average Score
8 6 4 2
-2 -4 -6
Tharparkar Jacobabad Naushero Feroz Umerkot Malir Karachi Sujawal West Karachi Badin Shaheed Benazirabad Ghotki Mirpur Khas Korangi Karachi South Karachi Mitiari Dadu Central Karachi Jamshoro East Karachi Sanghar Shikarpur Thatta Khairpur Mirs Tando Allah Yar Kashmore Kambar-Shahdadkot Tando Mohd Khan Larkana SUKKUR Hyderabad
0
-8
9.3 District Level Science Content Strand Based Results Class V Consistent with result patterns in previous phases of SAT, districts scored higher in Earth and Space Science, and Life Science; whereas, significantly low in Physical Science. Korangi Karachi toped in Life Science; whereas Jacobabad toped in Physical Science (with very narrow difference from Tharparkar) and Earth and Space Science. Since Physical Science constitutes major part of curriculum (about 65%), overall district scores reflect its impact as average scores ranged from 19% to 27%, indicating a low achievement across the districts. Moreover, small differences between lowest performing and highest performing districts and small district based standard deviations suggest moderate variation among and between districts scores.
45
Table 20 District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class V
S. No
District
Life Science Average (%)
1 2 3 4
Jacobabad Tharparkar Korangi Karachi West Karachi
31.72 33.27 36.46 35.82
20.71 20.43 19.79 19.53
60.15 47.94 36.23 38.63
28.51 27.68 27.27 27.14
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%) 5.32 4.49 4.08 3.96
5 6 7 8 9 10
Sujawal Malir Karachi South Karachi East Karachi Central Karachi Umerkot
35.98 34.50 35.60 34.46 33.78 32.71
19.17 19.60 17.89 17.97 18.61 18.32
36.38 38.31 35.93 36.87 35.51 35.91
26.78 26.69 25.89 25.63 25.61 25.11
3.59 3.50 2.71 2.44 2.43 1.93
14.08 13.27 11.27 10.42 11.70 13.09
11 12 13 14 15 16
Jamshoro Naushero Feroz Tando Allah Yar Mirpur Khas Badin Ghotki
33.89 30.85 33.54 32.38 32.28 26.72
16.75 17.53 16.29 17.40 16.36 18.93
34.84 38.03 34.97 32.33 33.18 37.90
24.56 24.24 24.19 24.14 23.62 23.55
1.37 1.06 1.01 0.95 0.43 0.37
12.56 13.97 10.73 15.44 13.40 15.39
17 18 19 20 21 22
Tando Mohd Khan Mitiari Shikarpur Thatta Shaheed Benazirabad Sanghar
31.14 31.49 27.66 30.52 30.60 30.26
15.75 15.74 15.93 15.59 15.46 15.08
34.92 32.41 42.87 33.31 32.76 33.85
23.05 22.92 22.73 22.58 22.49 22.27
-0.13 -0.27 -0.45 -0.60 -0.70 -0.91
11.97 13.31 11.17 12.93 13.39 11.99
23 24 25 26 27 28
Dadu Kambar-Shahdadkot Kashmore Hyderabad SUKKUR Larkana
29.31 28.91 27.95 27.91 26.74 24.98
14.54 13.74 14.11 14.09 14.09 13.91
30.73 31.31 30.98 31.11 32.58 34.22
21.33 20.80 20.64 20.63 20.37 19.81
-1.85 -2.38 -2.54 -2.55 -2.82 -3.37
13.41 12.42 11.88 10.32 11.09 12.23
29
Khairpur Mirs
24.86
14.17
32.09
19.70
-3.48
14.47
Physical Science Average (%)
Earth & Space Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation (Overall Average) 10.26 12.22 11.40 12.08
Notes: 1. Districts are ranked from 1 to 24 (highest to lowest) based on overall average score. 2. *represents the content strand wise highest score attained in Science of class v across districts 3. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in Science of class v across districts
46
Looking at difference from overall province’s average (Column 6 in Table 25), six districts’ perform significantly higher; whereas, two districts performed significantly lower than province’s overall science average score, and rest are concentrated around the provincial mean. See Figure 5 for clear illustration of districts’ differences from the provinces’ mean score. Figure 5Districts Class V Science Difference from Province’s overall Science average Score
6 5 4 3 2 1
-1 -2 -3 -4
Jacobabad Tharparkar Korangi Karachi West Karachi Sujawal Malir Karachi South Karachi Central Karachi East Karachi Umerkot Jamshoro Naushero Feroz Tando Allah Yar Mirpur Khas Badin Ghotki Tando Mohd Khan Mitiari Shikarpur Thatta Shaheed Benazirabad Sanghar Dadu Kambar-Shahdadkot Kashmore Hyderabad SUKKUR Larkana Khairpur Mirs
0
10.0 District Level Content Strand Based Results Class VIII Figure 6 depicts patterns in district based overall scores in language, math, and science for class VIII. Relatively, language scores for all districts are significantly higher than math and science scores. With a few exceptions, most of the districts appear to be performing between 25% and 50% language average scores suggesting a significant variation between districts. Districts’ math and science average scores appear to be concentrated between 20% and 30%, except a few districts performing above 20% or 30%. Detailed district based comparisons and content based achievements are discussed separately in thefollowing parts.
47
Figure 6Scattered Representation of Districts’ Overall Scores Class VIII
60
50
40 Overall Language 30
Overall Math Overall Science
20
10
0 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
10.1District Level Content Strand Based Results of Language Class VIII Content strand based analysis of districts’ class VIII scores revealed a pattern of achievement similar to class V – higher scores in reading across the districts; mostly twice the writing scores. District Jamshoro was found leading in reading scores; whereas, Korangi Karachi scored highest in writing. Twenty out of 29 districts scored above 50% in reading which is encouraging; however, only six districts scored above 30% in writing and all scores of rest of the districts fell between 17% and 30% which suggests severely low achievement in writing across the districts. The difference of 30 percent points between lowest performing district and highest performing district suggests significant variation among the districts; whereas standard deviations of most of the districts falling between 15% and 20% suggest a moderate variation within districts scores. These variations need to be studied carefully in studies based on SAT data as they may lead to understanding of how some schools and students perform higher or lower within similar overall schooling conditions.
48
Table 21 District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class VIII
S.No
District
Reading Average (%)
Writing Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
1 2 3
Korangi Karachi West Karachi Central Karachi Jamshoro
53.97 53.25 53.10 61.88
41.36 36.96 36.71 26.37
47.66 45.11 44.91 44.13
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%) 10.08 7.53 7.33 6.55
South Karachi East Karachi Shaheed Benazirabad Malir Karachi Tando Allah Yar Sujawal
50.99 52.73 58.08 55.24 56.57 59.24
35.61 33.26 25.99 26.55 24.87 21.11
43.30 43.00 42.03 40.89 40.72 40.18
5.72 5.42 4.45 3.31 3.14 2.60
18.89 19.38 20.01 19.11 19.44 18.56
Badin Umerkot Mitiari Sanghar Kambar-Shahdadkot Dadu
56.41 57.75 58.60 53.49 55.17 58.09
23.73 22.08 20.57 25.13 22.91 19.50
40.07 39.91 39.58 39.31 39.04 38.80
2.49 2.33 2.00 1.73 1.46 1.22
19.37 19.08 19.87 19.67 19.14 18.32
Naushero Feroz Thatta Tharparkar SUKKUR Hyderabad Kashmore
53.02 52.60 58.58 46.23 50.17 53.79
24.54 23.84 17.70 27.39 23.25 17.66
38.78 38.22 38.14 36.81 36.71 35.72
1.20 0.64 0.56 -0.77 -0.87 -1.86
18.58 19.92 18.14 20.57 19.33 18.52
Tando Mohd Khan Larkana Jacobabad Shikarpur Ghotki Khairpur Mirs
49.02 43.27 38.93 39.26 36.78 36.84
21.44 20.03 19.45 18.97 19.73 17.42
35.23 31.65 29.19 29.11 28.25 27.13
-2.35 -5.93 -8.39 -8.47 -9.33 -10.45
17.29 16.04 11.85 12.34 17.83 18.22
Mirpur Khas
32.78
21.38
27.08
-10.50
20.23
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Standard Deviation
19.09 19.23 19.01 20.78
Notes: 1. Districts are ranked from 1 to 24 (highest to lowest) based on overall average score. 2. *represents the content strand wise highest score attained in Language of class VIII across districts 3. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in Language of class VIII across districts
49
Since districts’ differences with province’s average score tend to be more positive compared to number of negative differences, it may mean slightly positively skewed distribution of districts’ language scores. See Figure 7 for clear illustration of districts’ differences from the provinces’ mean score. However, six districts’ differencesdeviate positively 5 or more percent points from provincial average score suggesting some districts have performedmoderately higher than other districts. Figure 7Districts Class VIII Language Difference from Province’s Overall Language Average Score
15 10 5
-5 -10 -15
Korangi Karachi West Karachi Central Karachi Jamshoro South Karachi East Karachi Shaheed Benazirabad Malir Karachi Tando Allah Yar Sujawal Badin Umerkot Mitiari Sanghar Kambar-Shahdadkot Dadu Naushero Feroz Thatta Tharparkar SUKKUR Hyderabad Kashmore Tando Mohd Khan Larkana Jacobabad Shikarpur Ghotki Khairpur Mirs Mirpur Khas
0
10.2 District Level Content Strand Based Results of Math Class VIII Overall math scores of districts were found severely low as most of the districts performed below 30% average score; which suggests prevalence of similar issues that hinder student achievement across the districts. Shikarpur, Jacobabad, and Tharparkar came out as top performers in almost all content strands of Math class VIII. All districts relatively performed higher in Information Handling and Numbers and Operations; whereas, districts’ scores were found significantly low in Algebra and Geometry as most of the scores in the tow content strands fell below 20% average score. The difference of 14 percent points in overall average between lowest performing and highest performing districts suggests a moderate variation among districts; however, content strand based differences vary at different scales.
50
Standard Deviation
Difference From Province's Overall
Overall
Information Handling
Geometry
Algebra
Number & Operations
Table 22 District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class VIII
S.No
District
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Shikarpur
34.24
25.37
22.24
73.11
31.49
9.12
8.21
Jacobabad
33.08
24.75
22.07
72.35
30.69
8.33
8.21
Tharparkar
32.28
24.69
19.32
38.15
27.95
5.59
17.63
Larkana
28.86
21.77
19.49
57.12
26.57
4.20
11.53
Naushero Feroz
28.06
23.25
21.18
36.93
25.87
3.51
18.37
Tando Mohd Khan
26.19
19.15
18.14
47.81
23.88
1.51
10.64
Sujawal
27.89
20.63
14.76
37.46
23.78
1.41
14.41
Malir Karachi
25.12
22.10
18.59
36.13
23.52
1.15
12.91
Ghotki
24.73
20.22
20.24
38.24
23.38
1.01
15.88
Khairpur Mirs
23.47
20.79
19.26
30.54
22.27
-0.09
21.78
Umerkot
25.89
19.00
14.79
30.53
22.07
-0.29
13.01
Shaheed Benazirabad
24.40
18.75
16.75
32.54
21.81
-0.55
12.74
Mitiari
24.74
17.75
15.75
33.37
21.58
-0.79
13.89
Badin
24.45
18.55
15.90
31.03
21.53
-0.84
12.40
Central Karachi
22.75
17.58
19.67
31.81
21.35
-1.02
9.76
South Karachi
22.44
17.61
19.25
34.25
21.23
-1.14
10.18
Korangi Karachi
22.73
17.53
18.82
33.66
21.23
-1.14
9.22
East Karachi
22.60
17.63
18.69
31.99
21.07
-1.29
9.48
Tando Allah Yar
23.39
18.55
16.18
30.94
21.06
-1.31
12.14
West Karachi
21.67
18.48
18.84
35.21
20.99
-1.37
9.32
Kashmore
23.13
17.44
14.89
29.80
20.33
-2.04
11.89
Thatta
22.40
18.47
15.36
30.14
20.32
-2.05
11.84
Sanghar
22.16
17.66
16.31
30.55
20.25
-2.12
11.35
Dadu
22.67
15.34
12.67
25.03
18.89
-3.48
11.25
Kambar-Shahdadkot
21.74
16.90
12.15
28.02
18.81
-3.56
10.53
Hyderabad
19.98
15.27
16.98
27.84
18.64
-3.73
8.83
SUKKUR
18.24
15.72
18.94
30.03
18.42
-3.95
7.37
Jamshoro
21.03
14.55
14.34
27.95
18.41
-3.95
9.41
Mirpur Khas
18.79
17.33
13.16
22.20
17.37
-5.00
13.64
Notes: 1. Districts are ranked from 1 to 24 (highest to lowest) based on overall average score. 2. *represents the content strand wise highest score attained in Language of class v across districts 3. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in Language of class v across districts
51
Pattern of districts’ differences from province’s overall math average show a few districts’ (Shikarpur, Jacobabad, and Tharparkar) significantly positive difference from province’s mean score. See Figure 8 for pattern of districts’ differences from the province’s mean score. Because of a few districts’ quite higher positive differences, majority of districts have a negative difference from provincial mean score. Figure 8Districts Class VIII math Difference from Province’s overall math average Score
10 8 6 4 2
Mirpur Khas
Jamshoro
SUKKUR
Hyderabad
Kambar-Shahdadkot
Dadu
Thatta
Sanghar
Kashmore
West Karachi
East Karachi
Tando Allah Yar
South Karachi
Korangi Karachi
Badin
Central Karachi
Mitiari
Umerkot
Khairpur Mirs
Ghotki
Malir Karachi
Sujawal
Shaheed Benazirabad
-6
Tando Mohd Khan
-4
Naushero Feroz
Larkana
Tharparkar
Shikarpur
-2
Jacobabad
0
10.3 District Level Content Strand Based Results of Science Class VIII With narrow differences from Jacobabad and Sujawal, Shikarpur scored highest in Life Science and Earth and Space Science; whereas, Korangi Karachi scored highest in Physical Science. Nonetheless, most of the districts’ overall scores as well as content strand based scores were found significantly low. Table 27 shows details of district based scores. Looking at variation indicators of districts, there are small differences between highest performing and lowest performing districts on content strand based average scores as well as overall average scores, which suggests moderate variation among districts’ performance. Standard deviations of districts also range between 9 and 20 suggesting moderate to significant variation within a district’s scores. 52
Table 23 District level content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class VIII
Physical Science Average (%)
Earth & Space Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From Province's Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation
S.No
District
Life Science Average (%)
1
Shikarpur
31.46
27.25
34.76
30.22
5.36
8.20
2
Jacobabad
30.98
27.06
34.07
29.83
4.96
8.33
3
Sujawal
30.21
29.09
23.14
28.29
3.43
13.42
4
Tharparkar
28.72
29.51
23.23
27.98
3.11
14.22
5
Korangi Karachi
24.35
29.10
27.46
27.11
2.24
9.87
6
Larkana
28.16
24.81
28.52
26.73
1.86
10.70
7
West Karachi
25.15
28.18
25.33
26.55
1.68
10.05
8
Central Karachi
24.01
28.47
25.95
26.40
1.54
9.78
9
Tando Allah Yar
27.12
26.90
22.46
26.09
1.22
11.74
10
South Karachi
24.00
27.62
25.47
25.93
1.06
8.95
11
Umerkot
26.69
26.89
20.36
25.51
0.64
11.67
12
Naushero Feroz
26.43
25.29
24.31
25.49
0.63
13.02
13
Malir Karachi
25.78
26.41
22.86
25.48
0.61
10.99
14
Tando Mohd Khan
27.12
24.81
24.03
25.46
0.60
10.04
15
East Karachi
23.40
27.54
23.88
25.36
0.49
9.37
16
Badin
25.86
26.72
21.13
25.30
0.43
11.42
17
Mitiari
25.95
25.26
20.31
24.51
-0.36
11.92
18
Shaheed Benazirabad
24.84
25.27
20.22
24.11
-0.76
11.44
19
Ghotki
23.65
23.77
25.49
24.07
-0.80
15.95
20
Kambar-Shahdadkot
25.66
24.39
19.88
23.93
-0.93
11.90
21
Jamshoro
25.86
24.21
19.84
23.91
-0.95
10.97
22
Dadu
25.09
24.26
20.74
23.85
-1.02
11.68
23
Sanghar
23.68
24.26
19.49
23.11
-1.76
10.77
24
SUKKUR
21.51
25.60
19.78
23.01
-1.86
7.69
25
Thatta
24.26
22.68
18.29
22.36
-2.51
10.52
26
Hyderabad
21.66
23.88
18.57
22.04
-2.83
8.64
27
Kashmore
22.68
23.02
18.22
21.94
-2.92
10.86
28
Mirpur Khas
19.68
24.69
16.40
21.28
-3.59
16.42
29
Khairpur Mirs
21.94
19.13
21.13
20.52
-4.35
15.77
Notes: 1. Districts are ranked from 1 to 24 (highest to lowest) based on overall average score. 2. *represents the content strand wise highest score attained in Science of class VIII across districts 3. † represents the content strand wise lowest score attained in Science of class VIIIacross districts
53
Districts’ difference from province’s overall science average show that four districts’ differences significantly positive and about same number of districts’ differences significantly negative from provincial mean score.Rest of the differences is close to the province’s average score, which indicatesthat majority of districts’ scores are concentrated around the mean of districts’ scores. See Figure 9 for pattern of districts’ differences from the provinces’ mean score. Figure 9Districts Class VIII Science Difference from Province’s overall Science average Score
5 4 3 2 1
Khairpur Mirs
Mirpur Khas
Hyderabad
Thatta
Kashmore
SUKKUR
Sanghar
Ghotki
Dadu
Shaheed Benazirabad
Kambar-Shahdadkot
Jamshoro
Mitiari
East Karachi
Tando Mohd Khan
Malir Karachi
Badin
South Karachi
Umerkot
Central Karachi
West Karachi
Tando Allah Yar
Larkana
Tharparkar
Sujawal
Naushero Feroz
-3
Korangi Karachi
-2
Jacobabad
-1
Shikarpur
0
-4 -5
11.0 Gender based analysis of results Province level gender based analysis of overall results for class V and class VIII indicate girls significantlyahead of boys in language with 4.6 percent points difference in class V and 8 percent points difference in class VIII. Statistical significance of the variance in two groups’ (mean scores) in language achievement is not tested; therefore, it should be kept in view while interpreting the results. See Table 29 and Table 30 for details. Although province level average scores for science appear to be very slightly different for girls and boys, it may not be considered a difference in performance as scores are extremely close. The overall scores of boys and girls in SAT IV test show that girls performed slightly higher than boys, as evident from girls’ positive difference from province’s overall average in both classes. Girls’ high performance in overall 54
scores could be an effect of girls’ higher mean scores in language. Standard deviation value for girls and boys are also very close which indicates a similar overall variation for both groups. Table 24 Provincial level gender based analysis of students’ scores in class V
S. No
Gender
1
Female
2
Male
Note:
Language Average (%) 35.22* 30.75
Math Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
23.54* 22.99
23.00 23.94*
27.26* 25.89
Difference from Province Overall Average (%) 0.88 -0.48
Standard Deviation
12.67 12.63
1. *represents the subject wise highest score attained in class V across gender
Table 30Provincial level gender based analysis of students’ scores in class VIII
S. No
Gender
1
Female
2
Male
Note:
42.35*
21.86*
25.91*
30.04*
Difference from Province Overall Average (%) 1.77
34.49
22.69
24.19
27.13
-1.14
Language Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation
11.37 11.88
1. *represents the subject wise highest score attained in class VIII across gender
12.0 Location based analysis of results Analysis of results based on rural and urban locations shows no significant difference between performances of students in these two localities at class V level as difference between location based content strand based averages is not significant. Table 31 and Table 32 provide details of location based analysis of results. There seems to be a significant difference between rural and urban students at class VIII level language achievement, as urban students group scored 5 percent points, on average, higher than rural students group.
55
Almost same results for both locations indicate that in general conditions of schooling and student background may be closely similar for two population groups in the schools targeted in SAT IV assessment. Table 25 Provincial level location based analysis of students’ scores in class V
S. No
Location
Language Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference from Province Overall Average (%)
Standard Deviation
1
Rural
32.10
23.54
23.05
26.23
-0.13
12.68
2
Urban
32.87*
23.76*
23.48*
26.71
0.35
12.55
Standard Deviation
Note:
1. *represents the subject wise highest score attained in class V across location
Table 26 Provincial level location based analysis of students’ scores in class VIII
S. No
Note:
Location
Language Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference from Province Overall Average (%)
1
Rural
35.53
22.67*
23.11
27.10
-0.65
12.37
2
Urban
40.46*
22.03
23.69*
28.73
0.98
10.44
1. *represents the subject wise highest score attained in class VIII across location
56
13.0 SEF Schools District Based Results Grade V students of Sindh Education Foundation (SEF) schools of nine districts appeared in SAT IV test. SEF school districts show pattern of achievement similar to main district as SEF school districts scored higher in language and significantly low in math and science. 13.1 SEF School Districts’ Content Strand Based Results Language Class V SEF schools of district Thatta performed significantly higher on reading comprehension, writing, and overall language scores compared to SEF schools in other nine districts. Table 33 provides content strand based analysis of SEF schools in nine districts. Following general performance trends in districts of the province, SEF schools across the districts performed higher in reading comprehension and significantly lower in writing skills. Table 27 SEF schools’ district wise content strand based analysis of students’ scores in language of class V
S No
District
Writing Average (%)
Reading Average (%)
Overall Language Average (%)
Difference with Main District Average (%)
Difference with Province Average (%)
1
Badin
3.40
30.97
17.18
-17.06
-15.14
2
Dadu
14.51
54.63
34.57
1.17
2.25
3
Jacobabad
17.50
40.00
28.75
1.27
-3.57
4
Kambar-Shahdadkot
12.30
44.62
28.46
-3.46
-3.86
5
Khairpur Mirs
5.26
40.81
23.03
-4.89
-9.28
6
Larkana
0.00
20.00†
10.00†
-17.19
-22.32
7
Mirpur Khas
0.00†
25.00
12.50
-16.24
-19.82
8
Sanghar
12.33
51.03
31.68
-2.21
-0.64
9
Shaheed Benazirabad
4.99
46.14
25.56
-10.18
-6.76
10
Tharparkar
6.54
50.83
28.69
-0.81
-3.63
11
Thatta
18.45*
56.11*
37.28*
5.09
4.96
12
Umerkot
6.44
39.52
22.98
-9.15
-9.34
Notes: 1. *represents the subject content wise highest score attained in class V across SEF school 2.†represents the subject content wise lowest score attained in class V across SEF schools
57
Severity of SEF schools’ low performance in writing is visible by the fact that four districts scored below 5% average score and five scored between 12% and 15% average score. Looking at overall performance in language, SEF schools appeared performing slightly lower than other school types targeted in SAT IV assessment as seven out of nine SEF schools’ districts have negative difference with respective district’s overall average score and province’s average score. 13.2 SEF School Districts’ Content Strand Based Results Math Class V SEF district Jacobabad took the lead in number & operations, measurement and information handling; whereas Shaheed Benazirabadscored higher in geometry. Larkana and Shaheed Benazirabad performed lowest in math among SEF districts. See Table 34 for details.
Difference with Province Average (%)
Difference with Main District Average (%)
Overall Math Average (%)
Information Handling Average (%)
Geometry Average (%)
Alegbra Average (%)
District
Measurement Average (%)
S No
Number &Operation Average (%)
Table 28 SEF schools’ district wise content strand based analysis of students’ scores in math of class V
1
Badin
19.87
26.61
10.22
9.68
29.03
17.77
-7.54
-5.84
2
Dadu
28.16
39.21
15.90
10.08
30.00
24.36
0.85
0.75
3
Jacobabad
59.52*
50.00*
50.00*
42.86*
100.00*
56.25*
26.80
32.64
4
Kambar-Shahdadkot
27.72
37.81
14.28
10.47
32.25
23.92
3.49
0.31
5
Khairpur Mirs
24.73
29.96
12.16
10.70
28.51
21.10
-0.97
-2.51
6
Larkana
15.75
25.00
5.13
10.99
26.92
14.81
-5.22
-8.80
-6.69
-6.11
†
25.00
0.00
†
14.29
100.00*
17.50
†
7
Mirpur Khas
14.29
8
Sanghar
23.22
25.74
13.24
6.30†
19.12†
18.81
-3.82
-4.80
9
Shaheed Benazirabad
30.92
36.36
13.64
15.44
35.23
26.38
2.05
2.77
10
Tharparkar
34.92
45.83
23.61
7.14
50.00
30.21
-0.58
6.60
11
Thatta
25.84
40.74
18.67
11.38
34.26
24.14
2.01
0.53
12
Umerkot
21.70
22.12†
12.74
14.15
24.04
19.19
-8.98
-4.42
Notes: 1. *represents the subject content wise highest score attained in Math of class V across SEF school 2.† represents the subject content wise lowest score attained in Math of class V across SEF school
58
Similar to trends for main districts, SEF districts performed higher in measurement and information handling; however, scores for a couple of SEF districts are significantly higher than main districts. Only three SEF districts performed higher than their comparable main districts’ overall averages and same number of SEF districts performed higher than province’s overall average score suggesting slightly lower overall performance of SEF districts in math class V.
13.3 SEF School Districts’ Content Strand Based Results Science Class V Similar to performance trend in all districts, SEF school districts also performed relatively higher in Earth and Space Science, followed by life science and lowest in physical science. Sanghar topped in life science followed by Tharparkar in earth & space, and Shaheed Benazirabad in physical science; whereas Dadu scored lowest in almost all content strands. SEF districts modestly varied in overall scores as indicated by difference of about eleven percent points between relatively high-performing and low-performing SEF districts. Overall, SEF school districts appeared to be performing slightly lower than main districts as indicated by negative difference of seven out of nine SEF districts’ scores with relevant main districts. Approximately same is indicated by analysis of SEF districts’ difference with province’s overall averages. See Table 35 for details.
59
Difference with Province Average (%)
Difference with District Average (%)
Overall Science Average (%)
Earth & Space Science Average (%)
District
Physical Science Average (%)
S No
Life Sciences Average (%)
Table 29 SEF schools’ district wise content strand based analysis of students’ scores in science of class V
1
Badin
22.58
12.46
26.61†
17.42
-6.20
-5.76
2
Dadu
27.14
13.11
30.00
19.71
-1.62
-3.47
3
Jacobabad
46.43*
34.09*
75.00*
42.50*
13.99
19.32
4
Kambar-Shahdadkot
27.09
14.42
33.16
20.73
-0.07
-2.45
5
Khairpur Mirs
24.97
13.14
28.51
18.82
-0.89
-4.37
6
Larkana
16.48†
10.14†
26.92
14.04†
-5.77
-9.15
7
Mirpur Khas
28.57
13.64
0.00
17.50
-6.64
-5.68
8
Sanghar
34.87
16.04
39.71
25.00
2.73
1.82
9
Shaheed Benazirabad
25.08
14.93
28.13
19.80
-2.69
-3.38
10
Tharparkar
22.62
15.15
45.83
20.83
-6.84
-2.35
11
Thatta
29.63
16.58
31.48
22.64
0.05
-0.55
12
Umerkot
24.52
13.99
31.49
19.42
-5.69
-3.76
Notes: 1.*represents the subject content wise highest score attained in Science of class V across SEF school 2.†represents the subject content wise lowest score attained in Science of class V across SEF school
60
SECTION THREE: COMPARATIVE RESULTS
61
14.0COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RESULTS This section presents different comparative analysis. Province level analysis based on comparison between class V and class VIII is provided based on performance in different content strands and separate for each subject. Since assessment framework for both grades was same in the three subjects, comparative analysis of content strand based scores (and overall scores) illustrates an overall comparative performance of the two classes. Further comparative analysis comprises of district-based inter-subject comparison of student scores, district-based comparison of four performance levels ranging from low to exceptional levels, and comparative analysis of SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and SAT IV results. The comparative analysis identify several areas for further investigation, research and research based reform initiatives. 14.1 Province level language content strand based comparison between class V and class VIII scores Content strand based comparison between class V and class VIII performance (in terms of scores) provides each district’s scores in both grades as well as positive or negative differences based on how higher or lower class VIII performed in comparison to class V. Hence, positive difference means class VIII’s higher score in percent points; whereas, negative difference means class VIII’s lower score in comparison to corresponding class V scores. As provided in Table 36, content strand based comparative analysis of language indicates that class VIII performed slightly higher in reading comprehension with positive difference in 16 districts (out of 29) and significantly higher in writing with positive difference in 28 districts (out of 29) districts. Class VIII’s positive differences in reading comprehension ranged from 0.21 to 11.43 percent points with 12 districts’ differences, ranging from 2.0 to 11.43 percent points and three districts performing significantly low with differences ranging from 0.21 to 0.98. Districts’ differences in writing scores ranged from 1.49 to 16.64 percent points suggesting all districts’ performance was significantly higher in class VIII writing except one district where the difference is in negative. The reason for higher performance in writing by class VIII is possibly because of relative higher emphasis on writing in class VIII curriculum, instructions and paper pencil/written examinations.
62
Table 30 Provincial District-wise Results vis a vis Language Content Strand of Class V and VIII
Reading Comprehension S.No.
District
Writing Comprehension
V
VIII
Class VIII’s Difference to V
V
VIII
Class VIII’s Difference to V
1 Badin
52.54
56.41
3.87
15.95
23.73
7.78
2 Central Karachi
57.27
53.1
-4.17
24.75
36.71
11.96
3 Dadu
54.02
58.09
4.08
12.77
19.5
6.73
4 East Karachi
58.21
52.73
-5.47
23.03
33.26
10.23
5 Ghotki
38.86
36.78
-2.08
18.23
19.73
1.49
6 Hyderabad
44.17
50.17
6
12.73
23.25
10.52
7 Jacobabad
40.87
38.93
-1.94
14.1
19.45
5.35
8 Jamshoro
55.75
61.88
6.13
17.08
26.37
9.3
9 Kambar-Shahdadkot
50.39
55.17
4.78
13.44
22.91
9.47
10 Kashmore
48.95
53.79
4.84
12.85
17.66
4.81
11 Khairpur Mirs
36.98
36.84
-0.14
18.87
17.42
-1.46
12 Korangi Karachi
58.55
53.97
-4.59
24.68
41.36
16.69
13 Larkana
43.06
43.27
0.21
11.31
20.03
8.72
14 Malir Karachi
58.97
55.24
-3.74
20.04
26.55
6.51
15 Mirpur Khas
45.36
32.78
-12.58
12.12
21.38
9.26
16 Mitiari
54.02
58.6
4.58
13.95
20.57
6.62
17 Naushero Feroz
52.57
53.02
0.44
17.22
24.54
7.32
18 Sanghar
53.82
53.49
-0.33
13.96
25.13
11.17
19 Shaheed Benazirabad 55.61
58.08
2.47
15.88
25.99
10.11
20 Shikarpur
43.02
39.26
-3.75
9.94
18.97
9.03
21 South Karachi
56.05
50.99
-5.06
23.54
35.61
12.07
22 Sujawal
56.53
59.24
2.71
16.2
21.11
4.91
23 SUKKUR
45.25
46.23
0.98
12.34
27.39
15.05
24 Tando Allah Yar
50.49
56.57
6.08
16.53
24.87
8.34
25 Tando Mohd Khan
51.33
49.02
-2.31
13.86
21.44
7.58
26 Tharparkar
47.15
58.58
11.43
11.85
17.7
5.85
27 Thatta
50.04
52.6
2.56
14.34
23.84
9.51
28 Umerkot
48.95
57.75
8.8
15.31
22.08
6.76
29 West Karachi
59.19
53.25
-5.94
22.81
36.96
14.15
Although differences in districts’ performance in writing are significantly higher for class VIII, overall performance in writing is significantly low for all districts in both classes. This may mean that, across the classes, there is higher emphasis on reading in grade level curricula, teaching, 63
and assessments that need to be further studied systematically. Another important aspect revealed in the comparative analysis is the significantly high-performing districts in class V writing have also scored quite higher in class VIII writing that also requires further systematic investigation. 14.2 Province level math content strand based comparison class V and class VIII The Table 37 presents comparison of math scores in “number and operations” and “algebra” as well as percent point differences between class V and class VIII district scores. Overall districts appeared to be performing low in number and operations in class VIII with only 3 positive differences compared to corresponding scores in class V. Positive differences ranged from 3.48 to 9.20 percent points whereas most of the negative differences ranged from - 0.03 to – 8.48 percent points indicating most of the districts performing higher or lower with narrow margin except four districts in which the negative differences ranged from -5 to -8. While districts overall appeared to be performing extremely low in number and operations in class VIII, the overall scores of all districts for both grades ranged from 20% -35% with variation of few points higher or lower. Differences between districts’ positive scores in class VIII and class V algebra are 0.53to13.38 percent points, which means class VIII performed significantly higher. While interpreting these differences, curriculum of grades must be taken into account. Class V curriculum have very limited contents in algebra, that have been introduced very recently compared to class VIII that has many concepts. So very recent introduction of algebra at class V could be a reason for lower performance in class V.
64
Table 31 Provincial District wise results vis a vis Mathematics Content Strands of Class V & VIII
S No.
District
Number & Operations
V
VIII
Class VIII’s Difference to V
Class VIII’s Difference to V
Algebra
V
VIII
1
Badin
28.46
24.45
-4.01
18.11
18.55
0.45
2
Central Karachi
26.89
22.75
-4.14
15.86
17.58
1.72
3
Dadu
26.57
22.67
-3.9
14.82
15.34
0.53
4
East Karachi
26.58
22.6
-3.97
13.29
17.63
4.34
5
Ghotki
26.71
24.73
-1.98
19.01
20.22
1.21
6
Hyderabad
20.88
19.98
-0.91
9.21
15.27
6.05
7
Jacobabad
34
33.08
-0.92
18.29
24.75
6.46
8
Jamshoro
26.33
21.03
-5.3
13.58
14.55
0.97
9
Kambar-Shahdadkot
23.1
21.74
-1.36
11.18
16.9
5.72
10
Kashmore
23.16
23.13
-0.03
12.38
17.44
5.05
11
Khairpur Mirs
24.02
23.47
-0.55
18.43
20.79
2.36
12
Korangi Karachi
27.66
22.73
-4.93
16.67
17.53
0.85
13
Larkana
22.79
28.86
6.08
10.64
21.77
11.13
14
Malir Karachi
29.73
25.12
-4.61
19.51
22.1
2.59
15
Mirpur Khas
27.28
18.79
-8.48
18.59
17.33
-1.26
16
Mitiari
26.66
24.74
-1.91
15.78
17.75
1.96
17
Naushero Feroz
31.18
28.06
-3.12
20.73
23.25
2.52
18
Sanghar
25.4
22.16
-3.24
14.44
17.66
3.22
19
Shaheed Benazirabad
27.21
24.4
-2.82
16.73
18.75
2.02
20
Shikarpur
25.04
34.24
9.2
11.99
25.37
13.38
21
South Karachi
27.77
22.44
-5.33
16.79
17.61
0.82
22
Sujawal
28.92
27.89
-1.03
19.86
20.63
0.76
23
SUKKUR
20.61
18.24
-2.37
10.22
15.72
5.5
24
Tando Allah Yar
24.49
23.39
-1.1
14.06
18.55
4.49
25
Tando Mohd Khan
22.72
26.19
3.47
10.39
19.15
8.76
26
Tharparkar
34.9
32.28
-2.62
22.05
24.69
2.64
27
Thatta
24.27
22.4
-1.87
15.16
18.47
3.31
28
Umerkot
31.36
25.89
-5.47
22.5
19
-3.5
29.74
21.67
-8.07
14.9
18.48
3.58
29 West Karachi
65
Table 32 Provincial District-wise Results vis a vis Mathematics Content Strands of Class V & VIII
S No.
Geometry
District V
VIII
Class VIII’s Information Handing Class VIII’s Difference to Difference to V V V VIII
1
Badin
12.31
15.9
3.59
35.24
31.03
-4.21
2
Central Karachi
14.76
19.67
4.91
24.45
31.81
7.36
3
Dadu
11.8
12.67
0.87
34.77
25.03
-9.75
4
East Karachi
14.23
18.69
4.46
22.85
31.99
9.14
5
Ghotki
14.14
20.24
6.1
40.97
38.24
-2.73
6
Hyderabad
11.22
16.98
5.76
26.05
27.84
1.79
7
Jacobabad
13.91
22.07
8.16
65.44
72.35
6.91
8
Jamshoro
11.21
14.34
3.14
34.59
27.95
-6.64
9
Kambar-Shahdadkot
9.73
12.15
2.42
34.11
28.02
-6.09
10
Kashmore
9.26
14.89
5.63
32.77
29.8
-2.96
11
Khairpur Mirs
14.81
19.26
4.45
33.38
30.54
-2.85
12
Korangi Karachi
14.88
18.82
3.94
25.45
33.66
8.21
13
Larkana
10.62
19.49
8.87
38.59
57.12
18.52
14
Malir Karachi
14.52
18.59
4.06
36.39
36.13
-0.26
15
Mirpur Khas
11.25
13.16
1.91
31.41
22.2
-9.2
16
Mitiari
11.92
15.75
3.83
35.06
33.37
-1.69
17
Naushero Feroz
17.82
21.18
3.36
42.58
36.93
-5.65
18
Sanghar
10.98
16.31
5.33
34.96
30.55
-4.41
19
Shaheed Benazirabad
12.2
16.75
4.55
35.86
32.54
-3.32
20
Shikarpur
11.48
22.24
10.76
46.13
73.11
26.98
21
South Karachi
14.79
19.25
4.46
24.26
34.25
9.98
22
Sujawal
13.68
14.76
1.08
37.28
37.46
0.18
23
SUKKUR
10.9
18.94
8.04
31.62
30.03
-1.59
24
Tando Allah Yar
10.89
16.18
5.28
30.55
30.94
0.39
25
Tando Mohd Khan
10.48
18.14
7.66
34.25
47.81
13.55
26
Tharparkar
13.67
19.32
5.64
55.49
38.15
-17.35
27
Thatta
10.64
15.36
4.72
33.77
30.14
-3.62
28
Umerkot
16.88
14.79
-2.09
36.07
30.53
-5.54
29
West Karachi
16.53
18.84
2.31
28.16
35.21
7.05
The content strand based differences in geometry in class V compared to class VIII indicates significantly better performance at class VIII with positive percent point in 28 districts out of 29 66
districts. The positive differences ranged from 0.87 to 10.76 percent point. The positive difference could be due to relatively better performance of all districts in geometry in class VIII in comparison with class V. Another reason could be sequence of grade level math curriculum (and math textbooks) in which geometry is usually one of the last couple of units, which increases the probability of no coverage for geometry in teaching of math in a given academic year. Nonetheless, reasons for differences need to be studied systematically. Contrary to algebra and geometry, the table above shows that class VIII performed extremely low in information handling with negative differences ranging from -0.21 to -17.34 percent pointsin 17 districts out of 29 districts. It seems, differences were high partially because performance for this content strand in class VIII was quite low possibly an effect of placing information handling as the last unit in class VIII curriculum that increases the chance of noncoverage of this unit in the teaching of math. The low scores and differences may also be due to gaps in teachers’ capacity, teachers’ content knowledge, and teachers’ teaching methodology, the representation of the content in the textbooks and the shortage of mathematics teachers in the system. Nonetheless, these all assumptions offered to explain differences need to be studied systematically in order to inform future reforms in math. 14.3 Province level science content strand based comparison between class V and class VIII Comparative analysis between two grades revealed that class VIII students performed slightly higher in physical science and moderately lower in life science, whereas class V students performed significantly higher in earth & space science. See Table 38 for details. There are 29 positive differences in physical science that means 29 districts performed comparatively higher in class VIII. The positive differences are significantly high as they ranged from 4.84 to 11.6 percent points. These are comparisons based on overall mean scores of classes, thus curriculum differences and the recent changes in curriculum should be considered while interpreting these differences. In life sciences 2 out of 29 differences are positive. As 27 differences in life science are negative and these ranged from – 0.74 to -12.70 with 20 districts’ differences higher than 5 percent points, it may suggest that class V students performed significantly higher in life science.
67
S No.
District
V
VIII
Life Science
V
VIII
Difference from Class VIII to V
VIII
Physical Science
Difference from Class VIII to V
V
Difference from Class VIII to V
Table 33 Provincial District-wise Results vis a vis Science Contents of Class V & VIII
Earth & Space Science
1
Badin
16.36
26.72
10.36
32.28
25.86
-6.43
33.18
21.13
-12.05
2
Central Karachi
18.61
28.47
9.86
33.78
24.01
-9.78
35.51
25.95
-9.56
3
Dadu
14.54
24.26
9.71
29.31
25.09
-4.22
30.73
20.74
-9.99
4
East Karachi
17.97
27.54
9.58
34.46
23.4
-11.06
36.87
23.88
-12.99
5
Ghotki
18.93
23.77
4.84
26.72
23.65
-3.07
37.9
25.49
-12.41
6
Hyderabad
14.09
23.88
9.78
27.91
21.66
-6.25
31.11
18.57
-12.54
7
Jacobabad
20.71
27.06
6.34
31.72
30.98
-0.74
60.15
34.07
-26.09
8
Jamshoro
16.75
24.21
7.46
33.89
25.86
-8.03
34.84
19.84
-15
9
Kambar-Shahdadkot
13.74
24.39
10.66
28.91
25.66
-3.25
31.31
19.88
-11.43
10
Kashmore
14.11
23.02
8.91
27.95
22.68
-5.27
30.98
18.22
-12.76
11
Khairpur Mirs
14.17
19.13
4.96
24.86
21.94
-2.92
32.09
21.13
-10.96
12
Korangi Karachi
19.79
29.1
9.32
36.46
24.35
-12.11
36.23
27.46
-8.76
13
Larkana
13.91
24.81
10.91
24.98
28.16
3.18
34.22
28.52
-5.7
14
Malir Karachi
19.6
26.41
6.8
34.5
25.78
-8.72
38.31
22.86
-15.45
15
Mirpur Khas
17.4
24.69
7.29
32.38
19.68
-12.7
32.33
16.4
-15.92
16
Mitiari
15.74
25.26
9.52
31.49
25.95
-5.54
32.41
20.31
-12.1
17
Naushero Feroz
17.53
25.29
7.76
30.85
26.43
-4.43
38.03
24.31
-13.72
18
Sanghar
15.08
24.26
9.18
30.26
23.68
-6.57
33.85
19.49
-14.36
19
Shaheed Benazirabad 15.46
25.27
9.81
30.6
24.84
-5.76
32.76
20.22
-12.53
20
Shikarpur
15.93
27.25
11.32
27.66
31.46
3.8
42.87
34.76
-8.11
21
South Karachi
17.89
27.62
9.73
35.6
24
-11.6
35.93
25.47
-10.46
22
Sujawal
19.17
29.09
9.92
35.98
30.21
-5.76
36.38
23.14
-13.24
23
SUKKUR
14.09
25.6
11.51
26.74
21.51
-5.23
32.58
19.78
-12.79
24
Tando Allah Yar
16.29
26.9
10.61
33.54
27.12
-6.42
34.97
22.46
-12.51
25
Tando Mohd Khan
15.75
24.81
9.06
31.14
27.12
-4.01
34.92
24.03
-10.89
26
Tharparkar
20.43
29.51
9.08
33.27
28.72
-4.56
47.94
23.23
-24.7
27
Thatta
15.59
22.68
7.1
30.52
24.26
-6.26
33.31
18.29
-15.02
28
Umerkot
18.32
26.89
8.57
32.71
26.69
-6.02
35.91
20.36
-15.55
29
West Karachi
19.53
28.18
8.65
35.82
25.15
-10.67
38.63
25.33
-13.3
68
Another important aspect is that some low-performing districts in class VIII life science such as East Karachi, Central Karachi, Korangi Karachi, Malir Karachi, South Karachi, West Karachi and Jamshoro performed reasonably higher in class VIII Physical sciences test. District based comparison for earth & space science shows that all districts performed significantly higher in class V as all of the differences are negative ranging from -5.70 to-26.09 with 5 districts’ differences less than 10 percent points. Nature of curriculum and learning material could affect the scores, as earth & space portion is quite small in curriculum for both classes and relatively even smaller for class V, the differences should be interpreted cautiously. Although it is hard to establish reasons behind the differences, as it was not mandate of this study, comparison of scores for two classes showed clearly that all districts scored higher in class V which suggests further investigation of reasons behind this pattern of difference.
15.0 District-based Inter-subject Comparisons Districts were ranked based on their overall score in each subject. Super script number on each score indicates a district’s ranking in the subject area, as shown in Table 40. Some overall patterns are visible in district based inter-subject comparison of performance. Most of the districts emerged following this order in their subject based average scores: highest score in language, followed by score in math, and lowest score in science. This pattern indicates consistency of performance and scoring in different subject based tests. However, some variation in math and science score was also observed. In some districts the science scores are observed to be higher than math score. Also there seems to be a pattern in the ranks obtained in Language and Sciences as ranks in most districts vary from 1st to 5th in the two subjects. For example, Korangi Karachi ranked 1st in language is ranked 3rd in Sciences, similarly Sukkur ranked 22nd in Language and 27th in Sciences. In some districts math and science scores are quite close; however, language scores deviate significantly. For example Tharparkar that scored 1st in Math and 2nd in Sciences but deviates in languages as it is ranked 21st in Languages. Based on the overall averages most of the districts in Karachi are ranked amongst the top 5 districts in class V.
69
Table 40District Wise inter subject Comparison of Students of Class V
S. No
District
Language Average (%)
Math Average Science Average (%) (%)
Overall Average (%)
1
West Karachi
41
25.77
27.14
31.3
2
Malir Karachi
39.51
27.1
26.69
31.1
3
Korangi Karachi
41.61
24.09
27.27
30.99
4
Central Karachi
41.01
23.48
25.61
30.03
5
South Karachi
39.79
24.05
25.89
29.91
6
Sujawal
36.36
26.59
26.78
29.91
7
East Karachi
40.62
22.73
25.63
29.66
8
Tharparkar
29.5
30.79
27.68
29.32
9
Naushero Feroz
34.9
28.27
24.24
29.14
10
Jacobabad
27.48
29.45
28.51
28.48
11
Umerkot
32.13
28.18
25.11
28.47
12
Jamshoro
36.41
22.85
24.56
27.94
13
Badin
34.24
25.31
23.62
27.72
14
Shaheed Benazirabad
35.75
24.33
22.49
27.52
15
Mitiari
33.98
23.83
22.92
26.91
16
Tando Allah Yar
33.51
21.5
24.19
26.4
17
Sanghar
33.89
22.62
22.27
26.26
18
Dadu
33.4
23.51
21.33
26.08
19
Mirpur Khas
28.74
24.19
24.14
25.69
20
Thatta
32.19
22.13
22.58
25.63
21
Ghotki
28.55
24.3
23.55
25.47
22
Tando Mohd Khan
32.59
20.21
23.05
25.29
23
Kambar-Shahdadkot
31.92
20.43
20.8
24.38
24
Kashmore
30.9
20.69
20.64
24.08
25
Shikarpur
26.48
22.2
22.73
23.8
26
Khairpur Mirs
27.93
22.08
19.7
23.24
27
SUKKUR
28.79
18.73
20.37
22.63
28
Hyderabad
28.45
18.07
20.63
22.38
29 Larkana 27.19 20.02 19.81 Note: Districts are ranked from 1 to 29 (Highest to Lowest) based on overall average score.
22.34
Language still remains to be the subject where most districts did their best, while performing the lowest in Math. This trend is however not consistent in Shikarpur and Jacobabad. In Shikarpur it can be especially noted that though the district performed well in Math and Science, it has performed severely low in Language. Jacobabad on the other hand has had a very little difference in averages of all three subjects, though it ranks highly in Math and Sciences and poorly in Language. It can also be noted overall that districts which rank high in Math and science usually 70
deviate in their Language ranking; this seems to be true for Larkana, Shikarpur and Tharparkar along with a few others. Table 34 District-wise Inter-subject Comparison of Students of Class VIII
S. No
District
Language Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Science Average Overall Average (%) (%)
1
Korangi Karachi
47.66
21.23
27.11
32
2
Tharparkar
38.14
27.95
27.98
31.36
3
Central Karachi
44.91
21.35
26.4
30.89
4
West Karachi
45.11
20.99
26.55
30.88
5
Sujawal
40.18
23.78
28.29
30.75
6
Shikarpur
29.11
31.49
30.22
30.27
7
South Karachi
43.3
21.23
25.93
30.15
8
Naushero Feroz
38.78
25.87
25.49
30.05
9
Malir Karachi
40.89
23.52
25.48
29.96
10
Jacobabad
29.19
30.69
29.83
29.9
11
East Karachi
43
21.07
25.36
29.81
12
Shaheed Benazirabad
42.03
21.81
24.11
29.32
13
Tando Allah Yar
40.72
21.06
26.09
29.29
14
Umerkot
39.91
22.07
25.51
29.17
15
Badin
40.07
21.53
25.3
28.97
16
Jamshoro
44.13
18.41
23.91
28.82
17
Mitiari
39.58
21.58
24.51
28.56
18
Larkana
31.65
26.57
26.73
28.32
19
Tando Mohd Khan
35.23
23.88
25.46
28.19
20
Sanghar
39.31
20.25
23.11
27.56
21
Kambar-Shahdadkot
39.04
18.81
23.93
27.26
22
Dadu
38.8
18.89
23.85
27.18
23
Thatta
38.22
20.32
22.36
26.96
24
SUKKUR
36.81
18.42
23.01
26.08
25
Kashmore
35.72
20.33
21.94
26
26
Hyderabad
36.71
18.64
22.04
25.8
27
Ghotki
28.25
23.38
24.07
25.23
28
Khairpur Mirs
27.13
22.27
20.52
23.31
29
Mirpur Khas
27.08
17.37
21.28
21.91
Note: Districts are ranked from 1 to 29 (Highest to Lowest) based on overall average score.
71
16.0 Performance (grade) based analysis of districts’ scores Districts’ scores were analyzed on proportion of their students separated in four levels of performance (grade) classifications comprising: low performance (students with 0% to 33% of scores), mediocre performance (students with 34% to 60% scores), high performance (students with 61% to 80% scores), and exceptional performance (students with above 80% scores). Hereafter, four performance levels will be mentioned as low, mediocre, high, and exceptional. The Tables below provide details of districts’ performance at different performance levels. 16.1 Districts’ performance level based proportions of students in language Districts’ class V language performance level based analysis revealed that overwhelming proportion of students (approximately 90%) scored at low performance level and mediocre performance level combined; however, all of districts’ students, with varying proportions, scored at high level and relatively small proportion at exceptional level. Central Karachi seems to have the highest density of high performance students followed by South Karachi and East Karachi. Though these three districts hold the highest percentage of high performers, it is Korangi Karachi which holds the highest percentage of exceptional performances. It is also interesting to know how, along with the most exceptional performances, Korangi also holds the highest percentage for mediocre performances along with East Karachi. On the lower end, Badin, Shikarpur and Larkana seem to have the highest percentage of low performances as all of them had over 80% of students in this category. Many districts had a relatively high number of mediocre performances ranging from 30% to 60% of students while Korangi Karachi appeared to be the most mediocre. Low Performances still took up the majority of the students with a peak value of 84% of students, while most districts range around 50 – 60% in the low performance percentage. Korangi Karachi tops the high performance percentage chart with 8.25% of students, but many other districts also had 2% to 4 % of students with high performances. Nonetheless, scarcity of exceptional performances is quite visibleas many districts completely lackedthis category.
72
Table 35 District-based proportion of students at various language performance levels Class V
Language of Class V(Proportions of Students)
S No District
Low Performance (0%-33.99% score)
Mediocre Performance (34%-59.99% score)
High Performance (60%-79.99% score)
Exceptional Performance (80%-100% score)
1
Badin
84.88%
14.21%
0.91%
0.00%
2
Central Karachi
33.33%
58.17%
8.50%
0.00%
3
Dadu
55.15%
42.51%
2.33%
0.00%
4
East Karachi
29.73%
64.86%
5.41%
0.00%
5
Ghotki
69.90%
29.26%
0.83%
0.00%
6
Hyderabad
70.67%
28.72%
0.61%
0.00%
7
Jacobabad
80.74%
19.26%
0.00%
0.00%
8
Jamshoro
45.39%
52.43%
1.94%
0.24%
9
Kamber Shahdadkot
55.70%
41.83%
2.15%
0.32%
10
Kashmore
58.37%
38.18%
3.45%
0.00%
11
Khairpur Mirs
68.76%
30.35%
0.84%
0.04%
12
Korangi Karachi
29.08%
65.58%
4.45%
0.89%
13
Larkana
80.71%
18.86%
0.43%
0.00%
14
Malir Karachi
38.39%
53.57%
7.74%
0.30%
15
Mirpur Khas
66.72%
31.18%
1.79%
0.31%
16
Matiyari
52.92%
44.57%
2.34%
0.17%
17
Noushero Feroz
53.08%
44.39%
2.29%
0.24%
18
Sanghar
52.07%
44.37%
3.44%
0.13%
19
SBA
46.95%
48.52%
4.54%
0.00%
20
Shikarpur
80.13%
19.37%
0.50%
0.00%
21
South Karachi
41.67%
52.08%
6.25%
0.00%
22
Sajawal
44.08%
51.22%
4.70%
0.00%
23
SUKKUR
69.10%
28.59%
2.19%
0.12%
24
57.23%
40.33%
2.24%
0.20%
58.66%
39.37%
1.77%
0.20%
26
Tando Allayar Tando Mohammad Khan Tharparkar
67.19%
31.13%
1.68%
0.00%
27
Thata
53.06%
42.73%
3.85%
0.35%
28
Umerkot
56.92%
41.55%
1.53%
0.00%
29
West Karachi
35.64%
59.41%
4.95%
0.00%
25
73
Table 36 District-based proportion of students at various language performance levels Class VIII
Language of Class VIII (Proportions of Students)
S. No
District
Low Performance (0%-33.99% score)
Mediocre Performance (34%-59.99% score)
High Performance (60%-79.99% score)
Exceptional Performance (80%-100% score)
1
Badin
35.41%
61.09%
3.50%
0.00%
2
Central Karachi
25.24%
68.57%
5.71%
0.48%
3
Dadu
37.07%
57.53%
5.02%
0.39%
4
East Karachi
27.10%
70.09%
2.80%
0.00%
5
Ghotki
72.63%
25.70%
1.68%
0.00%
6
Hyderabad
43.06%
55.09%
1.85%
0.00%
7
Jacobabad
81.92%
18.08%
0.00%
0.00%
8
Jamshoro
23.40%
69.15%
6.38%
1.06%
9
Kamber Shahdadkot
31.90%
63.80%
3.68%
0.61%
10
Kashmore
67.42%
29.55%
3.03%
0.00%
11
Khairpur Mirs
75.21%
22.69%
2.10%
0.00%
12
Korangi Karachi
23.20%
67.01%
8.25%
1.55%
13
Larkana
71.43%
27.62%
0.95%
0.00%
14
Malir Karachi
36.00%
56.00%
8.00%
0.00%
15
Mirpur Khas
79.12%
17.67%
3.21%
0.00%
16
Matiyari
38.89%
59.26%
1.85%
0.00%
17
Noushero Feroz
39.50%
55.74%
3.92%
0.84%
18
Sanghar
44.48%
50.84%
4.68%
0.00%
19
SBA
34.45%
57.53%
7.36%
0.67%
20
Shikarpur
83.33%
16.67%
0.00%
0.00%
21
South Karachi
34.19%
64.52%
1.29%
0.00%
22
Sajawal
39.51%
53.09%
7.41%
0.00%
23
SUKKUR
49.37%
41.77%
7.59%
1.27%
24
Tando Allayar
38.21%
57.72%
4.07%
0.00%
25
Tando Mohammad Khan
48.60%
47.66%
3.74%
0.00%
26
Tharparkar
46.06%
48.79%
5.15%
0.00%
27
Thata
46.67%
50.00%
3.33%
0.00%
28
Umerkot
34.38%
62.50%
3.13%
0.00%
29
West Karachi
25.56%
66.67%
7.78%
0.00%
74
16.2 Districts’ performance level based proportions of students in math Table 44 shows an enormously high percentage of districts lie within low performance. Table 37 District-based proportion of students at various math performance levels Class V
Math of Class V (Proportions of Students) S No.
District
1
Badin
76.57%
20.86%
High Performance (60%79.99% score) 2.47%
2
Central Karachi
90.20%
9.48%
0.33%
0.00%
3
Dadu
83.17%
15.62%
1.21%
0.00%
4
East Karachi
95.95%
4.05%
0.00%
0.00%
5
Ghotki
77.03%
22.82%
0.15%
0.00%
6
Hyderabad
97.87%
1.98%
0.15%
0.00%
7
Jacobabad
82.95%
16.84%
0.21%
0.00%
8
Jamshoro
88.83%
10.92%
0.24%
0.00%
9
Kamber Shahdadkot
89.46%
10.00%
0.54%
0.00%
10
Kashmore
86.33%
12.81%
0.86%
0.00%
11
Khairpur Mirs
79.88%
17.50%
2.61%
0.00%
12
Korangi Karachi
90.80%
8.31%
0.89%
0.00%
13
Larkana
95.61%
4.29%
0.11%
0.00%
14
Malir Karachi
75.89%
23.51%
0.60%
0.00%
15
Mirpur Khas
77.16%
20.03%
2.57%
0.23%
16
Matiyari
83.31%
14.86%
1.84%
0.00%
17
Noushero Feroz
72.07%
25.75%
2.17%
0.00%
18
Sanghar
84.28%
14.83%
0.89%
0.00%
19
SBA
78.07%
19.84%
1.98%
0.12%
20
Shikarpur
90.94%
8.55%
0.50%
0.00%
21
South Karachi
86.67%
12.92%
0.42%
0.00%
22
Sajawal
74.72%
23.18%
2.11%
0.00%
23
SUKKUR
89.90%
9.00%
1.09%
0.00%
24
Tando Allayar
90.22%
9.16%
0.61%
0.00%
25
Tando Mohammad Khan
92.13%
7.48%
0.39%
0.00%
26
Tharparkar
68.65%
29.13%
2.06%
0.16%
27
Thata
83.19%
15.94%
0.88%
0.00%
28
Umerkot
70.88%
25.36%
3.36%
0.41%
29
West Karachi
88.12%
11.39%
0.50%
0.00%
Low Performance (0%-33.99% score)
Mediocre Performance (34%-59.99% score)
Exceptional Performance (80%-100% score) 0.11%
75
Districts’ class V math low performance ranges from 72% to almost 98% students performing at this level with Hyderabad demonstrating a severe lowperformance of 97.87% of its students. Mediocre performances of districts range from 1.98% to 29.13%of students performing at this level. Table 38 District-based proportion of students at various math performance levels of Class VIII
Math of Class VIII (Proportions of Students) S. No
District
Low Performance (0%-33.99% score)
Mediocre Performance (34%-59.99% score)
High Performance (60%79.99% score)
Exceptional Performance (80%-100% score)
1
Badin
91.05%
8.56%
0.39%
0.00%
2
Central Karachi
97.62%
2.38%
0.00%
0.00%
3
Dadu
95.75%
4.25%
0.00%
0.00%
4
East Karachi
98.13%
2.80%
0.00%
0.00%
5
Ghotki
77.09%
22.91%
0.00%
0.00%
6
Hyderabad
98.61%
1.39%
0.00%
0.00%
7
Jacobabad
83.62%
16.38%
0.00%
0.00%
8
Jamshoro
96.81%
2.13%
1.06%
0.00%
9
Kamber Shahdadkot
94.48%
4.91%
0.61%
0.00%
10
Kashmore
96.21%
3.79%
0.00%
0.00%
11
Khairpur Mirs
81.93%
15.55%
2.52%
0.00%
12
Korangi Karachi
97.42%
2.06%
0.52%
0.00%
13
Larkana
89.52%
10.00%
0.48%
0.00%
14
Malir Karachi
87.33%
11.33%
1.33%
0.00%
15
Mirpur Khas
94.38%
5.22%
0.40%
0.00%
16
Matiyari
82.41%
17.59%
0.00%
0.00%
17
Noushero Feroz
82.63%
14.57%
2.80%
0.00%
18
Sanghar
94.65%
5.35%
0.00%
0.00%
19
SBA
91.97%
7.69%
0.33%
0.00%
20
Shikarpur
84.00%
16.00%
0.00%
0.00%
21
South Karachi
96.77%
3.23%
0.00%
0.00%
22
Sajawal
91.36%
8.64%
0.00%
0.00%
23
SUKKUR
97.47%
2.53%
0.00%
0.00%
24
93.50%
6.50%
0.00%
0.00%
90.65%
9.35%
0.00%
0.00%
26
Tando Allayar Tando Mohammad Khan Tharparkar
78.79%
17.58%
3.64%
0.00%
27
Thata
94.17%
5.00%
0.83%
0.00%
28
Umerkot
91.88%
7.50%
0.63%
0.00%
29
West Karachi
95.56%
4.44%
0.00%
0.00%
25
76
The average score of districts at mediocre levelremain between 8% and 12% score range. High performances of districts are extremely rare with a peak value at only 3.36% of students in this category in Umerkot district. Exceptional performances fail to even reach the 1% mark with most districts lacking the percentage entirely, while Umerkot tops the list with 0.4% of its students in this category. See Table 45 for details. In class VIII math, most districts recorded a very high number of low performances generally higher than 90% of their students at this performance levelwith a few exceptions such as Ghotki and Tharparkar. Mediocre performances vary to great degrees ranging from a lowest value of 1.39% and highest at 22.91% for Ghotki, while most values remained below 10%. There are only 5 districts with over 1% of their students in high performances with Tharparkar at the top with 3.64% students whereas most districts lack high performances completely. No district tabulated any exceptional performances in class VIII math. 16.3 Districts’ performance level based proportions of students in science For science grade V, low performances level is very high in all districts as districts proportion of students at this level ranged from 75% to 97% of students. See Table 45 for details. Mediocre performances of districts is generally over 10% of students at this level with a few districts performing lower such as Larkana at 2.68% and Shikarpur at 6.54%. Sujawal proves to be the most mediocre of the bunch as 23.99% of its students performed at this level. No exceptional performances were recorded and high performances were recorded below 1% of students for all districts. In grade VIII science, low performance levelwas recorded high as around 80% of students performed at this level for most of the districts,while Hyderabad being highest with 98.15% of its students performing at low performance level. See Table 46 for details. Mediocre performances proportion of students ranged from 2.53% for Sukkur district to 25.7% for Ghotki district showing quite high deviation among districts. Only seven districts recorded any high performance percentage of students with just five districts crossing the mark of 1% of their students at this level as Khairpur Mir’sdistrict topped with 1.26% of its students. No districts recorded any proportion of their students at exceptional performance level.
77
Table 39 District-based proportion of students at various science performance levels class V
Science of Class V (Proportions of Students) No
District
Low Performance (0%-33.99% score)
Mediocre Performance (34%59.99% score)
High Performance (60%79.99% score)
Exceptional Performance (80%-100% score)
1
Badin
84.88%
14.21%
0.91%
0.00%
2
Central Karachi
87.58%
12.09%
0.33%
0.00%
3
Dadu
90.02%
9.90%
0.08%
0.00%
4
East Karachi
90.54%
9.46%
0.00%
0.00%
5
Ghotki
82.94%
16.91%
0.15%
0.00%
6
Hyderabad
96.66%
3.34%
0.00%
0.00%
7
Jacobabad
87.47%
12.53%
0.00%
0.00%
8
Jamshoro
86.65%
13.11%
0.24%
0.00%
9
Kamber Shahdadkot
91.29%
8.71%
0.00%
0.00%
10
Kashmore
91.75%
8.25%
0.00%
0.00%
11
Khairpur Mirs
89.59%
9.57%
0.84%
0.00%
12
Korangi Karachi
85.76%
13.95%
0.30%
0.00%
13
Larkana
97.32%
2.68%
0.00%
0.00%
14
Malir Karachi
75.00%
24.11%
0.89%
0.00%
15
Mirpur Khas
80.05%
18.94%
0.86%
0.16%
16
Matiyari
86.48%
13.36%
0.17%
0.00%
17
Noushero Feroz
87.15%
12.48%
0.36%
0.00%
18
Sanghar
88.92%
10.76%
0.32%
0.00%
19
SBA
85.81%
14.08%
0.12%
0.00%
20
Shikarpur
93.46%
6.54%
0.00%
0.00%
21
South Karachi
85.83%
14.17%
0.00%
0.00%
22
Sajawal
75.53%
23.99%
0.49%
0.00%
23
SUKKUR
91.24%
8.64%
0.12%
0.00%
24
Tando Allayar
92.46%
7.54%
0.00%
0.00%
25
Tando Mohammad Khan
90.16%
9.84%
0.00%
0.00%
26
Tharparkar
77.04%
22.63%
0.32%
0.00%
27
Thata
85.81%
13.84%
0.35%
0.00%
28
Umerkot
83.81%
15.48%
0.71%
0.00%
29
West Karachi
88.12%
11.88%
0.00%
0.00%
78
Table 40 District-based proportion of students at various science performance levels Class VIII
Science of Class VIII (Proportions of Students) S No
District
Low Performance (0%-33.99% score)
Mediocre Performance (34%-59.99% score)
High Performance (60%79.99% score)
Exceptional Performance (80%-100% score)
1
Badin
82.88%
17.12%
0.00%
0.00%
2
Central Karachi
91.90%
8.10%
0.00%
0.00%
3
Dadu
88.80%
11.20%
0.00%
0.00%
4
East Karachi
97.20%
2.80%
0.00%
0.00%
5
Ghotki
74.30%
25.70%
0.00%
0.00%
6
Hyderabad
98.15%
1.85%
0.00%
0.00%
7
Jacobabad
85.31%
14.69%
0.00%
0.00%
8
Jamshoro
90.43%
9.57%
0.00%
0.00%
9
Kamber Shahdadkot
85.89%
13.50%
0.61%
0.00%
10
Kashmore
93.18%
6.82%
0.00%
0.00%
11
Khairpur Mirs
88.03%
10.71%
1.26%
0.00%
12
Korangi Karachi
90.21%
9.79%
0.00%
0.00%
13
Larkana
89.05%
10.95%
0.00%
0.00%
14
Malir Karachi
86.67%
13.33%
0.00%
0.00%
15
Mirpur Khas
87.95%
10.84%
1.20%
0.00%
16
Matiyari
80.56%
18.52%
0.93%
0.00%
17
Noushero Feroz
86.55%
12.32%
1.12%
0.00%
18
Sanghar
91.64%
8.36%
0.00%
0.00%
19
SBA
89.30%
10.70%
0.00%
0.00%
20
Shikarpur
92.00%
8.00%
0.00%
0.00%
21
South Karachi
94.19%
5.81%
0.00%
0.00%
22
Sajawal
77.78%
20.99%
1.23%
0.00%
23
SUKKUR
97.47%
2.53%
0.00%
0.00%
24
Tando Allayar
83.74%
16.26%
0.00%
0.00%
25
Tando Mohammad Khan
88.79%
11.21%
0.00%
0.00%
26
Tharparkar
80.30%
18.48%
1.21%
0.00%
27
Thata
94.17%
5.83%
0.00%
0.00%
28
Umerkot
88.13%
11.88%
0.00%
0.00%
29
West Karachi
90.00%
10.00%
0.00%
0.00%
79
17.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SATI, SAT II, SAT III AND SAT IV RESULTS Comparison is provided between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III, and SAT IV results for class V and between SAT II, SAT III, and SAT IV results for class VIII as class VIII students were not assessed in SAT I. Differences are calculated on the basis how high or low (in terms of percent points) SAT IV scores were compared to SAT III scores. Hence, a positive difference means SAT IV score higher and a negative difference means SAT IV score lower. 17.1 Province level comparison between SAT III and SAT IV Comparative analysis of overall scores at province level indicates that SAT IV results of language are slightly lower and the results are higher in sciences and math for both classes; however, language score is slightly lower in class V and moderately lower in class VIII. In math, the scores are moderately high at both grades V and VIII and in science scores are considerably higher in both classes V and class VIII. It is hard to explain the differences because two populations of students assessed in SAT III and SAT IV are different and we have very limited information about background of students. Difference could be also because of standard errors in test scores of the two population groups. Overall these differences may not be considered significant in case of languages, mathematics, and science because scores are not significantly higher given the number of students in thousands who appeared in SAT III and SAT IV. Nonetheless, this requires further systematic investigation in the context of Sindh, Pakistan. Moreover, there are several significant differences (greater or less than 5) in district based analysis, which need further systematic investigation.
80
Table 41 Province level comparison between SAT III and SAT IV
Class VIII 1
Class V Subject Language Average
SATI
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
32
30
32.81
32.80
-0.1
37.01
40.48
36.93
-3.55
15
17
18.22
24.09
5.87
13.73
17.62
21.95
4.33
19
18
15.26
23.68
8.24
17.07
17.17
24.37
7.2
22
21
22.1
26.86
4.76
22.6
25.09
27.75
2.66
(%) Math Average (%) Science Average (%) Overall Average (%)
[1]: As per Tors of SAT Phase I (2012), the test was conducted from students of grade V only, Therefore Comparative Analysis of grade VIII from SAT phase I (2012) is not Applicable
17.2 District based comparison between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and IV language scores Table 49 below presents comparative analysis of SAT III and SAT IV language scores. The language results at class V are mixed as relatively more districts,14 out of 24, scored slightly lower in SAT IV language scores; however, most of the differences are not very far. The ten districts’ positive differences are ranging from 0.15 to 5.39 percent points, whereas 14 districts’ differences are negative ranging from –0.30 to –7.71percent points. Districts which gained significantly high (from 3% to 5.39%) include Hyderabad, Naushero Feroze, Sanghar and Karachi with 5.39% difference in scores. Most of the districts’ differences (18 out of 24) are negative in class VIII language indicating that districts performed relatively lower in SAT IV as negative differences ranged from -1.23 to 18.11 percent points. Except Hyderabad and Karachi all positive differences among the districts were below 2 percent points in class VIII Languages. As explained earlier, in order to explain what led to these differences, a systematic study or studies need to be done.
81
Table 42 District-based comparative analysis of SAT-I, SAT-II, SAT-III & SAT-IV Language results
District SATI
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
S No
Class VIII Language
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
Class V Language
1
Badin
24.44
31.85
35.82
34.24
-1.58
36.83
43.16
40.07
-3.09
2
Dadu
25.1
30.21
35.71
33.40
-2.31
35.27
42.56
38.80
-3.76
3
Ghotki
21.06
24.52
32.77
28.55
-4.22
37.73
40.86
28.25
-12.61
4
Hyderabad
34.21
25.25
25.03
28.45
3.42
27.32
33.56
36.71
3.15
5
Jacobabad
21.14
26.08
33.53
27.48
-6.05
37.06
39.27
29.18
-10.09
6
Jamshoro KambarShahdadkot
33.48
30.6
35.99
36.41
0.42
39.99
44.02
44.13
0.11
26.85
27.04
31.17
31.91
0.74
39.76
44.3
39.14
-5.16
8
Karachi 1
48.03
37.02
35.29
40.68
5.39
35.46
38.57
44.74
6.17
9
Kashmore
21.44
27.02
33.42
30.90
-2.52
33.88
40.55
35.72
-4.83
10
Khairpur Mirs
30.3
27.59
35.64
27.93
-7.71
43.58
45.24
27.13
-18.11
11
Larkana
25.02
23.23
27.49
27.19
-0.30
37.72
39.09
31.65
-7.44
12
Mirpur Khas
27.2
34.67
34.75
28.74
-6.01
38.53
40.58
27.08
-13.50
13
Mitiari
25.89
25.67
36.44
33.98
-2.46
38.81
43.22
39.57
-3.65
14
Naushero Feroz
25.37
25.47
31.47
34.90
3.43
35.4
41.68
38.78
-2.90
15
Sanghar Shaheed Benazirabad
24.59
33.72
30.6
33.89
3.29
37.98
39.23
39.31
0.08
31.94
33.17
35.6
35.75
0.15
37
43.27
42.04
-1.23
17
Shikarpur
20.57
19.92
25.25
26.48
1.23
36.05
34.89
29.11
-5.78
18
Sujawal 3
NA 2
NA 2
39.65
36.36
-3.29
NA 2
46.51
40.18
-6.33
19
Sukkur Tando Allah Yar Tando Mohd Khan
26.1
21.96
26.06
28.79
2.73
33.4
35.18
36.81
1.63
27.44
32.98
32.6
33.51
0.91
39.36
40.72
40.72
0.00
27.66
33.79
36.96
32.59
-4.37
36.43
43.42
35.24
-8.18
7
16
20 21 22
Tharparkar
24.89
34.12
33.58
29.50
-4.08
42.24
45.35
38.14
-7.21
23
Thatta
26.02
28.38
32.99
32.19
-0.80
37.01
40.89
38.22
-2.67
24
32.07 36.03 35.74 32.13 -3.61 39.21 43.55 39.91 -3.64 Umerkot Note: 1. All districts of Karachi are combined, since it is considered as one administrative unit 2. NA means “Not Available” 3. In SAT Phase-I & Phase-II, Sujawal was part of Thatta district. In SAT Phase-III, Sujawal was made a separate district having Mirpur Bithoro, Jati, Kharo Chann, Sujawal & Shah Bunder Talukas. Therefore, the results of language, Science, and Math in SAT Phase-I and Phase-II in class V & VIII are not given.
82
17.3 District based comparison between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and SAT IV math scores District-based math comparative analysis between SAT phases shows that all districts gained slightly in SAT IV class V math scores. The positive differences in the twenty four districts ranged from 0.26 to 12.27 percent points and most of these differences were above 3 percentpoints.This indicates significantly higher results in SAT IV class V math. It is hard to explain if these differences are significant enough and the reason for the differences since the population is different and background variables are not available for two population groups. The comparative analysis indicates that most districts (22 out 24 districts) showed an increase in SAT IV class VIII math scores as positive differences ranged from 0.47 to 17.43 percent points. Shikarpur gained most with 17.43 percent points increase in SAT IV among the twenty two districts, with significant gains in scores ranging from 3.44 to 17.43 percent points. While Tharparkar made significant gains in SAT IV class V scores, interestingly it scored extremely low with 0.47 percent points in SAT IV class V scores.
83
Table 50District-based comparative analysis of SAT-I, SAT-II, SAT-III & SAT-IV Math results
District SATI
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
S No
Class VIII Math
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
Class V Math
1
Badin
14.2
18.57
22.25
25.31
3.06
13.14
22.14
21.53
-0.61
2
Dadu
13.58
16.28
19.8
23.51
3.71
11.96
17.91
18.89
0.98
3
Ghotki
10.46
14.98
19.19
24.30
5.11
11.94
16.77
23.38
6.61
4
Hyderabad
17.23
13.99
13.87
18.07
4.20
13.18
15.85
18.64
2.79
5
Jacobabad
10.11
15.34
17.18
29.45
12.27
11.24
15.86
30.69
14.83
6
Jamshoro KambarShahdadkot
15.22
16.81
18.38
22.85
4.47
12.43
18.11
18.41
0.30
7.82
13.88
15.09
20.43
5.34
11.57
16.83
18.88
2.05
8
Karachi 1
21.45
19.91
19.15
24.33
5.18
15.56
18.16
21.40
3.24
9
Kashmore
10.45
15.44
18.04
20.69
2.65
12.86
15.71
20.33
4.62
10
Khairpur Mirs
13.83
15.41
18.7
22.08
3.38
12.25
16.76
22.27
5.51
11
Larkana
8.85
14.03
14.18
20.02
5.84
11.89
14.33
26.57
12.24
12
Mirpur Khas
14.07
20.63
23.78
24.19
0.41
16.91
22.23
17.37
-4.86
13
Mitiari
15
14.53
19.89
23.83
3.94
13.12
20.23
21.57
1.34
14
Naushero Feroz
11.37
15.34
16.15
28.27
12.12
12.45
15.58
25.87
10.29
15
Sanghar Shaheed Benazirabad
14
19.04
15.64
22.62
6.98
15.55
15.91
20.25
4.34
13.21
20.31
20.79
24.33
3.54
15.41
18.37
21.81
3.44
Shikarpur
12.7
13.34
13.7
22.20
8.50
11.67
14.06
31.49
17.43
18
Sujawal 3
2
NA
NA
20.8
26.59
5.79
NA
18.54
23.78
5.24
19
Sukkur
14.06
14.16
14.56
18.73
4.17
11.85
13.3
18.42
5.12
20
Tando Allah Yar
16
17.86
17.93
21.50
3.57
14.54
17.99
21.06
3.07
21
Tando Mohd Khan
11
19.12
19.95
20.21
0.26
12.74
15.4
23.89
8.49
22
Tharparkar
15.2
23.66
22.36
30.79
8.43
17.89
27.48
27.95
0.47
23
Thatta
9.59
14.31
17.64
22.13
4.49
11.61
15.82
20.32
4.50
7
16 17
2
2
24
17.01 24.51 22.24 28.18 5.94 15.81 21.53 22.07 0.54 Umerkot Note: 1. All districts of Karachi are combined, since it is considered as one administrative unit 2. NA means “Not Available” 3. In SAT Phase-I & Phase-II, Sujawal was part of Thatta district. In SAT Phase-III, Sujawal was made a separate district having Mirpur Bithoro, Jati, Kharo Chann, Sujawal & Shah Bunder Talukas. Therefore, the results of language, Science, and Math in SAT Phase-I and Phase-II in class V & VIII are not given.
84
17.4 District based comparison between SAT I, SAT II, SAT III and SAT IV science scores Comparison of district based class V science results shows all twenty four districts performed significantly higher and their positive differences ranged from 3.72 to 24.46. Interestingly the districts that scored higher in SAT I, II and III also scored higher in class V in SAT IV, while Jacobabad jumped up by scoring the highest with 28.51 point percent in SAT IV. See Table 51 for details. Class VIII science results comparison between SAT III and SAT IV shows that all the districts have performed higher in SAT IV with differences ranging from 0.64 to 15.22. Among these,Mirpurkhas district scored lowest in SAT IV grade V with a score of 0.64. Also most of the districts showed significant gains in SAT IV as compared with SAT I, II and III. As stated earlier it is extremely difficult to explain the reason for the differences in scores due to population group differences and unavailability of background information on students, teachers, schools, and leadership related factors. This may be due to the nature of test, some standard error, the time when SAT IV was conducted and many other factors that require a systematic investigation.
85
Table 43 District-based comparative analysis of SAT-I, SAT-II, SAT-III & SAT-IV Science results
District SATI
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SATII
SATIII
SATIV
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
S No
Class VIII Science
SAT-IV’s difference to SAT III
Class V Science
1
Badin
17.27
19.51
18.08
23.62
5.54
16.41
20.61
25.30
4.69
2
Dadu
16
16.15
16.07
21.33
5.26
15.72
17.21
23.85
6.64
3
Ghotki
12.43
14.28
15.12
23.55
8.43
15.12
16.67
24.07
7.40
4
Hyderabad
20.41
15.8
12.33
20.63
8.30
15.9
15.85
22.04
6.19
5
Jacobabad
12.67
15.17
13.7
28.51
14.81
15.64
15.48
29.83
14.35
6
Jamshoro KambarShahdadkot
21
16.49
15.73
24.56
8.83
17.88
17.36
23.91
6.55
11
14.37
12.46
20.80
8.34
16.36
17.14
24.04
6.90
7 8
Karachi 1
28.43
24.06
17.47
26.39
8.92
19.67
17.53
26.30
8.77
9
Kashmore
13
14.48
14.59
20.64
6.05
14.67
14.67
21.94
7.27
10
Khairpur Mirs
19
15.47
14.76
19.71
4.95
16.8
17.4
20.52
3.12
11
Larkana
12.31
14.08
12.1
19.81
7.71
15.15
15.25
26.73
11.48
12
Mirpur Khas
17.63
21.74
20.42
24.14
3.72
19.53
20.64
21.28
0.64
13
Mitiari
16.5
13.42
16.28
22.92
6.64
15.54
17.19
24.51
7.32
14
Naushero Feroz
14.4
14.76
12.56
24.24
11.68
14.48
14.63
25.49
10.86
15
Sanghar Shaheed Benazirabad
16.83
19.24
13.4
22.27
8.87
18.2
16.99
23.11
6.12
17
19.41
16.87
22.49
5.62
16.82
16.43
24.11
7.68
Shikarpur
14.35
13.22
12.55
22.73
10.18
15.35
2
2
18.62
26.78
16 17
NA
NA
15
30.22
15.22
8.16
NA
2
17.87
28.29
10.42
18
Sujawal
19
Sukkur
16.41
14.45
12.39
20.37
7.98
15.03
14.88
23.01
8.13
20
Tando Allah Yar
19.15
18.65
15.97
24.19
8.22
16.52
18.51
26.09
7.58
21
Tando Mohd Khan
15.64
19.03
17.88
23.05
5.17
16.73
17.5
25.46
7.96
22
Tharparkar
17.41
22.59
16.57
27.68
11.11
19.39
21.88
27.98
6.1
23
Thatta
13.86
14.74
15.54
22.58
7.04
15.56
16.4
22.36
5.96
3
24 Umerkot 21.02 23.2 18.88 25.11 6.23 17.32 19.88 25.51 5.63 Note: 1. All districts of Karachi are combined, since it is considered as one administrative unit 2. NA means “Not Available” 3. In SAT Phase-I & Phase-II, Sujawal was part of Thatta district. In SAT Phase-III, Sujawal was made a separate district having Mirpur Bithoro, Jati, Kharo Chann, Sujawal & Shah Bunder Talukas. Therefore, the results of language, Science, and Math in SAT Phase-I and Phase-II in class V & VIII are not given.
86
The gains and losses or no gains and no losses in scores in SAT IV, as explained in the analysis so far, can be based on a range of factors which are hard to explain just based on analysis of results and comparisons. Hypotheses can be offered based on general observations and informed assumptions; however, degree of confidence may not be as strong as it could be established based on findings of systematic research. Research work based on SAT results should be encouraged and sponsored to answer questions like who are (and to what extent) responsible for students achievement scores, and what makes students and schools perform higher or lower.
18.0 Recommendations Based on descriptive analysis of students’ test scores, recommendations are framed for improvement in key educational areas at primary and middle schooling levels in Sindh. SAT IV results are helpful in putting forward recommendations for capacity building of existing teachers, enhancing quality of teacher preparation programs, and improvement in schooling conditions, quality improvement of curriculum and teaching resource materials, and further research to understand trends in results to inform future policy and program reforms. However, it is important to note that recommendations are limited to only knowledge based on descriptive analysis of results in relation to general observations about schooling practices in Sindh. Several correlation based analysis and further research should be conducted in the specific key areas discussed here to understand the issues systematically and to generate more empirical evidence to inform the future reforms in K-8 education in the province. 18.1 Capacity Building of Teachers Traditionally,periodical in-service trainings for teachers are used as an strategy to enhance teachers capacity; however, it is a growing strong understanding among community of teacher educators that use of variety of strategies on an on-going basis is more effective to keep teachers’ knowledge and skills up to mark. Therefore, as a general recommendation, many other strategies along with in-service training should be applied, such as provision of updated teacher learning reading resource materials, provision of alternative textbooks and pedagogical content knowledge based books, establishing structures to develop peer-coaching and mentoring relationships among teachers, exposure visits to other school systems in other provinces and parts of country, provision and use of online web-based resources, encouraging teachers to do 87
small level studies and publish in teacher district-based newsletters and so on. Some specific recommendations include: a)
Creating Continuous Professional Interaction among Teachers of Different Schools,
UCs, Talukas, and Districts Performing at Various Levels:Data dispersion and distribution of school mean scores show that there were many schools which performed high and even few of them at exceptional level. List of relatively better performing schools specifically high performing schools in each district should be generated. Teachers from lower performing schools should be engaged in interaction with teachers in high performing schools. District-based or taluka-based sessions should be arranged where teachers from high-performing schools can share their practices of teaching and learning in their schools with other teachers. These interactions should be done on regular basis to provide opportunities to the teachers to think and reflect upon their teaching practices and learn from their peers.
b)
Creating Balance of Focus between "Reading" and "Writing" Skills and Training
Teachers to Develop Students Genuine Writing Skills Instead of Teaching Writing as Notedictating: Content based analysis of results shows that overall students performed higher in reading comprehension and severely lower in writing. This is clear indication that there is overemphasis on reading and no or little emphasis on writing. There is need to create a balance in curriculum, textbooks, and teaching and learning of the two skills. Apart from this, it is generally observed that teachers use note-dictating method to teach writing.More specifically, teachers dictate students to copy a written paragraph, essay, letter, or story in their fair copy and reproduce it in a teacher-made test or exam. In this method, students are not engaged in actual writing in which they think ideas, create outline,develop structure and organize their sentences and parts on their own. Note-dictating is traditional long-holding practice of teachers in Pakistani school systems.To change teachers this practice, rigorous trainings should be arranged for all teachers teaching language on how to engage students in developing their writing skills by using progressive student-centered methods.
88
c)
Changing Math Instructions to Focus on Developing Children's "Conceptual
Understanding" and "Problem Solving" Skills Instead of Just Remembering the Rules and Procedures: Students’ overall performance is very low in Maths . It has been observed frequently that teachers lack in deeper content knowledge as well as appropriate pedagogical content knowledge in Maths to teach this subject effectively. Most of the time, focus in teaching of math is engaging students to remember rules and procedures whereas conceptual understanding and problem solving is neither taught nor learnt by teachers themselves. Teachers teaching math at class V and class VIII should be provided specific trainings on “conceptual understanding” of math content and “problem solving” skills and how to develop both of these math abilities in their students. Moreover, trainings should be given on pedagogies of teaching math as fun and in interesting ways. It is a common observation that students dislike teachers’ traditional methods of lecturing and note-dictating and teachers ‘focus on remembering by practicing procedures. Teachers should be provided trainings on effective ways of teaching math and should be provided reading materials on effective pedagogies of math at primary and middle school level.
d)
Sharing Effective Resources on Teaching and Learning of Geometry with Schools
and Training Teachers to Enhance Their Ability to teach this Least-focused Content Strand Effectively: Moreover, it seems that Geometry is the most neglected area in teaching and learning of math as students’ scores turned out to be severely low in both grades. Specific trainings should be conducted on content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge for teaching geometry. Also several kinds of reading resources should be shared with teachers. UCbased and/or taluka-based interaction (workshops, reflective meetings, demonstration of effective lessons followed by critical and reflective discussions) among math teachers focused on teaching and learning geometry also will help in enhancing teachers capacity to teach geometry effectively.
89
e)
Developing Teachers Science Conceptual Knowledge and Science Inquiry Skills by
Engaging them in Effective Training and by Sharing Effective Science Reading as well as Science Teaching andLearning Materials: Students performance was found lowest in science and almost in all content strands; specifically quite low in physical science. It isgenerally observed thatmost of the teachers engage students in rote learning of science materials instead of developing their conceptual understanding and inquiry and problem solving skills. Teachers should be shared effective reading materials on teaching and learning science focusing on conceptual understanding and inquiry skills and attitude. There are many effective resources available online; teachers should be engaged in learning from and utilizing those resources.
f)
Training Teachers to Develop Teacher-Made and Standardized Tests and to
Analyze Test-based Data to Enhance Students' Learning as well as to Improve Teachers' Own Teaching: Apart from developing teachers’ professional capacityin teaching subject areas, teachers’ test development skills should be enhanced through engaging them in sessions focused on development of teacher-made tests as well as standardized tests. Further, teachers’ ability to analyze student scores and to use the scores for improving students’ learning and improving their own teaching should be enhanced. Training sessions, peer coaching and mentoring could be effective strategies to develop teachers’ capacity in testing and assessment areas.
18.2 Enhancing Quality of In-service Teacher Education and Teacher Preparation Traditionally in-service teacher education and teacher preparation programs have been theoretical in nature and alienated from ground realities of the schools. Moreover, materials and resources have been outdated because of lack of local initiatives to enhance teacher education in the province. However, recent initiatives of four-year B. Ed Honors program for elementary and secondary teachers are good initiatives to prepare effective teachers. These programs should be strengthened bymaking appropriate provincial educational policies, provision of funding for program participants, and aligning teacher recruitment policies to support quality teacher preparation. Generally, higher secondary graduates, especially high performing students, prepare for getting admissions either in medical colleges or engineering schools. B. Ed. 4-year Program 90
is an effective initiative to attract high-performing students towards teaching profession. However, policies should be made to make schools a conducive work place and reputable grades and compensations should be given to the graduates with B. Ed. 4-year qualifications.
18.3 Research Research is hallmark of progressive societiesas empirical evidence is used to inform policies and programs. Unfortunately, research culture has not taken strong roots in Pakistan especiallybecause of lack of support in public policies and shortage of funding for research in public institutions. Different phases of SAT project have created wealth of data which could be utilized to conduct different studies. Moreover, many patterns in results and students achievement at district, region, and province level invite research to answer questions arising from analysis of trends and patterns. Some of the areas for research are identified as follows:
Researching What Makes Some Schools Perform Higher than Other Schools:
Schools performing at high level and exceptional level of performance as explained in the section three and in data dispersion and distribution graphs invite for research to understand what makes these schools perform to the level significantly higher than overwhelming number of schools which perform low. Findings will help in figuring out strategies and mechanisms which can help to improve low-performing schools.
Studying Very High Performing and Very Low Performing Students: Significantly
high-performing and low-performing students also need to be studied to understand what helps high-performing students and what hinders learning of low-performing students.
Developing Case Studies of Highly Effective Teachers to InformTeacher Education,
Teachers' Professional Development, and Teacher Recruitment: Case studies of teachers whose students perform very high or significantly higher than other students will help in understanding what characteristics should be desired in an effective teacher. Based on findings, in-service teacher education programs and preparation program will be able to define features of
91
their program to prepareeffective teachers. Appropriate teacher recruitment criteria also can be developed to identify and to appoint teacher candidates having desired characteristics.
Studying How Weights are given to Reading, Writing, Math, and Sciences in taught
Curriculum to inform and to develop a Balance in Teaching of Different Subjects.
Studies should be done on understanding of weightage given to different subjects in
implemented or enacted curriculum by teachers. Assumption is that some subject content strands, such as reading, are given too much weight on the cost of important subjects such as math and science and writing skills. Findings may help in creating an appropriate balance in teaching of different subjects and skills.
Public-initiated Programs and Allocating Public Funding for Further Research and
Utilization of SAT Data/Findings: Generally funding is allocated by competent organizations and authorities to utilize data generated by projects like SAT. Along with funding allocations, consultants should be hired to identify specific areas for research utilizing SAT data. Competent organizations/individual researchers should be supported with appropriate funding to further explore SAT data as well as design and conduct studies based on SAT results.Findings of such studies may inform well in answering many long-standing questions about improving quality of education in the province.
92
19.0 References CaliforniaDepartmentofEducation.(2012).StandardizedTestingandReporting.Retrieved April 02,2015,fromhttp://star.cde.ca.gov/
Hair, J. F. Black, WC, Babin, BJ, & Anderson, RE (2010).Multivariate data analysis, 7.
OECD:ProgrammeforInternationalStudentAssessment.RetrievedApril 02,2015,from http://www.oecd.org/pisa th
Report.(2010).SecondaryAnalysisofExaminationResults2010:Performanceof5 and8 th GradestudentsinPunjab,Pakistan.Lahore:PunjabExaminationCommission.
TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. Retrieved on April 02, 2015 from http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2011/index.html
McAlpine, M. (2002). A Summary of Methods of Item Analysis. Published by Computer
Assisted Assessment (CAA) Center, UK.
Anderson, P. and Morgan, G. (2008). Developing Tests and Questionnaires for a National
Assessment of Educational Achievement. The World Bank: Washington DC 20433.
93
Appendix A (SAT Phase IV (2015-16) Actual Test Specification Actual Test Specification For Language Grade V&VIII (SAT IV)
Learning Level/Ability
Knowledge
Reading for Literary Experience %
17.5
Understanding
22.5
Application (Beyond understanding)
10
Competencies
Reading for Information
MCQs
%
[4 items of 1 marks each]
17.5
Competency 1 (Reading and Thinking skills) of [5 items of 1 National Curriculum mark each] 2006 Standard 1 & Standard 2 [1 item of 2 marks each]
22.5
10
Competencies
MCQ
[4 items of 1 mark each] Competency 1 (Reading and Thinking skills) [5 items of 1 of National mark each] Curriculum 2006 Standard 1 & Standard 2 [1 item of 2 marks each]
Total Marks 20
10
10
Total Items
10
10
Actual Test Specification For Language Writing Grade V&VIII (SAT IV)
Writing Learning Level % Narrative/Creative Writing Descriptive Writing / Writing for Specific Purpose
Total Marks
Competencies
50
50
ERQ I ERQ of 10 marks
Competency2 (Writing skills) of National Curriculum 2006 Standard 1 2 ERQs
1 ERQ of 10 marks
20 marks
94
Actual Test Specification and Distribution of Items For Science Test Grade V&VIII (SAT IV)
Content Strand
Area
Weightage
Life Sciences
Biology
35%
15%
10%
10%
Physical Science
Physics
35%
10%
15%
10%
Chemistry
20%
7.50%
12.50%
10%
7.50%
2.50%
Earth and Space Earth and Science Space Science
Understanding 40%
Application (Beyond Understanding) 20%
Knowledge 40%
Distribution of Questions in the Actual Test Paper
Content Strand
MCQs MCQs CRQs CRQs (Knowledge (Understanding (Understanding (Application Based) Based) Based) Based)
Biology
6
4
Physical Science
7
3
Earth and Space Science
3
1
2
Total Number of Questions
Marks
1
11
14
1
13
22
4
4
95
Actual Test Specification and Distribution of Items for Mathematics Grade V (SAT IV)
Mathematics Standards Numbers and Operations K
% No. of SLOs Weightag e
Mark
Weightage
MCQ
CRQs
50%
12
2
45
51.13%
20.45
3
17.64%
1.36
2
U
34
64.15%
15.44
6
1
A
8
44.44%
3.63
4
1
Algebra
17
19.31%
7.72
K
4
23.52%
1.81
1
U
9
16.99%
4.08
1
A Measurements and Geometry K
4
22.22%
1.82
19
21.60%
8.64
9
52.94%
4.08
5
U
5
9.43%
2.27
1
1
A Information Handling K
5
27.77%
2.27
2
1
7
7.95%
3.18
1
5.88%
0.45
1
U
5
9.43%
2.27
1
A
1
5.55%
0.45
Total
88
100%
40
10%
30%
10%
2
8
2
2
96
Appendix B (ToRs of Taluka/Town Coordinator) He / She will be responsible to,
Conduct survey workshops with ADOE/TEO (M/F) & Supervisors Primary Education for
preparing Centre schools and feeding primary schools linkages in each UC of respective taluka/town
Collect any other relevant information
Select a team of invigilators as prescribed by SAT Office
Prepare test administration field plan in coordination with SAT team
Collect stationery for TC office use, students’ stationery and attendance sheets from respective
TCS office
Collect test booklets from respective TCS office on the evening/morning of each test day
Distribute stationery, test booklets and student’s attendance sheets at every test Centre before 10
am
Start the test at all test Centers of the taluka/town simultaneously at 10 am on every test day
Collect Head Teacher’s Background Questionnaire, Teacher’s Background Questionnaire (TBQ)
and Parent’s Socio Economic Status and Background Questionnaires from respective TCS office after the administration of SAT III (2015-16) Actual Test
Get-filled the above mentioned research tools from sample schools, as advised by SAT office
Monitor the test administration process at test Centres
Collect filled and unfilled test booklets and student’s attendance sheets from Centre schools, as
soon as test completes
Dispatch the filled and unfilled test booklets and student’s attendance sheets to SAT office
Sukkur IBA through TCS (Dispatch address for SAT Office Sukkur IBA is mentioned in TC presentation {provided in the personal folders on Training Day}. Do not make any payment for dispatching at TCS office, just instruct TCS representative at the respective TCS office to dispatch the material through SAT office Sukkur IBA account).
Perform all other tasks as mentioned in TC presentation (hard copy is provided in the personal
folders on Training Day)
Perform any other task assigned by SAT Office
97
Appendix C (Taluka/Town Coordinator Undertaking) Undertaking It is stated that I, ______________________________________________ Taluka/Town Coordinator
at
Taluka/Town
__________________________________
of
__________________________________ District in SAT Project Sukkur IBA take legal obligation for underlying terms and conditions,
1.
I will not select any Government school teacher or any other person who has any
association with Education & Literacy Department Government of Sindh or any other department of Government of Sindh as Invigilator in SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test administration under SAT Project Sukkur IBA in my Taluka/Town. 2.
I shall prefer to hire the Invigilators with minimum qualification of graduation and SAT
or field work experience previously. In case of shortage of the people with required qualification and experience, I may hire with some relaxation in the criteria. 3.
I will collect test booklets one day before the test and will secure these booklets at most
safest place and ensure the complete confidentiality, secrecy and sensitivity of the test booklets. 4.
I will ensure that the sealed test booklets boxes will be opened at test centres before the
presence of Head Teacher/In charge teacher and head invigilator will take signature from the Head Teacher/In charge teacher to ensure that test centre booklet boxes are opened before him/her. Furthermore, the seal of test booklet boxes of each class/block will be opened in the block before the students. 5.
I will rent a car/van on every test day for the following tasks,
a.
receiving of test booklets from TCS office
b.
dispatching of test booklets to every test centre before starting the test
c.
collecting filled, unfilled test booklets and student’s attendance sheets from test centres
d.
dispatching the filled test booklets, unfilled booklets and attendance sheets to SAT office
Sukkur IBA through TCS. (Filled and unfilled test booklets are to be packed in separate boxes and must be clearly written above the box "Filled Booklets" or "Unfilled Booklets". Sending filled booklets mixed with unfilled booklets will result in deduction of the payment from Taluka
98
Coordinator's salary as it incurs the cost to deploy extra labor force to search out the filled booklets from unfilled boxes.) e.
for any other relevant task
6.
I ensure that I will perform all duties as prescribed in the Office Order reliably and
transparently 7.
I will be present in the field during SAT-IV actual test (2015-16) administration and will
be available for SAT work full time. I agree that SAT Office Sukkur IBA reserves the right to deduct my payment for the days I am not present for the work of SAT Office Sukkur IBA for any reason. (i.e. number of days missing multiply by per day payment shall be deducted. Per day payment shall be determined by dividing Rs.XXX by number of days of actual test in the taluka/town) 8.
I shall not hire any of my immediate family members as Invigilator. I agree that SAT
Office Sukkur IBA reserves the right to cancel all the payments of those invigilators who are from my immediate family. (I.e. Brother, sister, parent, daughter/son, spouse)
Full Name of Taluka/Town Coordinator __________________________________ Signature ____________________________________________________________ CNIC _______________________________________________________________ Witness 1
Witness 2
Name ____________________________
Name ______________________________
CNIC ____________________________
CNIC ______________________________
Signature _________________________
Signature ___________________________
99
Appendix D(Manual for Taluka/Town Coordinators and Invigilators) Standardized Achievement test is any test, which is given to large student population under standard conditions and with standardized procedures. Students respond to identical or quite similar questions with similar test conditions, directions and time. Standardized testing is very popular throughout the globe. In California, “Standardized Testing And Reporting” (STAR) has been established by Department of Education whose sole task is to help schools improve academic excellence of their students,www.star.cde.ca.gov.
Standardized tests are also taken in many countries together. Program for International Student Achievement (PISA) Launched in 1997 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, is an international study which aims to evaluate education systems worldwide, by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students. To-date, students representing more than 70 countries and economies have participated in the assessment,www.oecd.org/pisa.
In 2012, Reform Support Unit-Education and Literacy Department, Government of Sindh announced SAT project for the Province of Sindh to evaluate performance of students, studying in public sector schools in grade V and VIII in the subjects of Languages, Math and Science. Sukkur IBA applied to get this project and after a competitive bidding process the project was won by Sukkur IBA. The aim of the project is to serve following main purposes: 1.
Knowing students’ achievement
2.
Linking educational reforms to output/outcome rather than input
3.
The results are also aimed to review the curriculum of teacher training colleges and
teacher recruitment policies. 4.
Informing parents, education administration, civil society and government about the
status of education in the province Sukkur IBA has successfully completed the first and second phases of the project in 2012 and 2013-14 respectively. The implementation of third phase of the project is started after the formal signing of the contract extension between RSU and Sukkur IBA on September 26, 2014.
100
Orientation to Taluka/Town Coordinator’s about SAT Project Phase IV (2015-16) SAT-IV (2015-16) Deliverables
Pilot Test
Construction of Pilot Test
Administration of Pilot Test
Statistical Analysis of Pilot Test Results
Actual Test
Construction of Actual Test on the basis of statistical analysis of Pilot Test
Administration of Actual Test
E-Assessment of Actual Test
Result announcement of Actual Test (Workshop @ Karachi)
Development of 1500 Application Level Items of Languages, Math and Science (Class
IV-VIII)
Student's Report Cards (SRCs) Printing & Distribution
SAT website maintenance, www.satsindh.net.pk
Pilot Test
Pilot Test was conducted from six districts of Sindh, including Karachi, Hyderabad,
MirpurKhas, NausheroFeroze, Jacobabad & Sukkur
Test was administered in 40 schools from Dec 17, 2014 to December 19, 2014
A total number of 1866 students appeared in the Pilot Test out of 2000 sampled students
The students appearance ratio on test day remained 93%
SAT IV (2015-16) Actual Test Administration
Test will be taken from class V and VIII students, studying in all Government schools of
Sindh
Class V students of Sindh Education Foundation (SEF) schools will also appear in the
test from 10 districts of Sindh including, Badin, Dadu, Khairpur, Larkana, QambarShahdadkot, Sanghar, ShaheedBenazirabad, Tharparkar, Thatta and Umerkot
101
Students of class V will travel to Centresecondary schools and appear in the test
Secondary schools will be treated as test centers and some of the Primary schools will
also serve as test centers in those UCs, where there is no secondary school or secondary school is located on a distance of more than 1.5 or 2 Kilometers
The test will be taken from the subjects of Languages (Sindhi/Urdu/English), Math and
Science
Two versions (A and B) of SAT IV (2015-16) booklets are prepared to conduct the test
These booklets contain,
Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs), Fill in the Blanks (FIBs) and Constructed Response
Questions(CRQs) of all three subjects (Language, Math and Science)
Student’s have to fill one circle option out of four in response to each MCQ
Student’s will write the missing word in the blank space of each FIB
Student’s will write/construct their response in the given space against each CRQ
These test booklets have dedicated codes such as, (for class V)
0511: class five, English medium, Booklet A 0512: class five, English medium Booklet B 0521: class five, Urdu medium, Booklet A 0522: class five, Urdu medium, Booklet B 0531: class five, Sindhi medium, Booklet A 0532: class five, Sindhi medium, Booklet B
These test booklets have dedicated codes such as, (for class VIII)
0811: class eight, English medium, Booklet A 0812: class eight, English medium, Booklet B 0821: class eight, Urdu medium, Booklet A 0822: class eight, Urdu medium, Booklet B 0831: class eight, Sindhi medium, Booklet A 0832: class eight, Sindhi medium, Booklet B
102
Taluka/Town Coordinator Responsibilities/ToRs
Preparation of Centre-Feeding Schools Linkages in coordination with SAT project
officers
Coordinate with SAT Project Officers, ADOEs/TEOs (M/F)
Prepare field plans in coordination with SAT Project Officer
Identify UC-wise and taluka/town-wise team of invigilators (Ideally fresh graduates and
not anyone from Education & Literacy Department: Government of Sindh or from any other government department)
Select UC-wise and taluka/town-wise team of invigilators in coordination with SAT
Project Officer
Provide training to invigilators in coordination with SAT Project Officer
Collect Student’s Attendance Sheets from the given address to SAT office (local TCS
office or personal) one day before the start of the test
Collect test booklets from the given address to SAT office (local TCS office or personal)
one day before each test day between 3-7 pm
Every test day distribute the test booklets and Student’s Attendance Sheets at every test
Centre before 10 am
Start the test at every Centre at 10 am daily
Use separate Attendance Sheet for every school (Secondary and Primary)
Every test day collect the filled and unfilled test booklets, Tail Sheet and Student’s
Attendance Sheet from Centre schools, as soon as test completes.
TCS will provide one Tail Sheet in every box of test booklets
Tail sheet must be filled by invigilator during test
Student Attendance sheet must also be filled by invigilator and must be signed by Center
Head teacher/FA/Incharge Teacher
Instruct your each and every Invigilator to write ‘’FILLED COPIES’’ over the boxes of
filled test booklets and write ‘’UNFILLED COPIES’’ over the boxes of unfilled test booklets with Green or Red marker pen.
103
Every test day, dispatch the filled test booklets (with filled Tail Sheet and Student’s
Attendance Sheet) and unfilled test booklets to SAT office Sukkur IBA through TCS on following address.
Mr. Hamid Ali Sheikh
Team Lead Administration SAT Department of Training & Development: Sukkur IBA, Airport Road, Sukkur-65200
[email protected] Off No. 071-5630272 Ext 218 Cell No. 0333-7353466
Do not make any payment for dispatching at TCS office
Monitor the test administration process
Travel to the homes of identified student’s parents and get filled the “Parents’ Socio
Economic Status and Background Information Questionnaire” by asking questions of this form from the parents (TENTATIVE)
Get filled the TBQs and Parents’ Socio Economic Status and Background Information
Questionnaire, as per the guidelines of SAT office and return the same back to Sukkur IBA on following Address,
Mr Farhan Mehboob
Senior Project Officer SAT SAT Office, Department of Training & Development: Sukkur IBA, Airport Road, Sukkur-65200 Off No. 071-5630272 Ext 218 Cell # 0333-7172135
Coordinate with Regional Directors Education (RDEs), District Education Officers
(DEOs) and Assistant District Officers Education (ADOEs) or Taluka Education Officers (TEOs) Male & Female and other relevant Government Education Department stakeholders of Talukas/Towns and Districts
Coordinate and facilitate District-based Local Support Unit (LSU) Staff of RSU
Submit Student Appearance Report on daily basis to SAT Responsible Project Officer of
respective taluka/town through e-mail or Mobile Phone till 4PM
104
Coordinate and facilitate Sukkur IBA, Local Support Unit (LSU) of Reform Support Unit
(RSU), District level educational officers, Provincial Educational Assessment Centre (PEACE) Staff and RSU Monitoring Teams during their monitoring visits to test Centres
Ensure the quality of test administration
Put your Taluka/Town Coordinator Card at the time of entering in school premises
Coordinate with head teacher, teachers and other staff members of the school in a humble
and professional way
As per the policy of Sukkur IBA there is zero tolerance for cheating during the test or
using any other unfair means
If any case of cheating, or any other use of unfair means will be founded at any test
Centre of your respective taluka/town, then the test of that day will be cancelled and re-test will be arranged at that certain test Centre. You and your invigilator/s will also be penalized as per the policy of Sukkur IBA.
Your taluka’s/town’s invigilators’ payment is linked to professionally acting upon the all
given instructions in SAT III (2014-15) Actual Test Invigilator Manual and specifically appropriate completion of the following, o
Face Sheet
o
Tail Sheet
o
Attendance Sheet (with Stamp and Signature of Center Head teacher/F.A/In-charge
Teacher)
Ensure to take each and everything from test Centre, which you or your invigilator/s have
brought there and nothing should be left behind at any test Centre
Take 200 extra test booklets (100 of Class V and 100 of Class VIII) with yourself on
every test day on daily basis
Provide required copies of test booklets from these extra test booklets at all those test
Centre where-ever required
It is mandatory that test should be completed within 10 working days in your respective
taluka/town. So, prepare the test field plans accordingly.
105
Invigilators’Manual Instruction for SAT Phase IV (2015-16) Actual Test Administration
106
107
Introduction
Standardized Achievement test is any test, which is given to large student population under standard conditions and with standardized procedures. Students respond to identical or quite similar questions with similar test conditions, directions and time. Standardized testing is very popular throughout the globe. In California, “Standardized Testing And Reporting” (STAR) has been established by Department of Education whose sole task is to help schools improve academic excellence of their students,www.star.cde.ca.gov.
Standardized tests are also taken in many countries together. Program For International Student Achievement (PISA) Launched in 1997 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, is an international study which aims to evaluate education systems worldwide, by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students. To-date, students representing more
than
70
countries
and
economies
have
participated
in
the
assessment,www.oecd.org/pisa.
In 2012, Reform Support Unit-Education and Literacy Department, Government of Sindh announced SAT project for the Province of Sindh to evaluate performance of students, studying in public sector schools in grade VandVIII in the subjects of Languages, Math and Science. Sukkur IBA applied for this project and after a competitive bidding process the project was won by Sukkur IBA. The aims of the project are: a. To
link our mostly input driven reform agenda to output/outcomes.
b. To use the process and results of SAT to change teachers practices, for instance helping them to graduate from rote learning to active learning method that help to inculcate problem solving, critical thinking, communication, inquiry, and analytical skills in pupils. The results of the tests may also be used to review the curriculum/syllabus/textbooks of schools/teacher training colleges and teacher recruitment policies of various cadres and group of services. c. To inform parents, education administration, civil society and government of the outcomes/gaps in the systems and to gradually shift to result based accountability system.
108
d.
To inform policy makers, development partners, planners and implementers of the current
needs/gaps and to gradually move to evidence based policy making, planning and implementation. e. To acknowledge achievers and help and support under achievers through planned inputs. f. To identify good districts and background/ practices in order to learn and multiple the good practices to other districts. Sukkur IBA has successfully completed the three phases of SAT and now the 4 th phase has been awarded to Sukkur, IBA in December 2015.
Invigilator’s Instruction for SAT Phase IV (2015-16) Actual Test Administration On Test day
Pre-arrangements on test day
Carefully read the invigilator’s manual one night before the test administration as it
will refresh the tasks you need to perform on test day.
Put on clean and nice clothes, and keep proper dressing attire.
Take invigilator file along with details of test Centre and its address.
All invigilators must reach test center as instructed by Taluka Coordinator before 9.00 am
Before entering the school premises, put on your invigilator card given to you by
Sukkur IBA.
Arrival at the School
Meet with Head Teacher or In-charge Head Teacher/First Assistant (FA) of the school
and introduce him/her about SAT exam and its objectives.
Share with him/her the purpose of your visit and give him the RSU/Secretary
Education & Literacy Department: Government of Sindh letter, and request him/her that No
109
any Teacher except the Head teacher is allowed in the block, Sukkur IBA is properly trained and will conduct the test themselves.
Ask for the attendance register of class V and class VIII from the head teacher.
Check by comparing with the Actual Test enrollment of class V and VIII mentioned
in your field plans.
The test booklets of class V and VIII have been given to you as per the Actual Test
enrollment provided to you by SAT office
So, if the number of students of class V and VIII is as per the Actual Test
enrollment or less than the mentioned enrollment, then you will take the test from all students.
But, if the number of students in class V and VIII or anyone of these classes is
more than the mentioned Actual Test enrollment in the field plan, then you will provide them extra test booklets (which have been given to you by TC)
Manage class-wise separate test blocks for V&VIII classes
Before Starting the Test
Write following information on the black/white board of the test block
Name of the School
School’s SEMIS ID
Taluka
District
Medium
No of students appearing in the test (class-wise)
Test Start time
Start time of Practice Test and End time.
Start time of Sindhi Section and End time.
Start time of Math Section and End time.
Start time of Science Section and End time.
110
Motivate the students, by telling them that if they perform at their best, it will raise
rank of Sindh in Pakistan and the World. The name of schools will be highlighted in Newspapers and Media. Also, students and their teachers may be given an award by Govt of Sindh.
Distribute the stationery packets (pencil, sharpener, eraser)
Make sure that every student has a pencil, sharpener and eraser.
Open the sealed boxes, containing test booklets. Information about the school name,
district, taluka and UC name, SEMIS ID #, class, medium, no of test booklets in boxes is written on the LABEL pasted on each box. The booklets are packed in sealed Poly bags and kept in boxes (class-wise and version-wise (A-B) as per enrolment). Open the boxes and poly bags in the test block. Distribute the booklets version-wise as, A, to student 1, B to student 2, then A to student 3 and B to student 4 and so on.
Read aloud the instructions written on the front page of the test booklet to the students
sitting in your test block
Ask students if instructions are clear.
Instruct the students to ask you, in case of confusion and not to talk to a class-fellow
or student sitting next or behind.
Help Students in properly filling up the MCQs and attempting the CRQs, monitor
their response making throughout the test. Starting the Test
Ensure that students correctly fill in the face sheet of the test booklet
Check the following on the answer sheet of every student and if there is any mistake,
correct it accordingly before starting the test,
Booklet ID (to be written by the Invigilator)
Student’s Name
Father’s Name
Father’s Contact Number
School Name
(Invigilator should write this on the board)
School SEMIS ID
(Invigilator should write this on the board)
Class
(Invigilator should write this on the board) 111
Medium
Head Teacher Name
Teacher Name (Who taught Language, Math and Science to him/her in Class V and
(Invigilator should write this on the board)
VIII with CNIC number)
District Name
Gender
Age
The Actual Test is of three hours duration.The distribution of the time is as under,
Filling-up of Face sheet
Practice Test
10min
Invigilator’s Review Time
10min
Language
50min
Math
45min
Science
Break after the language and Math Sections
10min
Total Time
180min (3 hours)
You will announce the starting and finishing time for each section of the test in your
(Invigilator should write this on the board)
10min
45min
test block. Ensure that every student should be on that specific section in the allotted time. Also make sure that students get 10 minute break after Language and Math tests; however they must be sitting on their seats.
Do not sit on the chair during the invigilation time
The test booklet for students contains four sections; a practice test from three subjects
(Language, Math and Science) and three subject sections in following order, Language
Math
Science
Each section of the paper has Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) and Constructed
Response Questions (CRQs) or Extended Response Questions (ERQs) MCQs
You should write on the board that how to fill the circle of an MCQ
112
Each MCQ has four options; A, B, C and D. Ensure that the students select one option
as the best answer and fill the circle of the selected option with a black pencil/pen in a correct way as shown below:
.
CRQs/ERQs
Ensure that the students write the answer to each Constructed Response Question in
the space given below it
Students can use black pencil or black pen to write the responses. Students should not
use glue or pin on the test booklet
Take Attendance of all students who appeared in the test. Also put your Invigilator’s
ID & signature, get signature and stamp of the Head Teacher on the student attendance sheet. Finishing the Test
Before collecting booklets from students make sure that the students have properly
filled the face sheet. Ensure, all aspects of required information have been checked and the student had left nothing unchecked or empty.
Ensure the count of test booklets according to the attendance of the students.
Ensure that bar coded material is not torn or folded as that makes scanning difficult.
Put your name, ID no and signature on every test booklet of the students.
113
Collect the test booklets pack them in extra available Poly bags(version-wise), keep
them in small boxes, seal them, put the sealed small boxes in large boxes and seal them
The unfilled booklets (if any) should be packed in boxes. Attendance Sheets should be
packed in the envelope/s. Take all unfilled booklets boxes, Attendance Sheets, Stationary packets or any other material from the school. No material should be left at the school Write “FILLED COPIES” over the boxes of filled test booklets and write “UNFILLED COPIES” over the boxes of unfilled test booklets with green or red marker.
Some other Important Points
Put your Invigilator Card at the time of entering in school premises
Coordinate with head teacher, teachers and other staff members of the school in a
humble and professional way
Cooperate fully with SAT office Sukkur IBA Monitoring teams, who will be visiting
your test centers during the test
As per the policy of Sukkur IBA there is zero tolerance for cheating during the test or
using any other unfair means
If any case of cheating, or any other use of unfair means will be founded at your test
centre then the test of that day will be cancelled and re-test will be arranged at that certain test centre. You will also be penalized as per the policy of Sukkur IBA.
Note that your invigilation payment is linked to professionally acting upon the all
given instructions in this manual and specifically appropriate completion of the following, i.
Face Sheet of Test Booklet (all fields are mandatory, if students have not filled anyone or all of them, then it is Invigilator’s responsibility to fill-in
ii.
Attendance Sheet (With Stamp and Signature of Center Head Teacher/FA/Incharge/Senior Teacher
114
115
Appendix E (Monitoring Report Pro-forma)
Sukkur Institute of Business Administration Standardized Achievement Test Project Monitoring Report Pro-forma SAT-IV (2015-16) Actual Test Administration Date of Visit_________________District___________________Taluka_________________ School Name_______________________________________________________________
New SEMIS Code Monitored Class V
Monitored Class VIII
Invigilators' Names (ClassV)___________________________________________________ Invigilators' Names(Class VIII)_________________________________________________ Sr. MONITORING CHECKLIST YES NO COMMENTS 1 Invigilator team arrived on time 2
Invigilators were having their ID Cards
3
13
Test began at the prescribed time (10:00 AM) Stationery boxes were provided to students Instructions were communicated to students appropriately Students were seated in the appropriate sequence (i.e. as per medium of instruction) Students received test booklets as per their medium of instruction Number of test booklets matched the number of students Students received test booklets in A and B sequence Students filled their information appropriately on Student Face Sheet. Students attempted questions appropriately Test Centre environment is calm
14
Test Centre is adequately furnished
4 6 7
8 9 10 11 12
116
Sr. 15 16 17 18 19 20
MONITORING CHECKLIST Seats are appropriately arranged in Test Blocks Were arrangements made for students with special needs? Did you witness any form of misconduct by the invigilator or the students? Was Head Master/Mistress present in the school at the time of the test? Head Master/Mistress was informed about the schedule of SAT Phase IV test Who informed Head Master/Mistress about the day, date and time of the test
YES
NO
COMMENTS
RSU / ELD
SIBA
Please put a tick mark
Have you taken photos of: 21
(a) School main gate (b) Test block boards (c) Students and Invigilators
Did you encounter any issues during test monitoring? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Suggestions for improvement? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Name of the Monitoring Officer________________________________________________ Signature of the Monitoring Officer_____________________Date____________________
117
Appendix F (Development, Printing and Dispatch Plan for SAT IV (201516) Student Report Cards) As per the ToRs, SAT Office Sukkur IBA is required to develop, print and dispatch Student Report Cards (SRCs) to the parents/guardians of every student who appeared in the test through Head Masters/Mistresses. This practice was done in SAT I, (2012-13), SAT II (201314), SAT-III (2014-15) and same will be replicated in SAT IV (2015-16). The proposed mechanism for SAT-IV SRCs is as under:
1.
Development of SRCs
SAT office has developed a software program to prepare SAT IV SRCs, with the support of SAT IT team, the software contains following main features.
a.
Generating Student Report Card as per medium of instruction of student.
b.
Generating Contend-strand wise percentage scores of Language, Math & Science in
each Student Report Card. c.
Generating Overall percentage average scores of each subject for student
d.
Generating overall percentage averages of each subject for school.
2.
Development of School Performance Report
2.1
Sukkur IBA has designed School Performance Report for all the secondary& primary
schools which participated in SAT-IV exam. 2.2
The School Performance Report contains the percentage average scores in all
contend-strands of Language, Math & Science subjects along with overall subject average percentages. 2.3
The aim of sharing school performance report is to aware the Head Teacher regarding
performance of students in each subject category, so that he/she can bring reforms at school level by analyzing the SAT results. 2.4
School Performance Report is for school record.
2.5
Following this, the soft folders of SRCs are sent to the Printing Company.
3.
Printing of SRCs
a.
The Printing Company starts the printing of SRCs
3.2
After printing job the company sort out the school-wise SRCs of individual students
118
3.3
Prepare school-wise envelopeswith having the dispatch address of the school along
with the name and contact no of the Head Master/Mistress (If available in RSU data file) 3.4
The Printing Company keeps following documents in each school-wise SRC envelope
3.5
One colored SRC of each individual student of the school
3.6
One copy of SAT Instruction Letter to Head Master/Mistress
3.7
One copy of SAT Instruction Letter to Assistant District Officers/Taluka Education
Officers (ADOEs/TEOs) Male & Female. 3.8
After keeping all above mentioned documents in school-wise envelopes, they are
sealed and ready for dispatching. 4.
Printing of School Performance Report
a.
One pager school performance report will also be shared with School Head Teacher
for office record. 5.
Dispatch of SRCs
a.
Conducting Pre-dispatch Meeting at District Level
i.
Meetings
at
district
level
will
be
conducted
with
TEOs
Male/Female
(Primary/Secondary) in collaboration with Reform Support Unit. LSU Staff Members, DEO Primary, DEO Secondary, TEOs and Sukkur IBA representative will be part of this meeting. ii.
Sukkur IBA representative will share the complete process of SRC distribution with all concerned.
iii.
RSU will develop district wise and region wise schedule of such meetings and will
issue letters to LSU, DEOs, TEOs and Sukkur IBA regarding meeting.
Dispatch of SRCs to Class V & VIII-Primary & Secondary Schools 5.1
school-wise envelopes, which contain class V & VIII report cards, are dispatched to
the office addresses of concerned Taluka Education Officers (Primary & Secondary) Male/Female in entire Sindh province. 5.2
All School envelopes of boys primary schools will be delivered to TEO Primary
(Male) 5.3
All School envelopes of girls primary schools will be delivered to TEO Primary
(Female) 5.4
All School envelopes of boys secondary schools will be delivered to TEO
Secondary (Male)
119
5.5
All School envelopes of girls secondary schools will be delivered to TEO
Secondary (Female) 5.6
Sukkur IBA will use avail services of TCS Pvt Limited in dispatching the SRCs to
offices of TEO Primary (M/F) and TEO Secondary (M/F) 5.7
RSU will share the updated addresses of TEO Primary/Secondary (Male & Female)
with SAT office Sukkur IBA on prescribed format.
6.
Distribution Mechanism of SRCs
a.
Distribution of Class V SRCs through TEO primary (Male/Female)
i.
After meetings, Taluka Coordinator of SAT office Sukkur IBA will coordinate with TEO Primary (Male/Female) and select a day on which TEO primary will call all Head Teachers of the Taluka to come to TEO primary (Male/Female) office to collect Student Report Card. The receiving will be taken from Head Teachers and original receiving will be shared with Sukkur IBA Taluka Coordinator, TEO can keep its Xerox copy.
ii.
Sukkur IBA Taluka Coordinator will also be available during distribution process.
6.2
Distribution of Class VIII SRCs through TEO secondary (Male/Female)
6.2.1 Same Taluka Coordinator will also coordinate with TEO (Male/female) Secondary to select a day on which TEO Secondary (Male/Female) will call all Head teachers of Taluka to come to TEO Secondary (Male/Female) office to collect and discuss Student Report Cards. The receiving will be taken from Head Teachers and will be shared will RSU and Sukkur IBA. 6.2.2 Sukkur IBA Taluka Coordinator will also be available during distribution process. Discussion on Results 6.2.3 SAT office also requests all TEOs that they should discuss the SAT results with the Head Masters/Mistresses of their talukas/towns and thus try to take school-based reform in order to improve the quality of education delivery in the schools of their respective talukas/towns. 6.2.4 However, in some cases, If it is not possible for them, then SAT office requests them to distribute the SRCs to their Head Masters/Mistresses through Supervisors Primary Education. 7.
Distribution of SRCs to parents through Head Teachers
120
a.
After receiving the Student Report Cards, Head Teacher will organize Parents Day at school or may
also call Parent-teacher meeting in school.
b.
Head Teacher will discuss the results of each student with Parents & Subject teachers.
c.
Head Teacher will identify in which subject student can improve, based on SAT results.
d.
Head Teacher will distribute the Student Report Cards to parents.
e.
Head Teacher will get receiving signature/thumb impression from parents when
distributing the report card, and will share the same receiving sheet to concerned TEO office with in 10 working days. 8.
Additional Information on School-wise Student Report Cards Envelopes:
Each envelope contains following information and suggested action S# Information type
Description
Suggested action
01 Student Report
Sukkur IBA provides
Head Teacher will share these
report cards of students
report cards
who appeared in test
with parents of students.
Sukkur IBA provides
Head Teacher must review the
Performance
school performance report
report and take measures to
Report
on one page.
improve the weak areas in
Cards
02 School
Language, Science & Maths. Sukkur IBA provides
Head teacher must review it and
for distribution of
guidelines to Head
act accordingly.
SRC)
Teacher for distribution of
03 Letter (Guidelines
SRC to Parents 04 List of Students
Sukkur IBA provides list
Head teacher must taken
with Space for
of all students who
signature of student’s parent
Parents Signature.
appeared in SAT-IV with
while sharing the student report
space for signature/thumb
card. Same receiving sheet will
impression of parents
be handed over to concerned
when receiving report
TEO office with
card of their children.
in 10 working days.
121
Appendix G (District Profiles of Class V & VIII) District West Karachi Table 56 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V District's Difference From Content District's Difference From Province's Content Subject Content Strand Strand Subject Province's Subject Strand Average Average Average (%) Average (%) (%) (%) Reading 59.19 -10.17 Language 41 -8.68 Writing 22.81 -7.19
Math
Science
Number & Operation
29.74
-3.2
Measurement
36.2
-3.71
Algebra
14.9
0.9
Geometry Information Handling
16.53
-3.71
28.16
8.18
Life Science
35.82
-5.61
Physical Science
19.53
-3.12
Earth & Space Science
38.63
-2.79
25.77
-2.16
27.14
-3.96
Standard Deviation
20.23
12.82
12.08
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Orangi Town 42.84 38.53 SITE Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
-1.84
30.42
-4.65
30.4
-3.26
34.55
-3.25
2.47
22.75
3.02
24.95
2.19
28.74
2.56
0.8 19.93 5.84 23.15 3.99 27.76 3.54 Baldia Town 40.2 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
122
Table 57 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Reading Writing
Difference District's From District's Difference From Content Province's Subject Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) 53.25 -3.01 45.11 -7.53 36.96 -12.04
Number & Operation
21.67
2.83
Algebra
18.48
0.76
Geometry
18.84
-1.12
Information Handling
35.21
0.76
Life Science
25.15
-0.06
Physical Science
28.18
-2.74
Earth & Space Science
25.33
-2.16
20.99
1.38
26.55
-1.68
Standard Deviation
19.23
9.32
10.05
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Orangi Town SITE Town Baldia Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
47.42
-2.31
22.44
-1.45
29.2
-2.65
33.02
-2.14
44.73
0.38
20.52
0.47
25.4
1.15
30.22
0.66
40.99 4.12 18.76 2.23 22.91 3.64 27.55 3.33 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
123
District Malir Karachi Table 58 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Reading
58.97
-9.95
Writing
20.04
-4.42
Number & Operation
29.73
-3.19
42
-9.51
Algebra
19.51
-3.71
Geometry
14.52
-1.7
Information Handling
36.39
-0.05
Life Science
34.5
-4.29
Physical Science
19.6
-3.19
Earth & Space Science
38.31
-2.47
Measurement Math
Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
39.51
-7.19
19.15
27.1
-3.49
13.83
26.69
-3.51
13.27
District's Difference From Content Province's District's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Bin Qasim Town Gadap Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
41.11
-1.6
30.87
-3.77
28.95
-2.26
33.64
-2.54
38.44 1.07 24.59 2.51 25.19 1.5 29.41 1.69 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
124
Table 59 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Difference District's From Content Province's Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
55.24
-5
Writing
26.55
-1.63
Number & Operation
25.12
-0.62
Algebra
22.1
-2.86
Geometry
18.59
-0.87
Information Handling
36.13
-0.16
Life Science
25.78
-0.69
Physical Science
26.41
-0.97
Earth & Space Science
22.86
0.31
District's Subject Average (%)
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
40.89
-3.31
23.52
-1.15
25.48
-0.61
Standard Deviation
19.11
12.91
10.99
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Bin Qasim Town Gadap Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
44.4
-3.51
27.52
-4
28.28
-2.8
33.4
-3.44
39 1.89 21.36 2.16 23.97 1.51 28.11 1.85 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
125
District Korangi Karachi Table 60 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
41.61
-9.29
20.69
24.09
-0.48
11.48
27.27
-4.09
11.4
Difference From District's Province's Content District's Subject Content Strand Strand Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
58.55
-9.53
Writing
24.68
-9.06
Number & Operation
27.66
-1.12
Measurement
31.9
0.59
Algebra
16.67
-0.87
Geometry
14.88
-2.06
Information Handling
25.45
10.89
Life Science
36.46
-6.25
Physical Science
19.79
-3.38
Earth & Space Science
36.23
-0.39
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Korangi Town Shah Faisal Town
43.41
-1.8
24.17
-0.08
28.53
-1.26
32.04
-1.05
43.13
-1.52
24.63
-0.54
28.24
-0.97
32
-1.01
Landhi Town Malir Town
40.59
1.02
24.92
-0.83
25.42
1.85
30.31
0.68
Taluka
38.42 3.19 22.83 1.26 26.11 1.16 29.12 1.87 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
126
Table 61 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Difference District's From District's Content Content Province's Subject Strand Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Reading
53.97
-3.73
Writing
41.36
-16.44
Number & Operation
22.73
1.77
Algebra
17.53
1.71
Geometry
18.82
-1.1
Information Handling
33.66
2.31
Life Science
24.35
0.74
Physical Science
29.1
-3.66
Earth & Space Science
27.46
-4.29
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
47.66
-10.08
21.23
1.14
27.11
-2.24
Standard Deviation
19.09
9.22
9.87
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Shah Faisal Town Korangi Town Landhi Town Malir Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
51.27
-3.61
22
-0.77
28.35
-1.24
33.87
-1.87
48.5
-0.84
20.89
0.34
27.12
-0.01
32.17
-0.17
46.45
1.21
21.34
-0.11
26.55
0.56
31.44
0.56
44.64 3.02 21.03 0.2 26.54 0.57 30.75 1.25 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
127
District Sujawal Table 62 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Difference Difference District's Content From District's From Content Strand Strand Average Province's Subject Province's (%) Content Strand Average (%) Subject Average (%) Average (%) Reading
56.53
-7.51
Writing
16.2
-0.58
Number & Operation
28.92
-2.38
Measurement
41.7
-9.21
Algebra
19.86
-4.06
Geometry
13.68
-0.86
Information Handling
37.28
-0.94
Life Science
35.98
-5.77
Physical Science
19.17
-2.76
Earth & Space Science
36.38
-0.54
Standard Deviation
36.36
-4.04
17.26
26.59
-2.98
16.42
26.78
-3.6
14.08
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Sujawal Mirpur Bithoro
38.76
-2.4
29.77
-3.18
28.06
-1.28
32.2
-2.29
37.36
-1
29.06
-2.47
29.56
-2.78
31.99
-2.08
Jati Shah Bundar Kharo Chann
33.36
3
21.84
4.75
22.98
3.8
26.06
3.85
32.85
3.51
20.5
6.09
23.15
3.63
25.5
4.41
Taluka
30 6.36 18.33 8.26 16.67 10.11 21.67 8.24 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
128
Table 63 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Difference District's From Difference From Content District's Subject Province's Province's Subject Strand Average (%) Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
59.24
-9
Writing
21.11
3.81
Number & Operation
27.89
-3.39
Algebra
20.63
-1.39
Geometry
14.76
2.96
Information Handling
37.46
-1.49
Life Science
30.21
-5.12
29.09
-3.65
23.14
0.03
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
40.18
-2.6
23.78
-1.41
28.29
-3.42
Standard Deviation
18.56
14.41
13.42
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Sujawal Shah Bundar Mirpur Bithoro Jati
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
41.02
-0.84
27.38
-3.6
30.97
-2.68
33.12
-2.37
40.47
-0.29
22.73
1.05
33.1
-4.81
32.1
-1.35
41.46
-1.28
23.07
0.71
26.74
1.55
30.42
0.33
35.13 5.05 18.76 5.02 20.57 7.72 24.82 5.93 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
129
District South Karachi Table 64 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
Content Strand
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference Difference From From District's Province's Province's Subject Content Strand Subject Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) -7.03 39.79 -7.47 -7.92
Reading
56.05
Writing
23.54
Number & Operation
27.77
-1.23
Measurement
31.48
1.01
Algebra
16.79
-0.99
Geometry Information Handling
14.79
-1.97
24.26
12.08
Life Science
35.6
-5.39
Physical Science Science
17.89
-1.48
Earth & Space Science
35.93
-0.09
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
20.69
24.05
-0.44
12.19
25.89
-2.71
11.27
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Saddar Town Lyari Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
43.77
-3.98
24.78
-0.73
26.45
-0.56
31.67
-1.76
39.32
0.47
24.33
-0.28
26.59
-0.7
30.08
-0.17
Kemari Town
34.09 5.7 22.32 1.73 23.69 2.2 26.7 3.21 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
130
Table 65 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
Difference District's From District's Difference From Content Province's Subject Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
50.99
-0.75
Writing
35.61
-10.69
Number & Operation
22.44
2.06
Algebra
17.61
1.63
Geometry
19.25
-1.53
Information Handling
34.25
1.72
24
1.09
Physical Science Science
27.62
-2.18
Earth & Space Science
25.47
-2.3
Language
Math
Life Science
43.3
-5.72
21.23
1.14
25.93
-1.06
Standard Deviation
18.89
10.18
8.95
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Saddar Town 45.11 Kemari Town 44.29 Lyari Town 41.02
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
-1.81
22.51
-1.28
27.48
-1.55
31.7
-1.55
-0.99
20.8
0.43
24.99
0.94
30
0.15
2.28 20.26 0.97 25.05 0.88 28.77 1.38 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
131
District Central Karachi Table 66 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V District's Content Subject Content Strand Strand Average (%) Language
Math
Difference From Province's Content Strand Average (%)
District's Subject Average (%)
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
41.01
-8.69
21.13
23.48
0.13
11.78
26.61
-3.43
11.7
Reading
57.27
-8.25
Writing
24.75
-9.13
Number & Operation
26.89
-0.35
Measurement
31.74
0.75
Algebra
15.86
-0.06
Geometry Information Handling
14.76
-1.94
24.45
11.89
Life Science
33.78
-3.57
18.61
-2.2
35.51
0.33
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
New Karachi Town North Nazimabad T
43.03
-2.02
25.06
-1.58
26.47
-0.86
31.52
-1.49
42.25
-1.24
22.58
0.9
25.11
0.5
29.98
0.05
Liaqatabad Town Gulberg Town
40.81
0.2
22.92
0.56
25.67
-0.06
29.8
0.23
Taluka
35.17 5.84 21.53 1.95 23.57 2.04 26.76 3.27 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
132
Table 67 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
District's Difference Difference From Content From Province's District's Subject Content Strand Strand Province's Content Strand Average (%) Average Subject Average (%) (%) Average (%) Reading
53.1
-2.86
Writing Number & Operation
36.71
-11.79
32.75
-8.25
Algebra
17.58
1.66
Geometry
19.67
-1.95
Information Handling
31.81
4.16
Life Science
24.01
1.08
Physical Science
28.47
-3.03
Earth & Space Science
25.95
-2.78
44.91
-7.33
21.35
1.02
26.4
-1.53
Standard Deviation
19.01
9.76
9.78
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
North Nazimabad Town Liaqatabad Town New Karachi Town Gulberg Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
49.05
-4.14
23.34
-1.99
26.88
-0.48
33.09
-2.2
44.51
0.4
20.76
0.59
26.72
-0.32
30.66
0.23
45.68
-0.77
20.33
1.02
25.63
0.77
30.55
0.34
40.23 4.68 23.36 -2.01 26.85 -0.45 30.15 0.74 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
133
District East Karachi Table 68 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
Content Strand
Reading Language
Math
Science
Writing
Difference District's From Difference From Content Province's District's Subject Province's Standard Strand Content Average (%) Subject Average Deviation Average Strand (%) (%) Average (%) 58.21 -9.19 40.62 -8.3 20.55 23.03 -7.41
Number & Operation
26.58
-0.04
Measuremen t
31.51
0.98
Algebra
13.29
2.51
Geometry
14.23
-1.41
Information Handling
22.85
13.49
Life Science
34.46
-4.25
Physical Science
17.97
-1.56
Earth & Space Science
36.87
-1.03
22.73
0.88
10.37
25.63
-2.45
10.42
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Jamshed Town
39.64
0.93
23.31
-0.58
26.6 4
-1.02
29.8 6
-0.2
23.3 29.1 2.23 0.49 9 5 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
Gulshan-e-Iqbal
42.61
-2.04
21.46
1.27
134
Table 69 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Reading
52.73
-2.49
Writing
33.26
-8.34
Number & Operation
22.6
1.9
Algebra
17.63
1.61
Geometry Information Handling
18.69
-0.97
13.99
21.98
Life Science
23.4
1.69
27.54
-2.1
23.88
-0.71
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
43
-5.42
19.38
21.07
1.3
25.36
-0.49
District's Difference From District's Content Province's Content Subject Strand Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
9.48
9.37
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Gulshan-e-Iqbal Jamshed Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
46.13
-3.14
20.61
0.46
24.04
1.31
30.26
-0.45
41.75 1.24 21.26 -0.19 25.87 -0.51 29.62 0.19 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
135
District Tharparkar Table 70 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
S-ubject
Language
Math
Difference Difference District's From District's From Content Province's Subject Average Province's Strand Content Strand (%) Subject Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Content Strand
Reading Writing Number & Operation
47.15 11.85
1.87 3.77
34.9
-8.36
Measurement
39.88
-7.39
Algebra
22.05
-6.25
Geometry
13.67
-0.85
Information Handling
55.49
-19.15
Life Science
33.27
-3.06
20.43
-4.02
47.94
-12.1
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Standard Deviation
29.5
2.82
14.12
30.79
-7.18
14.95
27.68
-4.5
12.22
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Mithi Diplo
32.36
-2.86
35.17
-4.38
29.36
-1.68
32.3
-2.98
30.57
-1.07
32.8
-2.01
30.46
-2.78
31.27
-1.95
Nagarparkar Chachro
30.05
-0.55
29.9
0.89
27.47
0.21
29.14
0.18
Taluka
25.86 3.64 25.6 5.19 24.354 3.326 25.27 4.05 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
136
Table 71 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Content Strand
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Difference From District's Province's Province's Subject Content Strand Subject Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
58.58
-8.34
Writing
17.7
7.22
Number & Operation
32.28
-7.78
Algebra
24.69
-5.45
Geometry
19.32
-1.6
Information Handling
38.15
-2.18
Life Science
28.72
-3.63
Physical Science
29.51
-4.07
Earth & Space Science
23.23
-0.06
38.14
-0.56
27.95
-5.58
27.98
-3.11
Standard Deviation
18.14
17.63
14.22
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Diplo Mithi Chachro Nagar parkar
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
40.18
-2.04
31.79
-3.84
32.12
-4.14
34.7
-3.34
40.34
-2.2
30.77
-2.82
29.8
-1.82
33.63
-2.27
34.92
3.22
23.63
4.32
24.62
3.36
27.72
3.64
33.93 4.21 20.48 7.47 20.99 6.99 25.13 6.23 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
137
District Noushero Feroze Table 72 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Science
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Content Strand
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Difference From District's Province's Content Subject Strand Average Average (%) (%)
Reading
52.57
-3.55
Writing
17.22
-1.6
Number & Operation
31.18
-4.64
Measurement
35.44
-2.95
Algebra
20.73
-4.93
Geometry Information Handling
17.82
-5
42.58
-6.24
Life Science
30.85
-0.64
Physical Science
17.53
-1.12
Earth & Space Science
38.03
-2.19
Standard Deviation
34.9
-2.58
16.99
28.27
-4.66
19
24.24
-1.06
13.97
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
38.32
-3.42
31.81
-3.54
27.41
-3.17
Moro
38.33
-3.43
32.08
-3.81
26.71
-2.47
Naushero Feroz
33.21
1.69
28.29
-0.02
24.15
0.09
Mehrabpur
32.89
2.01
25.19
3.08
22.74
1.5
Kandiaro
32.11
2.79
24.21
4.06
20.83
3.41
32.5 1 32.3 7 28.5 5 26.9 4 25.7 1
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Bhirya
Taluka
Overall Average (%)
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
-3.37 -3.23 0.59 2.2 3.43
Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
138
Table 73 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Difference From District's Province's Content Strand Content Average (%) Strand Average (%)
Reading
53.02
-2.78
Writing
24.54
0.38
Number & Operation
28.06
-3.56
Algebra
23.25
-4.01
Geometry
21.18
-3.46
Information Handling
36.93
-0.96
Life Science
26.43
-1.34
25.29
0.15
24.31
-1.14
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From District's Province's Subject Subject Average Average (%) (%) 38.78
-1.2
25.87
-3.5
25.49
-0.62
Standard Deviation
18.58
18.37
13.02
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Moro Bhirya NausheroFeroz Kandiaro Mehrabpur
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
40.99
-2.21
30.1
-4.23
28.62
-3.13
33.24
-3.19
39.91
-1.13
27
-1.13
27.64
-2.15
31.51
-1.46
38.81
-0.03
24.66
1.21
23.88
1.61
29.12
0.93
37.33
1.45
23.39
2.48
23.13
2.36
27.95
2.1
36.09 2.69 23.53 2.34 23.65 1.84 27.75 2.3 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
139
District Jacobabad Table 74 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V Difference From District's Province's Content Strand Content Average (%) Strand Average (%)
Content Strand
Subject
Reading
40.87
8.15
Writing
14.1
1.52
34
-7.46
Measurement
31.48
1.01
Algebra
18.29
-2.49
Geometry
13.91
-1.09
Information Handling
65.44
-29.1
Life Science
31.72
-1.51
Physical Science Science
20.71
-4.3
Earth & Space Science
60.15
-24.31
Language
Number & Operation
Math
Difference From District's Province's Subject Subject Average Average (%) (%)
Standard Deviation
27.48
4.84
29.45
-5.84
10.54
28.51
-5.33
10.26
12.48
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Garhi Khairo Thull
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
28.67
-1.19
30.54
-1.09
29.34
-0.83
29.51
-1.03
26.86
0.62
29.35
0.1
28.27
0.24
28.16
0.32
Jacobabad
27.3 0.18 28.62 0.83 28.09 0.42 28 0.48 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
140
Table 75 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference Difference From From Province's District's Subject Province's Content Average (%) Subject Average Strand (%) Average (%)
Reading
38.93
11.31
Writing
19.45
5.47
Number & Operation
33.08
-8.58
Algebra
24.75
-5.51
Geometry
22.07
-4.35
Information Handling
72.35
-36.38
Life Science
30.98
-5.89
27.06
-1.62
34.07
-10.9
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
29.19
8.39
30.69
-8.32
29.83
-4.96
Standard Deviation
11.85
8.21
8.33
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Jacobabad Thull GarhiKhairo
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
31.1
-1.91
29.39
1.3
29.53
0.3
30.01
-0.11
28.02
1.17
31.83
-1.14
29.76
0.07
29.87
0.03
27.81 1.38 30.96 -0.27 30.55 -0.72 29.77 0.13 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
141
District Umerkot Table 76 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Difference Difference From District's From Province's District's Subject Content Strand Province's Content Average (%) Average (%) Subject Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
48.95
0.07
Writing
15.31
0.31
Number & Operation
31.36
-4.82
Measurement
35.79
-3.3
Algebra
22.5
-6.7
Geometry
16.88
-4.06
Information Handling
36.07
0.27
Life Science
32.71
-2.5
Physical Science Science
18.32
-1.91
Earth & Space Science
35.91
-0.07
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
32.13
0.19
15.81
28.18
-4.57
18.31
25.11
-1.93
13.09
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Kunri Samaro
35.83
-3.7
32.38
-4.2
28.92
-3.81
32.38
-3.91
34.84
-2.71
29.92
-1.74
25.46
-0.35
30.07
-1.6
Pithoro Umerkot
32.89
-0.76
25.14
3.04
25.06
0.05
27.7
0.77
Taluka
30.12 2.01 27 1.18 23.8 1.31 26.97 1.5 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
142
Table 77 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference Difference From From Province's District's Subject Standard Province's Content Strand Average (%) Deviation Subject Average Average (%) (%)
Reading
57.75
-7.51
Writing
22.08
2.84
Number & Operation
25.89
-1.39
19
0.24
Geometry
14.79
2.93
Information Handling
30.53
5.44
Life Science
26.69
-1.6
Physical Science Science
26.89
-1.45
Earth & Space Science
20.36
2.81
Language
Algebra Math
39.91
-2.33
22.07
0.3
25.51
-0.64
19.08
13.01
11.67
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Kunri Pithoro Samaro Umerkot
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
41.66
-1.75
23.89
-1.82
26.76
-1.25
30.77
-1.6
43.22
-3.31
21.36
0.71
23.97
1.54
29.52
-0.35
39.58
0.33
22.42
-0.35
24.78
0.73
28.93
0.24
38.51 1.4 21.42 0.65 25.52 -0.01 28.48 0.69 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
143
District Jamshoro Table 78 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Difference From District's Content District's Province's Strand Average Subject Average Content Strand (%) (%) Average (%)
Reading
55.75
-6.73
Writing
17.08
-1.46
Number & Operation
26.33
0.21
Measurement
32.98
-0.49
Algebra
13.58
2.22
Geometry Information Handling
11.21
1.61
34.59
1.75
Life Science
33.89
-3.68
Physical Science Science
16.75
-0.34
Earth & Space Science
34.84
1
Language
Math
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
36.41
-4.09
22.85
0.76
13.46
24.56
-1.38
12.56
16.91
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Thana Bula Khan Manjhand
42.36
-5.95
28.57
-5.72
29.07
-4.51
33.33
-5.39
36.27
0.14
22.87
-0.02
26.58
-2.02
28.57
-0.63
Kotri Sehwan
36.1
0.31
21.77
1.08
24.45
0.11
27.44
0.5
Taluka
35.33 1.08 22.39 0.46 22.45 2.11 26.73 1.21 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
144
Table 79 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference Difference From District's From Province's Standard Subject Province's Content Strand Deviation Average (%) Subject Average Average (%) (%)
Reading
61.88
-11.64
Writing
26.37
-1.45
Number & Operation
21.03
3.47
Algebra
14.55
4.69
Geometry
14.34
3.38
Information Handling
27.95
8.02
Life Science
25.86
-0.77
Physical Science
24.21
1.23
Earth & Space Science
19.84
3.33
44.13
-6.55
18.41
3.96
23.91
0.96
20.78
9.41
10.97
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Kotri Thana Bula Khan Manjhand Sehwan
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
46.97
-2.84
19.84
-1.43
25.07
-1.16
30.63
-1.81
43.43
0.7
19.26
-0.85
23.36
0.55
28.68
0.14
43
1.13
17.18
1.23
25.81
-1.9
28.67
0.15
41.22 2.91 16.99 1.42 21.23 2.68 26.48 2.34 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
145
District Badin Table 80 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From District's Difference From Province's Subject Average Province's Subject Content (%) Average (%) Strand Average (%)
Reading
52.54
-3.52
Writing
15.95
-0.33
Number & Operation
28.46
-1.92
Measurement
37.39
-4.9
Algebra
18.11
-2.31
Geometry
12.31
0.51
Information Handling
35.24
1.1
Life Science
32.28
-2.07
Physical Science Science
18.36
-1.95
Earth & Space Science
33.18
2.66
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
34.24
-1.92
17.85
25.31
-1.7
16.5
23.62
-0.44
13.4
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Talhar Badin GolarchiS.F.Rao
Math Average (%)
Tando Bago Matli
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
39.39
-5.15
32.06
-6.75
28.18
-4.56
33.21
-5.49
37.01
-2.77
29.2
-3.89
23.95
-0.33
30.05
-2.33
33.06
1.18
24.42
0.89
22.81
0.81
26.76
0.96
30.05
4.19
19.47
5.84
20.87
2.75
23.46
4.26
29
5.24
18.22
7.09
20.71
2.91
22.65
5.07
Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
146
Table 81 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Content Strand
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From District's Difference From Province's Subject Province's Subject Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
56.41
-6.17
Writing
23.73
1.19
Number & Operation
24.45
0.05
Algebra
18.55
0.69
Geometry
15.9
1.82
Information Handling
31.03
4.94
Life Science
25.86
-0.77
Physical Science
26.72
-1.28
Earth & Space Science
21.13
40.07
-2.49
21.53
0.84
25.3
-0.43
Standard Deviation
19.34
12.4
11.42 2.04
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
TandoBago Talhar Matli Golarchi-S.F.Rao Badin
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
43.49
-3.42
24.91
-3.38
29.52
-4.22
32.64
-3.67
42.36
-2.29
26.19
-4.66
26.77
-1.47
31.78
-2.81
38.81
1.26
21.78
-0.25
26.32
-1.02
28.97
0
39.64
0.43
18.23
3.3
22.22
3.08
26.7
2.27
38.52 1.55 18.45 3.08 22.02 3.28 26.33 2.64 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
147
District Shaheed Benazirabad Table 82 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
District's Difference From Difference From District's Content Province's Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Subject Average Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
55.61
-6.59
Writing
15.88
-0.26
Number & Operation
27.21
-0.67
Measurement
36.11
-3.62
Algebra
16.73
-0.93
Geometry
12.2
0.62
Information Handling
35.86
0.48
Life Science
30.6
-0.39
15.46
0.95
32.76
3.08
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Standard Deviation
35.75
-3.43
18.01
24.33
-0.72
16
22.49
0.69
13.39
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Sakrand Kazi Ahmed
38.54
-2.79
29.19
-4.86
25.43
-2.94
31.05
-3.53
36.4
-0.65
24.61
-0.28
21.17
1.32
27.39
0.13
Daur Nawab Shah
34.52
1.23
23.05
1.28
22.47
0.02
26.68
0.84
Taluka
33.82 1.93 20.78 3.55 20.79 1.7 25.13 2.39 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
148
Table 83 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Province's District's Subject Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
58.08
-7.84
Writing
25.99
-1.07
Number & Operation
24.4
0.1
Algebra
18.75
0.49
Geometry
16.75
0.97
Information Handling
32.54
3.43
Life Science
24.84
0.25
Physical Science Science
25.27
0.17
Earth & Space Science
20.22
2.95
Language
Math
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
42.03
-4.45
21.81
0.56
24.11
0.76
Standard Deviation
20.01
12.74
11.44
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Kazi Ahmed Sakrand Daur Nawab Shah
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
47.25
-5.22
23.55
-1.74
28.34
-4.23
33.04
-3.72
40.12
1.91
23.66
-1.85
24.74
-0.63
29.51
-0.19
41.93
0.1
18.87
2.94
22.54
1.57
27.78
1.54
39.77 2.26 21.61 0.2 21.79 2.32 27.72 1.6 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
149
District Matiari Table 84 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Language
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Content Strand
Subject
Reading
58.97
-9.95
Writing
20.04
-4.42
Number & Operation
29.73
-3.19
42
-9.51
Algebra
19.51
-3.71
Geometry Information Handling
14.52
-1.7
36.39
-0.05
Life Science
34.5
-4.29
19.6
-3.19
38.31
-2.47
Measurement Math
Difference Difference From District's From Province's Standard Subject Average Province's Content Deviation (%) Subject Average Strand (%) Average (%)
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
39.51
-7.19
19.15
27.1
-3.49
13.83
26.69
-3.51
13.27
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Bin Qasim Town Gadap Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
41.11
-1.6
30.87
-3.77
28.95
-2.26
33.64
-2.54
38.44 1.07 24.59 2.51 25.19 1.5 29.41 1.69 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
150
Table 85 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Difference From District's District's Province's Content Content Strand Subject Strand Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
55.24
-5
Writing
26.55
-1.63
Number & Operation
25.12
-0.62
Algebra
22.1
-2.86
Geometry
18.59
-0.87
Information Handling
36.13
-0.16
Life Science
25.78
-0.69
Physical Science
26.41
-0.97
Earth & Space Science
22.86
0.31
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
40.89
-3.31
23.52
-1.15
25.48
-0.61
Standard Deviation
19.11
12.91
10.99
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Bin Qasim Town Gadap Town
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
44.4
-3.51
27.52
-4
28.28
-2.8
33.4
-3.44
39 1.89 21.36 2.16 23.97 1.51 28.11 1.85 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
151
District Tando Allahyar Table 86 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
Content Strand
Difference From Difference From District's District's Province's Province's Content Strand Subject Average Content Strand Subject Average Average (%) (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
50.49
-1.47
Writing
16.53
-0.91
Number & Operation
24.49
2.05
Measurement
31.03
1.46
Algebra
14.06
1.74
Geometry
10.89
1.93
Information Handling
30.55
5.79
Life Science
33.54
-3.33
Physical Science Science
16.29
0.12
Earth & Space Science
34.97
0.87
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
33.51
-1.19
17.55
21.5
2.11
12.18
24.19
-1.01
10.73
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Jhando Mari Tando Allah Yar
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
36.25
-2.74
24.72
-3.22
26.54
-2.35
29.17
-2.77
35.16
-1.65
22
-0.5
23.93
0.26
27.03
-0.63
27.64 5.87 17.24 4.26 22.23 1.96 22.37 4.03 Chamber Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
152
Table 87 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
District's Difference From Difference From Content Province's District's Subject Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
56.57
-6.33
Writing
24.87
0.05
Number & Operation
23.39
1.11
Algebra
18.55
0.69
Geometry
16.18
1.54
Information Handling
30.94
5.03
Life Science
27.12
-2.03
Physical Science Science
26.9
-1.46
Earth & Space Science
22.46
0.71
Language
Math
40.72
-3.14
21.06
1.31
26.09
-1.22
Standard Deviation
19.44
12.14
11.74
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Tando Allah Yar Chamber Jhando Mari
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
41.71
-0.99
21.2
-0.14
26.63
-0.54
29.85
-0.56
37.27
3.45
17.74
3.32
22.23
3.86
25.75
3.54
41.68 -0.96 23.28 -2.22 28.08 -1.99 21.01 8.28 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
153
District Sanghar Table 88 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V District's Difference From Difference From Content Province's District's Subject Province's Strand Content Strand Average (%) Subject Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Content Strand
Subject
Reading
53.82
-4.8
Writing
13.96
1.66
Number & Operation
25.4
1.14
Measurement
34.55
-2.06
Algebra
14.44
1.36
Geometry Information Handling
10.98
1.84
34.96
1.38
Life Science
30.26
-0.05
Physical *Science Science
15.08
1.33
Earth & Space Science
33.85
1.99
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
33.89
-1.57
16.72
22.62
0.99
14
22.27
0.91
11.99
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Khipro Sanghar
34.65
-0.76
25.72
-3.1
23.97
-1.7
28.11
-1.85
34.87
-0.98
24.42
-1.8
23.73
-1.46
27.67
-1.41
Tando Adam Jam Nawaz Ali Sinjhoro Shahdadpur
35.45
-1.56
24.35
-1.73
22.83
-0.56
27.54
-1.28
34.62
-0.73
23.04
-0.42
22.83
-0.56
26.83
-0.57
32.73
1.16
21.07
1.55
21.09
1.18
24.96
1.3
Taluka
32.51 1.38 19.42 3.2 20.57 1.7 24.17 2.09 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
154
Table 89 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From District's Province's Subject Average Content Strand (%) Average (%)
Reading
53.49
-3.25
Writing
25.13
-0.21
Number & Operation
22.16
2.34
Algebra
17.66
1.58
Geometry
16.31
1.41
Information Handling
30.55
5.42
Life Science
23.68
1.41
24.26
1.18
19.49
3.68
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
39.31
-1.73
20.25
2.12
23.11
1.76
Standard Deviation
19.67
11.35
10.77
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Khipro Sanghar Sinjhoro Jam Nawaz Ali Tando Adam Shahdadpur
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
41.03
-1.72
22.5
-2.25
27.64
-4.53
30.39
-2.83
42.54
-3.23
21.46
-1.21
24.07
-0.96
29.35
-1.79
39.78
-0.47
20.75
-0.5
23.3
-0.19
27.94
-0.38
39.29
0.02
20.87
-0.62
22.73
0.38
27.63
-0.07
39.37
-0.06
20
0.25
21.89
1.22
27.09
0.47
35.26 4.05 17.61 2.64 20.54 2.57 24.47 3.09 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
155
District Dadu Table 90 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Difference Difference District's From From Content District's Subject Standard Province's Province's Strand Average (%) Deviation Content Strand Subject Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
54.02
-5
Writing
12.77
2.85
Number & Operation
26.57
-0.03
Measurement
35.28
-2.79
Algebra
14.82
0.98
Geometry Information Handling
11.8
1.02
34.77
1.57
29.31
0.9
Physical Science Science
14.54
1.87
Earth & Space Science
30.73
5.11
Language
Math
Life Science
33.4
-1.08
16.23
23.51
0.1
15.5
21.33
1.85
13.41
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Mehar Johi
35.75
-2.35
25.77
-2.26
23.14
-1.81
28.16
-2.08
31.86
1.54
22.73
0.78
21.57
-0.24
25.38
0.7
Dadu K N Shah
33.04
0.36
22.66
0.85
20.05
1.28
25.25
0.83
Taluka
31.98 1.42 22.25 1.26 20.74 0.59 24.99 1.09 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
156
Table 91 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Difference From Province's District's Subject Province's Subject Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
58.09
-7.85
Writing
19.5
5.42
Number & Operation
22.67
1.83
Algebra
15.34
3.9
Geometry
12.67
5.05
Information Handling
25.03
10.94
Life Science
25.09
0
Physical Science
24.26
1.18
Earth & Space Science
20.74
2.43
Standard Deviation
38.8
-1.22
18.32
18.89
3.48
11.25
23.85
1.02
11.68
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Mehar Dadu K N Shah Johi
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
40.58
-1.78
18.63
0.26
24.37
-0.52
27.86
-0.68
38.62
0.18
19.21
-0.32
23.51
0.34
27.12
0.06
37.41
1.39
18.86
0.03
23.74
0.11
26.67
0.51
36.64 2.16 18.31 0.58 23.75 0.1 26.24 0.94 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
157
District Mirpur Khas Table 92 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
District's Difference From District's Difference From Content Province's Subject Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
45.36
3.66
Writing
12.12
3.5
Number & Operation
27.28
-0.74
Measurement
35.4
-2.91
Algebra
18.59
-2.79
Geometry Information Handling
11.25
1.57
31.41
4.93
Life Science
32.38
-2.17
Physical Science Science
17.4
-0.99
Earth & Space Science
32.33
3.51
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
28.74
3.58
18.94
24.19
-0.58
17.26
24.14
-0.96
15.44
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Jhuddo Digri
32.91
-4.17
30.59
-6.4
28.62
-4.48
30.71
-5.02
32.58
-3.84
28.35
-4.16
25.57
-1.43
28.83
-3.14
Sindhri Mirpur Khas Kot Ghulam Mohd Hussain Bux Mari
29.44
-0.7
26.66
-2.47
26.17
-2.03
27.42
-1.73
27.83
0.91
21.84
2.35
23.46
0.68
24.38
1.31
25.6
3.14
21.48
2.71
21.68
2.46
22.92
2.77
Taluka
25.4 3.34 18.94 5.25 20.78 3.36 21.71 3.98 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
158
Table 93 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
Difference Difference District's From District's From Content Strand Province's Subject Average Province's Average (%) Content Strand (%) Subject Average Average (%) (%)
Reading
32.78
17.46
Writing
21.38
3.54
Number & Operation
18.79
5.71
Algebra
17.33
1.91
Geometry
13.16
4.56
Information Handling
22.2
13.77
Life Science
19.68
5.41
Physical Science Science
24.69
0.75
Earth & Space Science
16.4
6.77
Language
Math
27.08
10.5
17.34
5.03
21.28
3.59
Standard Deviation
20.23
13.64
16.42
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Digri MirpurKhas Jhuddo Sindhri Kot Ghulam Mohd HussainBux Mari
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
30.31
-3.23
21.4
-4.03
25.2
-3.92
25.64
-3.73
30.33
-3.25
18.06
-0.69
24.18
-2.9
24.19
-2.28
25.97
1.11
20.36
-2.99
19.17
2.11
21.83
0.08
21.78
5.3
14.86
2.51
16.06
5.22
17.56
4.35
19.65
7.43
11.95
5.42
15.53
5.75
15.71
6.2
20.58 6.5 9.47 7.9 12.69 8.59 14.25 7.66 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
159
District Thatta Table 94 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Content Strand
Difference From Difference From Province's District's Subject Province's Content Average (%) Subject Average Strand (%) Average (%)
Reading
50.04
-1.02
Writing
14.34
1.28
Number & Operation
24.27
2.27
Measurement
35.68
-3.19
Algebra
15.16
0.64
Geometry Information Handling
10.64
2.18
33.77
2.57
Life Science
30.52
-0.31
Physical Science Science
15.59
0.82
Earth & Space Science
33.31
2.53
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
32.19
0.13
17.39
22.13
1.48
14.29
22.58
0.6
12.93
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Keti Bundar Ghorabari
42.48
-10.29
27.23
-5.1
29.41
-6.83
33.04
-7.41
39.17
-6.98
27.19
-5.06
25.52
-2.94
30.63
-5
Mirpur Sakro Thatta
33.02
-0.83
23.79
-1.66
23.18
-0.6
26.65
-1.02
Taluka
29.61 2.58 19.85 2.28 21.17 1.41 23.55 2.08 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
160
Table 95 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII Difference Difference From District's From Content District's Subject Province's Content Strand Province's Strand Average (%) Subject Average Average (%) Content Strand (%) Average (%)
Subject
Reading
52.6
-2.36
Writing
23.84
1.08
Number & Operation
22.4
2.1
Algebra
18.47
0.77
Geometry
15.36
2.36
Information Handling
30.14
5.83
Life Science
24.26
0.83
Physical Science Science
22.68
2.76
Earth & Space Science
18.29
4.88
Language
Math
38.22
-0.64
20.32
2.05
22.36
2.51
Standard Deviation
19.92
11.84
10.52
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Keti Bundar 43.46 Ghorabari 40.6 Mirpur Sakro 40.82 Thatta 35.76
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
-5.24
20.85
-0.53
22.64
-0.28
28.98
-2.02
-2.38
21.89
-1.57
22.93
-0.57
28.47
-1.51
-2.6
20.36
-0.04
21.82
0.54
27.67
-0.71
2.46 20 0.32 22.61 -0.25 26.12 0.84 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
161
District Ghotki Table 96 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Difference From District's Province's Content Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
38.86
10.16
Writing
18.23
-2.61
Number & Operation
26.71
-0.17
Measurement
29.03
3.46
Algebra
19.01
-3.21
Geometry Information Handling
14.14
-1.32
40.97
-4.63
Life Science
26.72
3.49
Physical Science Science
18.93
-2.52
Earth & Space Science
37.9
-2.06
Language
Math
Difference From District's Province's Subject Subject Average Average (%) (%)
Standard Deviation
28.55
3.77
16.27
24.3
-0.69
16.29
23.55
-0.37
15.39
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Ubauro Ghotki
30.19
-1.64
26.27
-1.97
25.14
-1.59
27.2
-1.73
29.51
-0.96
24.93
-0.63
24.42
-0.87
26.29
-0.82
Mirpur Mathelo Khan Garh Daharki
28.73
-0.18
24.51
-0.21
23.08
0.47
25.44
0.03
28.29
0.26
22.93
1.37
22.87
0.68
24.7
0.77
Taluka
24.41 4.14 21.02 3.28 20.7 2.85 22.04 3.43 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
162
Table 97 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Content Strand
Difference From District's Difference From Province's Subject Province's Subject Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
36.78
13.46
Writing
19.73
5.19
Number & Operation
24.73
-0.23
Algebra
20.22
-0.98
Geometry
20.24
-2.52
Information Handling
38.24
-2.27
Life Science
23.65
1.44
23.77
1.67
25.49
-2.32
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
28.25
9.33
23.38
-1.01
24.07
0.8
Standard Deviation
17.83
15.88
15.95
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
MirpurMathelo Khan Garh Ghotki Ubauro Daharki
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
31.31
-3.06
28.06
-4.68
28.85
-4.78
29.41
-4.18
28.77
-0.52
24.89
-1.51
27.31
-3.24
26.99
-1.76
30.61
-2.36
23.48
-0.1
23.66
0.41
25.92
-0.69
25.45
2.8
24.46
-1.08
24.61
-0.54
24.84
0.39
22.91 5.34 15.07 8.31 17.17 6.9 18.39 6.84 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
163
District Tando Mohd Khan Table 98 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Language
Science
Difference From Province's Content Strand Average (%)
Reading
51.33
-2.31
Writing
13.86
1.76
Number & Operation
22.72
3.82
Measurement
31.8
0.69
Algebra
10.39
5.41
Geometry Information Handling
10.48
2.34
34.25
2.09
Life Science
31.14
-0.93
Physical Science
15.75
0.66
Earth & Space Science
34.92
0.92
Content Strand
Subject
Math
District's Content Strand Average (%)
District's Subject Average (%)
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
32.59
-0.27
17.43
20.21
3.4
12.18
23.05
0.13
11.97
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Tando Ghulam Hyde Tando Mohd Khan
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
34.04
-1.45
22.2
-1.99
23.67
-0.62
26.64
-1.35
33.27
-0.68
20.36
-0.15
23.82
-0.77
25.81
-0.52
Bulri Shah Karim
30.15 2.44 17.97 2.24 21.31 1.74 23.14 2.15 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
164
Table 99 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
Difference From District's District's Difference From Province's Content Strand Subject Average Province's Subject Content Strand Average (%) (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
49.02
1.22
Writing
21.44
3.48
Number & Operation
26.19
-1.69
Algebra
19.15
0.09
Geometry
18.14
-0.42
Information Handling
47.81
-11.84
Life Science
27.12
-2.03
Physical Science Science
24.81
0.63
Earth & Space Science
24.03
-0.86
Language
Math
35.23
2.35
23.88
-1.51
25.46
-0.59
Standard Deviation
17.29
10.64
10.04
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Tando Ghulam Hyde 35.01 Bulri Shah Karim 35.69 Tando Mohd Khan 35.15
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
