1 / 33

Education Reform Act 1988 three parallel processes

King’s College (DEPS) Assessment Group Seminar Moving On from Levels – a chance to reflect on TGAT and assessment of the National Curriculum Professor Paul Black . Education Reform Act 1988 three parallel processes . • Composing the Act, Legislation Process

fergal
Download Presentation

Education Reform Act 1988 three parallel processes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. King’s College (DEPS) Assessment Group SeminarMoving On from Levels – a chance to reflect on TGAT and assessment of the National Curriculum Professor Paul Black

  2. Education Reform Act 1988three parallel processes • Composing the Act, Legislation Process - Summer 1987 to Summer 1988 • Task Group on Assessment and Testing (TGAT) • September 1987 to Christmas 1987 – Tests at 7, 11 and 14 plus 16 (?) • First Subject Working groups - 1987 to July 1988 - