Comparative Analytics

EASE Analytics

Cross-cycle performance intelligence across EASE I · EASE II · EASE III — 14 partner schools, 8 subjects, 6 grade levels

EASE Performance Report
EASE I
70.5
Network avg score 11,999 student entries 14 schools · G7–G12
EASE II
72.5
Network avg score 10,715 student entries 12 schools · G7–G12
EASE III
72.9
Network avg score 10,431 student entries 14 schools · G7–G11
📈
+2.4 pts
Overall network improvement
EASE I → III
Most Improved Subject
English Extended +7.4 pts
Most Consistent Subject
Religion 86–88 avg
Best Math Cycle
EASE II 64.8 avg
Absent from EASE II
Fatih & TNA Fatih
Subject Performance Across EASE Cycles
Weighted average scores per subject — EASE I vs II vs III
EASE I
EASE II
EASE III
Grade-Level Performance Trend
How each grade performs across EASE cycles
Network Average Trajectory
Overall avg per EASE cycle across all subjects
Select School:
School Performance Journey
Score across EASE I → II → III by subject
EASE I
EASE II
EASE III

Subject Profile Radar
Subject strengths across all three EASE cycles
School vs Network Average — Mathematics
Comparing this school's Math performance against the network mean
Select Subject:
Grade Performance by Assessment
How each grade level scores across EASE cycles
EASE I
EASE II
EASE III
School Rankings
Per-school average for selected subject
EASE I
EASE II
EASE III
EASE I Total Entries
11,999
EASE II Total Entries
10,715
EASE III Total Entries
10,431
Largest Subject
Religion ~2,200+ entries
Participation by Subject — All Cycles
Total student entries per subject per EASE cycle
EASE I
EASE II
EASE III
Participation Trend Per Subject
How participation changed across cycles
Total Network Participation
Overall entries across all subjects per cycle

Note: EASE III excludes Grade 12. EASE II excludes Fatih Bilingual & TNA Fatih schools.

Teachers Assessed (A-EASE)
224 teachers · 13 schools
Network Teacher Avg
77.3 / 100
Strongest Teacher–Student Alignment
Religion −2.3 pt gap
Widest Teacher–Student Gap
Mathematics −28.1 pts
🔍
What the Data Says — Key Findings
A-EASE Teacher Data × EASE I · II · III Student Outcomes
Overall
No strong direct relationship
School-level Pearson r = 0.13 — a very weak correlation. A school's teacher exam average alone does not reliably predict its students' EASE performance. Other factors (pedagogy, curriculum delivery, school culture) play a bigger role.
Religion · Best alignment
Teacher mastery reflects student outcomes
The only subject where teacher scores (90.6) closely track student results (85–88 across all three EASE cycles). High knowledge and strong student performance co-exist consistently here.
Mathematics · Biggest concern
High teacher knowledge, low student transfer
Teachers average 87.6 in Math — yet students score 59–65 across EASE I–III. A 28-point gap persists network-wide. Fatih Bilingual is the extreme case: teacher avg 98.3, students 47–49. Knowledge is not reaching the classroom.
English Extended · Reversed pattern
Students outperform their teachers
Teachers scored only 63.8 on the English exam, yet students achieved 76.8 in EASE I and grew to 84.2 by EASE III. Student English development appears driven by exposure and practice — largely independent of teacher exam performance.
Teacher A-EASE Score vs Student Performance Across All Cycles — By Subject
How does teacher subject mastery (A-EASE) compare to student outcomes across EASE I, II, and III?

Teacher scores from A-EASE I (n=224). Student scores are network averages per EASE cycle. English teacher score mapped to English Extended.

School-Level Correlation — Teacher Avg vs Student Composite
Each dot is a school. Three colors = three EASE cycles. Does teacher score predict student performance?

Teacher avg from A-EASE (n=13 schools). Student composite = mean of all available subjects per school per cycle. TNA Fatih excluded (no teacher data).

Teacher Score Distribution
Proficiency band breakdown across all 224 teachers
The Mathematics Gap — Teacher Scores vs Student Math Across EASE I · II · III
Teachers outperform students in Math by a striking margin. Has this gap narrowed over time?

Teacher Math avg from A-EASE. Student Math per school per cycle from EASE I, II, III datasets. Network avg: Teacher 87.6 | EASE I 59.5 | EASE II 64.8 | EASE III 60.8.