0.22
26.13
-2.25
26.84
-1.38
29.33
-1.14
-0.46
24.41
-0.53
25.39
0.07
28.5
-0.31
0.08 22.81 1.07 24.94 0.52 27.64 0.55 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
165
District Kambar Shahdadkot Table 100 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Difference From District's Province's Content Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
50.39
-1.37
Writing
13.44
2.18
Number & Operation
23.1
3.44
Measurement
32.22
0.27
Algebra
11.18
4.62
Geometry
9.73
3.09
Information Handling
34.11
2.23
Life Science
28.91
1.3
Physical Science
13.74
2.67
Earth & Space Science
31.31
4.53
District's Subject Average (%)
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
31.92
0.4
17.07
20.43
3.18
13.3
20.8
2.38
12.42
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Kambar Naseerabad
34.81
-2.89
22.88
-2.45
22.43
-1.63
26.71
-2.33
32.24
-0.32
21.9
-1.47
20.64
0.16
24.93
-0.55
Miro Khan Warrah Sijawal Junejo Shahdadkot
31.99
-0.07
20.89
-0.46
20.99
-0.19
24.62
-0.24
31.74 30.58
0.18
0.72 0.63
19.51 20.22
1.29
1.34
19.71 19.8
0.58
23.65 23.54
0.73 0.84
30.47
1.45
18.09
2.34
20.87
-0.07
23.14
1.24
Taluka
Qubo Saeed Khan
25.08 6.84 15.94 4.49 17.82 2.98 19.61 4.77 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
166
Table 101 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
Difference District's Difference From From Content District's Subject Province's Province's Strand Average (%) Subject Average Content Strand Average (%) (%) Average (%)
Reading
55.17
-4.93
Writing
22.91
2.01
Number & Operation
21.74
2.76
Algebra
16.9
2.34
Geometry
12.15
5.57
Information Handling
28.02
7.95
Life Science
25.66
-0.57
Physical Science Science
24.39
1.05
Earth & Space Science
19.88
3.29
Language
Math
39.04
-1.46
18.81
3.56
23.93
0.94
Standard Deviation
19.14
10.53
11.9
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Naseerabad Kambar SijawalJunejo Warrah Miro Khan Shahdadkot
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
42.23
-3.19
19.88
-1.07
28.41
-4.48
30.17
-2.91
41.48
-2.44
21.73
-2.92
26.87
-2.94
30.03
-2.77
40.68 39.78
-1.64
-0.41
0.63
28.64 26.28
-1.38
3.05
26.01 23.3
-2.08
-0.74
19.22 15.76
37.77
1.27
18.42
0.39
21.71
2.22
25.97
1.29
0.98
34.58 4.46 16.7 2.11 18.28 5.65 23.19 4.07 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
167
District Kashmore Table 102 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Language
Math
Reading
48.95
0.07
Writing
12.85
2.77
Number & Operation
23.16
3.38
Measurement
34.19
-1.7
Algebra
12.38
3.42
Geometry
9.26
3.56
Information Handling
32.77
3.57
Life Science
27.95
2.26
14.11
2.3
30.98
4.86
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
30.9
1.42
17.28
20.69
2.92
13.47
20.64
2.54
11.88
Difference From District's District's Province's Content Content Strand Subject Strand Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Kashmore Kandhkot
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
34.45
-3.55
23.71
-3.02
23.13
-2.49
27.1
-3.02
30.47
0.43
18.77
1.92
19.68
0.96
22.97
1.11
27.84 3.06 19.43 1.26 19.07 1.57 22.11 1.97 Tangwani Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
168
Table 103 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
Difference District's From District's Difference From Content Province's Subject Average Province's Subject Strand Content Strand (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
53.79
-3.55
Writing
17.66
7.26
Number & Operation
23.13
1.37
Algebra
17.44
1.8
Geometry
14.89
2.83
Information Handling
29.8
6.17
Life Science
22.68
2.41
Physical Science Science
23.02
2.42
Earth & Space Science
18.22
4.95
Language
Math
35.72
1.86
20.33
2.04
21.94
2.93
Standard Deviation
18.52
11.89
10.86
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Kashmore Kandhkot Tangwani
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
39.76
-4.04
23.4
-3.07
24.34
-2.4
29.16
-3.16
36.99
-1.27
20.23
0.1
21.8
0.14
26.34
-0.34
30.5 5.22 17.46 2.87 19.77 2.17 22.58 3.42 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
169
District Shikarpur Table 104 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From District's Difference From Province's Subject Average Province's Subject Content Strand (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
43.02
6
Writing
9.94
5.68
Number & Operation
25.04
1.5
Measurement
29.37
3.12
Algebra
11.99
3.81
Geometry Information Handling
11.48
1.34
46.13
-9.79
Life Science
27.66
2.55
Physical Science Science
15.93
0.48
Earth & Space Science
42.87
-7.03
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
26.48
5.84
14.4
22.2
1.41
12.46
22.73
0.45
11.17
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Khanpur Garhi Yasin
27.45
-0.97
25.72
-3.52
24.36
-1.63
25.84
-2.04
28.36
-1.88
23.26
-1.06
23.8
-1.07
25.14
-1.34
Shikarpur Lakhi
27.15
-0.67
20.65
1.55
22.22
0.51
23.34
0.46
Taluka
23.09 3.39 21.28 0.92 21.48 1.25 21.93 1.87 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
170
Table 105 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Content Strand
District's Difference From Difference From Content Province's District's Subject Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
39.26
10.98
Writing
18.97
5.95
Number & Operation
34.24
-9.74
Algebra
25.37
-6.13
Geometry
22.24
-4.52
Information Handling
73.11
-37.14
Life Science
31.46
-6.37
Physical Science Science
27.25
-1.81
Earth & Space Science
34.76
-11.59
Language
Math
29.11
8.47
31.49
-9.12
30.22
-5.35
Standard Deviation
12.34
8.21
8.2
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Shikarpur Garhi Yasin Lakhi Khanpur
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
30.55
-1.44
31.44
0.05
30.53
-0.31
30.84
-0.57
27.89
1.22
31.73
-0.24
30.33
-0.11
29.98
0.29
27.52
1.59
32.02
-0.53
30.14
0.08
29.89
0.38
29.55 -0.44 29.72 1.77 28.73 1.49 29.33 0.94 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
171
District Khairpur Mirs Table 106 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V District's Difference From District's Difference From Content Province's Subject Average Province's Subject Strand Content Strand (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Content Strand
Subject
Reading
36.98
12.04
Writing
18.87
-3.25
Number & Operation
24.02
2.52
Measurement
24.42
8.07
Algebra
18.43
-2.63
Geometry Information Handling
14.81
-1.99
33.38
2.96
Life Science
24.86
5.35
Physical Science Science
14.17
2.24
Earth & Space Science
32.09
3.75
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
27.93
4.39
22.08
1.53
20.1
19.7
3.48
14.47
17.15
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Nara
26.69
1.24
25.38
-3.3
22.43
-2.73
24.83
-1.59
Kot Diji
28.47
-0.54
24.64
-2.56
21.03
-1.33
24.71
-1.47
Kingri
30.08
-2.15
21.63
0.45
19.76
-0.06
23.82
-0.58
Mirwah
27.95
-0.02
22.75
-0.67
20.37
-0.67
23.69
-0.45
Gambat
28.54
-0.61
22.39
-0.31
19.78
-0.08
23.57
-0.33
Sobhodero
29.87
-1.94
22.02
0.06
18.43
1.27
23.44
-0.2
Faiz Ganj
26.12
1.81
20.28
1.8
18.91
0.79
21.77
1.47
Taluka
Khairpur Mirs
25.73 2.2 19.25 2.83 18.05 1.65 21.01 2.23 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
172
Table 107 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII Difference Difference From District's District's From Content Province's Content Content Strand Subject Province's Strand Strand Average Average (%) Average (%) Subject Average (%) (%)
Subject
Reading
36.84
13.4
Writing
17.42
7.5
Number & Operation
23.47
1.03
Algebra
20.79
-1.55
Geometry
19.26
-1.54
Information Handling
30.54
5.43
Life Science
21.94
3.15
Physical Science Science
19.13
6.31
Earth & Space Science
21.13
2.04
Language
Math
27.13
10.45
22.27
0.1
20.52
4.35
Standard Deviation
18.22
21.78
15.77
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Gambat Sobhodero Mirwah FaizGanj KotDiji Nara Kingri
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
28.05
-0.92
25.67
-3.4
22.33
-1.81
25.35
-2.04
29.96 26.8
-2.83
-1.35
-1.44
25.02 24.24
-1.71
-1.69
21.48 21.96
-0.96
0.33
23.62 23.96
28.26
-1.13
22.01
0.26
20.23
0.29
23.5
-0.19
27.25
-0.12
21.37
0.9
20.25
0.27
22.96
0.35
22.8
4.33
25.1
-2.83
20.02
0.5
22.64
0.67
27.48
-0.35
18.52
3.75
20.12
0.4
22.04
1.27
-0.93
KhairpurMirs
25.74 1.39 21.18 1.09 18.44 2.08 21.79 1.52 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
173
District Sukkur Table 108 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
District's Difference From Difference From District's Content Province's Content Province's Subject Strand Strand Average Subject Average Average (%) Average (%) (%) (%)
Content Strand Reading
45.25
3.77
Writing
12.34
3.28
Number & Operation
20.61
5.93
Measurement
28.89
3.6
Algebra
10.22
5.58
Geometry
10.9
1.92
Information Handling
31.62
4.72
Life Science
26.74
3.47
Physical Science Science
14.09
2.32
Earth & Space Science
32.58
3.26
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
28.79
3.53
18.03
18.73
4.88
11.74
20.37
2.81
11.09
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
PANO AKIL NEW SUKKUR ROHRI
Math Average (%)
SALEHPAT CITY SUKKUR
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
42.5
-13.71
31.82
-13.09
27.58
-7.21
33.97
-11.34
32.29
-3.5
19.57
-0.84
23.31
-2.94
25.06
-2.43
26.73
2.06
18.15
0.58
18.94
1.43
21.27
1.36
25.56
3.23
16.72
2.01
20.15
0.22
20.81
1.82
27.11 1.68 16.25 2.48 18.09 2.28 20.49 2.14 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
174
Table 109 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
District's Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Difference From Province's Content District's Subject Province's Subject Strand Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
46.23
4.01
Writing
27.39
-2.47
Number & Operation
18.24
6.26
Algebra
15.72
3.52
Geometry
18.94
-1.22
Information Handling
30.03
5.94
Life Science
21.51
3.58
Physical Science Science
25.6
-0.16
Earth & Space Science
19.78
3.39
Language
Math
36.81
0.77
18.42
3.95
23.01
1.86
Standard Deviation
20.57
7.37
7.69
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Salehpat City Sukkur Rohri Pano Akil New Sukkur
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
48.08
-11.27
29.15
-10.73
24.33
-1.32
33.85
-7.77
38.75
-1.94
18.35
0.07
24.16
-1.15
27.08
-1
37.46
-0.65
17.81
0.61
21.81
1.2
25.7
0.38
33.7
3.11
18.86
-0.44
21.99
1.02
24.85
1.23
30.23 6.58 18.04 0.38 20.8 2.21 23.03 3.05 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
175
District Hyderabad Table 110 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Subject
District's Difference From District's Difference From Content Province's Subject Province's Subject Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Content Strand Reading
44.17
4.85
Writing
12.73
2.89
Number & Operation
20.88
5.66
Measurement
24.61
7.88
Algebra
9.21
6.59
Geometry Information Handling
11.22
1.6
26.05
10.29
Life Science
27.91
2.3
Physical Science Science
14.09
2.32
Earth & Space Science
31.11
4.73
Language
Math
Standard Deviation
28.45
3.87
17.99
18.07
5.54
10.04
20.63
2.55
10.32
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Qasimabad Latifabad
37.68
-9.23
19.95
-1.88
24.66
-4.03
27.43
-5.05
27.14
1.31
19.02
-0.95
20.95
-0.32
22.37
0.01
Hyderabad City Hyderabad
27.62
0.83
18.4
-0.33
20.67
-0.04
22.23
0.15
Taluka
27.91 0.54 16.63 1.44 19.16 1.47 21.14 1.24 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
176
Table 111 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Subject
Difference District's From District's Difference From Content Strand Province's Subject Average Province's Subject Average (%) Content Strand (%) Average (%) Average (%)
Content Strand
Reading
50.17
0.07
Writing
23.25
1.67
Number & Operation
19.98
4.52
Algebra
15.27
3.97
Geometry
16.98
0.74
Information Handling
27.84
8.13
Life Science
21.66
3.43
Physical Science Science
23.88
1.56
Earth & Space Science
18.57
4.6
Language
Math
36.71
0.87
18.64
3.73
22.04
2.83
Standard Deviation
19.33
8.83
8.64
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Qasimabad Latifabad Hyderabad City Hyderabad
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
42.17
-5.43
17.2
1.44
22.51
-0.47
27.3
-1.5
37.29
-0.55
20.22
-1.58
22.97
-0.93
26.83
-1.03
37.11
-0.37
18.86
-0.22
21.82
0.22
25.93
-0.13
34.07 2.67 17.07 1.57 21.29 0.75 24.14 1.66 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
177
District Larkana Table 112 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class V
Content Strand
Subject
Reading
43.06
5.96
Writing
11.31
4.31
Number & Operation
22.79
3.75
Measurement
26.76
5.73
Algebra
10.64
5.16
Geometry
10.62
2.2
Information Handling
38.59
-2.25
Life Science
24.98
5.23
Physical Science Science
13.91
2.5
Earth & Space Science
34.22
1.62
Language
Math
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
27.19
5.13
16.58
20.02
3.59
13.4
19.81
3.37
12.23
Difference From District's District's Province's Content Content Strand Subject Strand Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Language Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class V
Rato Dero Larkana
30.38
-3.19
24.53
-4.51
22.76
-2.95
25.89
-3.55
28.25
-1.06
19.35
0.67
19.77
0.04
22.45
-0.11
Dokri Bakrani
23.86
3.33
17.83
2.19
18.74
1.07
20.14
2.2
Taluka
22.31 4.88 16.06 3.96 15.78 4.03 18.05 4.29 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
178
Table 113 All Subjects Content Strand Based Analysis and Taluka Based Overall Scores of Class VIII
Content Strand
Subject
District's Difference From District's Difference From Content Province's Content Subject Average Province's Subject Strand Strand Average (%) Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
43.27
6.97
Writing
20.03
4.89
Number & Operation
28.86
-4.36
Algebra
21.77
-2.53
Geometry Information Handling Life Science
19.49
-1.77
57.12
-21.15
28.16
-3.07
Physical Science Science
24.81
0.63
Earth & Space Science
28.52
-5.35
Language
Math
31.65
5.93
26.57
-4.2
26.73
-1.86
Standard Deviation
16.04
11.53
10.7
Math Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Science Average (%)
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Overall Average (%)
Difference From District’s Overall Average (%)
RatoDero Larkana Dokri Bakrani
Difference From District’s Subject Average (%)
Taluka
Language Average (%)
Taluka Based Overall Average Percentage of Class VIII
32.09
-0.44
27.26
-0.69
27.15
-0.42
28.83
-0.51
32.39
-0.74
26.6
-0.03
26.93
-0.2
28.64
-0.32
30.51
1.14
26.68
-0.11
26.77
-0.04
27.99
0.33
28.57 3.08 24.72 1.85 24.74 1.99 26.01 2.31 Notes: 1. The Talukas are ranked on the basis of overall average (%) of Talukas 2. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 3. All averages and differences are given in percent points
179
Appendix H (Gender Wise Content Strand Based Results) Table 114 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Female Students of Class V
Subject Content Strand
Language
Math
Gender Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Gender Subject Province's Average (%) Content Strand Average (%)
Reading
51.88
-2.86
Writing
18.57
-2.95
Number & Operation
26.09
0.45
Measurement
30.21
2.28
Algebra
15.54
0.26
Geometry Information Handling
13.19
-0.37
32.96
3.38
Life Science
31.21
-1
16.57
-0.16
35.01
0.83
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
35.22
-2.9
18.93
23
0.61
15.01
23.54
-0.36
13.13
Table 115 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Female Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Gender Difference From Difference From Content Province's Gender Subject Province's Strand Content Strand Average (%) Subject Average Average (%) Average (%) (%)
Reading
52.33
-2.09
Writing
32.37
-7.45
Number & Operation
23.85
0.65
Algebra
18.45
0.79
Geometry
18.04
-0.32
Information Handling
34.48
1.49
Life Science
25.49
-0.4
26.95
-1.51
24.29
-1.12
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
42.35
-4.77
21.86
0.51
25.91
-1.04
Standard Deviation
19.73
12.75
11.68
180
Table 116 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Male Students of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Difference Gender From Content Province's Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
47.47
1.55
Writing
14.03
1.59
Number & Operation
26.78
-0.24
Measurement
33.72
-1.23
Algebra
15.94
-0.14
Geometry Information Handling
12.62
0.2
38.16
-1.82
Life Science
29.67
0.54
16.33
0.08
36.29
-0.45
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Gender Subject Province's Average (%) Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
30.75
1.57
17.07
23.94
-0.33
15.39
22.99
0.19
12.97
Table 117 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Male Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Content Strand
Gender Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Difference From Gender Subject Province's Province's Subject Average (%) Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
48.89
1.35
Writing
20.09
4.83
Number & Operation
24.93
-0.43
Algebra
19.74
-0.5
Geometry
17.51
0.21
Information Handling
36.94
-0.97
Life Science
24.84
0.25
Physical Science
24.47
0.97
Earth & Space Science
22.45
0.72
34.49
3.09
22.69
-0.32
24.19
0.68
Standard Deviation
18.79
14.03
12.1
181
Appendix I (Location Wise Content Strand Based Results) Table 118: All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Rural Students of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Location Content Content Strand Strand Average (%)
Difference Difference From Location From Province's Standard Subject Province's Content Deviation Average (%) Subject Strand Average (%) Average (%) 1.19 32.1 0.7 17.7 0.23
Reading
48.81
Writing Number & Operation
15.38 26.42
0.54
Measurement
32.51
1.09
Algebra
15.77
0.32
Geometry
12.74
0.54
Information Handling
36.6
0.16
Life Science
30.03
0.85
Physical Science
16.31
0.49
Earth & Space Science
35.72
0.63
23.54
0.55
15.39
23.05
0.63
13.07
Notes: 1. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 2. All averages and differences are given in percent points.
182
Table 119: All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Rural Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Content Strand
Location Content Strand Average (%)
Reading Writing Number & Operation Algebra Geometry Information Handling
50.27 20.79
Difference Difference From Location From Province's Standard Subject Province's Content Deviation Average (%) Subject Strand Average (%) Average (%) -1.3 35.53 1.4 19.26 4.11
25.21
-1.19
19.88 16.87
-0.9 0.53
35.95
-0.77
Life Science
25.53
-0.96
Physical Science
21.54
3.37
Earth & Space Science
22.4
0.39
22.67
-0.72
14.89
23.11
1.26
12.35
Notes: 1. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 2. All averages and differences are given in percent points.
183
Table 120: All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Urban Students of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Location Content Content Strand Strand Average (%) Reading
49.53
0.47
Writing Number & Operation
16.22
-0.61
26.82
0.14
Measurement
32.44
1.16
Algebra
15.87
0.22
13
0.28
35.65
1.11
Life Science
30.61
0.27
Physical Science
16.65
0.15
Earth & Space Science
36.13
0.22
Geometry Information Handling
Science
Difference Difference From Location From Province's Standard Subject Province's Content Deviation Average (%) Subject Strand Average (%) Average (%) 32.87
-0.07
18.25
23.76
0.33
14.93
23.48
0.2
12.87
Notes: 1. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 2. All averages and differences are given in percent points.
184
Table 121: All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Urban Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Science
Content Strand
Location Content Strand Average (%)
Reading
50.34
Writing Number & Operation Algebra
30.57
Difference Difference From Location From Province's Standard Subject Province's Content Deviation Average (%) Subject Strand Average (%) Average (%) -1.37 40.46 -3.53 19.57 -5.67
23.65
0.37
18.46
0.52
Geometry Information Handling
18.87
-1.47
36.16
-0.98
Life Science
24.57
0
Physical Science
22.75
2.16
Earth & Space Science
24.28
-1.49
22.03
-0.08
11.55
36.69
-12.32
10.09
Notes: 1. Positive difference means score points higher than district’s overall average (%) and negative difference means score points lower than district’s overall average (%) 2. All averages and differences are given in percent points.
185
AppendixJ (School Type Wise Content Strand Based Results) Table 122 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Boys Schools’ Students of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Boys Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Province's Boys Subject Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
48.14
0.88
Writing
14.59
1.03
Number & Operation
26.88
-0.34
Measurement
33.39
-0.9
Algebra
16.17
-0.37
Geometry Information Handling
12.76
0.06
38.06
-1.72
Life Science
29.77
0.44
16.32
0.09
36.05
-0.21
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
31.36
0.96
24.01
-0.4
15.68
23
0.18
13.13
17.29
Table 122 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Boys Schools’ Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Boys Content Strand Average (%)
Difference From Difference From Province's Boys Subject Province's Content Strand Average (%) Subject Average Average (%) (%)
Reading
49.22
1.02
Writing
20.5
4.42
Number & Operation
25.11
-0.61
Algebra
19.89
-0.65
Geometry Information Handling Life Science
17.43
0.29
36.76
-0.79
24.98
0.11
24.52
0.92
22.4
0.77
Physical Science Science Earth & Space Science
34.86
2.72
22.79
-0.42
24.26
0.61
Standard Deviation
18.98
14.31
12.29
186
Table 123 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Girls Schools’ Students of Class V
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Difference From Girls Content Province's Strand Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
Reading
50.56
-1.54
Writing
17.89
-2.27
Number & Operation
24.74
1.8
Measurement
28.42
4.07
Algebra
14.18
1.62
Geometry
12.65
0.17
Information Handling
32.47
3.87
Life Science
30.88
-0.67
16.33
0.08
35.07
0.77
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
Girls Subject Average (%)
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
34.22
-1.9
18.69
21.8
1.81
14.28
23.29
-0.11
13
Table 124 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Girls Schools’ Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Content Strand
Girls Content Strand Average (%)
Reading
51.74
-1.5
Writing
31.64
-6.72
Number & Operation
23.67
0.83
Algebra
18.24
1
Geometry Information Handling
18.13
-0.41
35.14
0.83
Life Science
25.63
-0.54
26.85
-1.41
24.22
-1.05
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
41.69
-4.11
19.63
21.78
0.59
25.9
-1.03
Difference From Province's Girls Subject Content Strand Average (%) Average (%)
12.68
11.76
187
Table 125 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Mixed Schools’ Students of Class V Difference From Province's Subject Average (%)
Standard Deviation
39.61
-7.29
20.8
23.58
0.03
11.52
25.38
-2.2
11.35
Difference From Mixed Content Province's Mixed Subject Subject Content Strand Strand Average Content Strand Average (%) (%) Average (%) Language
Math
Reading
56.31
-7.29
Writing
22.91
-7.29
Number & Operation
27.23
-0.69
Measurement
32.34
0.15
Algebra
15.69
0.11
Geometry Information Handling
14.11
-1.29
24.61
11.73
Life Science
34.2
-3.99
17.96
-1.55
35.34
0.5
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
Table 126 All Subject Content Strand Based Analysis of Mixed Schools’ Students of Class VIII
Subject
Language
Math
Difference Difference Mixed Content From From Mixed Subject Standard Content Strand Strand Average Province's Province's Average (%) Deviation (%) Content Strand Subject Average Average (%) (%) Reading
53.35
-3.11
Writing
37.76
-12.84
Number & Operation
22.4
2.1
Algebra
17.35
1.89
Geometry Information Handling
18.69
-0.97
32.51
3.46
Life Science
24.25
0.84
28.16
-2.72
25.82
-2.65
Science Physical Science Earth & Space Science
45.55
-7.97
20.93
1.44
26.33
-1.46
19.13
9.27
9.43
188
189
