Last night I read a blog about the proposals http://debrakidd.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/pride-and-prejudice/ and was appalled that the government were suggesting these examples of how to report a student's progress to parents:
In the end of key stage 2 reading test, Sally received a scaled score of 126 (the secondary ready standard is 100), placing her in the top 10% of pupils nationally. The average scaled score for pupils with the same prior attainment was 114, so she has made more progress in reading than pupils with a similar starting-point.
In the end of key stage 2 mathematics test, Tom received a scaled score of 87. He did not meet the secondary readiness standard (100). This places him in the bottom 10% of pupils nationally. The average scaled score for pupils with the same prior attainment was 92, so he has made less progress in mathematics than other pupils with a similar starting point.
Tom's parents are going to need consoling but so are Fred's, Megan's, Josh's, Katie's, William's, Lauren's, Ben's and Jordan's because only the top 10 percent will be good enough for most parents and the thing about statistics is that everyone can't be in the top 10%. It could be that getting 99% of the questions right puts child in the top 10% but if they got 90% of the questions right they would be in the bottom 10% however, this won't matter to the parent. I know because I'm a middle class parent who wants the best for my children and I like all the others will fall into the trap and no one is suggesting that parents be given the raw scores. I wrote recently about how A level exam results had made me have nasty competitive thoughts and ranking 11 year old children in terms of a single test result would make that worse.
Aware that making snap judgements on one quote from a document is not very rigorous I ploughed my way through the whole thing. https://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=conSection&consultationId=1920&dId=1300&sId=8724
My initial thought was that it was very confused. I was a bit confused but the authors of the document seemed even more confused. They want to change things but they really aren't sure how.
By the time I had finished reading I felt compelled to respond. These are the questions they ask:
1. We expect schools to have a curriculum and assessment framework that meets a set of core principles and:
- sets out steps so that pupils reach or exceed the end of key stage expectations in the new national curriculum;
- enables them to measure whether pupils are on track to meet end of key stage expectations;
- enables them to pinpoint the aspects of the curriculum in which pupils are falling behind, and recognise exceptional performance;
- supports teaching planning for all pupils; and
- enables them to report regularly to parents and, where pupils move to other schools, providing clear information about each pupils strengths, weaknesses and progress towards the end of key stage expectations.
Question 1: Will these principles underpin an effective curriculum and assessment system?
My head was spinning. I ticked the 'I don't know box'. Had they defined the principles? I could see the 'ands' were clearly defined but not the principles.
2. Question 2: What other good examples of assessment practice we can share more widely? Is there additional support we can provide for schools?
They had listed a few favourite schools. I wrote that I would like to see all good practice shared. I'm confused as to why Cannon Lane First School in Harrow are the font of all knowledge.
3. Question 3: Does a scaled score, decile ranking and value-added measure provide useful information from national curriculum tests?
I confess that this is where I started to get a bit ranty. I said that it obviously provides information but the time spent collecting the information takes away from the time educating the children and that it's not useful information anyway. A statistic doesn't tell you how well an individual child is performing or how well that school is meeting the needs of individual children. (I wish I had been that eloquent)
4. Question 4: Should we continue to measure progress from the end of key stage 1, using internally-marked national curriculum tests?
I ticked the 'No' box. They are so confused about baseline assessment. They just haven't worked out how to do it. They know that no one wants SATs tests at Key Stage 1 but they can't see how else to measure progress. They know that unless the assessments are externally moderated some schools will fiddle their results.
5. Question 5: If end of key stage 1 national curriculum test results are used as the baseline to measure progress, should school-level results be published?
Again, I ticked the 'No' box. I pointed out that when you publish the results schools need to make sure that their results 'look' good and then a lot of time is wasted on statistic manipulation that could be spent educating children. (Again, I wish I had been that eloquent)
6. Question 6: Should we introduce a baseline check at the start of reception?
No. No. No. There was only one 'No' box and clicking on it three times didn't make any difference to the input but I did it anyway. I said that it breaks my heart to think that 4 year olds will have to be 'tested' within weeks of entering school. Parents will be coaching them to be school ready. Parents will want to know the results of these tests they will be standing in the playground and boasting about how their baby is in the top 10% of the country. Where will it stop? Maybe an amniocentesis could be done at 20 weeks during all pregnancies so there could be a proper baseline assessment!
7. Question 7: Should we allow schools to choose from a range of commercially-available assessments?
The 'No' box was ticked again. That's really not very rigorous is it? Allow schools to use, whichever test gives them the best results. If they are insisting on a baseline assessment then it has to be standardised.
8. Question 8: Should we make the baseline check optional?
This is where I might have overstepped the mark. I am probably now on the list of undesirables and the Secret Service are watching me.(Have I read too much John Le Carre?). I wrote, "Are you mad? How can it be optional if you are going to publish progress results?"
9. Question 9: If we take a baseline from the start of reception, should end of key stage 1 national curriculum tests become non-statutory for all-through primary schools?
I was beginning to lose the will to live. "Yes. Of course, if you do that there is no point in them. You really are stupid aren't you?"
10. Question 10: Do you have any comments about these proposals for the department’s floor standards?
"Yes, your department's standards are going right through the floor."
11. Question 11: Should we include an average point score measure in floor standards?
"Great another thing to measure. When is anyone going to have any time to teach any of these children?"
12. Question 12: Are there any other measures we should prioritise in performance tables?
I told them to measure happiness. That for me, as a parent, and their customer that is my priority for my children.
It seems to me that KS2 children get the raw end of the deal whatever happens. They will continue to be assessed and labelled as failures. They won't get the free school meals that KS1 children get. They don't get a morning snack or an afternoon play. They get less spend per capita than any other Key stage group in education and they have to achieve the most.
I hope someone other than ranty old liberal me comments and helps them find their way because it is terrifying to think we have a Department for Education that is this confused.
No comments:
Post a Comment