As such, we can make empirical statements about their reliability and the validity of our inferences. These predictions are based on data derived from standardised national examinations. And of those 34% who do hit their prediction, “More children get to the ‘right’ place in the ‘wrong’ way, than get to the ‘right’ place in the ‘right’ way.” As you can see from the graph below, children attaining identical scores in KS1 go on to achieve widely varying results at the end of KS2, and by the time they’re 16, the best we can say is that 66% of them will achieve a grade other than the one they were predicted to get. No. As Mike Treadaway demonstrated on the Education Datalab blog, measuring pupil progress involves more than taking a straight line. Is it possible or desirable to make a meaningful statement about an individual students’ chances of achieving a predicted grade? To be clear, no one is going to prevent you from collecting data, but inspector won’t be interested in it. … inspectors will not look at school’s internal progress and attainment data. And, in fact, with much of that progress and attainment data, they and we can’t be confident that it’s valid and reliable information. And that diverts their time away from what they entered the profession to do, which is to be educators. Too often, vast amounts of teachers’ and leaders’ time is absorbed into recording, collecting and analysing excessive progress and attainment data within schools. Here’s a video of Matthew Purves, Deputy Director, Schools, explaining why Ofsted will be ignoring pointless data:ĭata should not be king. Third, there’s a belief that reports to parents, governors, inspectors or some other shadowy party must be based on numbers. Second, some actually believe it’s possible or desirable to make a meaningful statement about an individual students’ chances of achieving a prediction. Firstly, many school leaders still believe someone somewhere requires them to do this. It should therefore be obvious that using flight paths to inform assessment or guide teaching compounds an error. At the level of nationally representative population sample we can estimate the likelihood of someone who is measured at performing at one level attaining another level, but this is meaningless at the level of individuals. Predicting a students’ progress is a mug’s game. The internet is full of such misguided attempts to do the impossible. Seemingly, the most common approach to solving this problem is to produce some sort of ‘flight path’. Schools are desperate to find ways to predict students’ progress from year to year and between key stages.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |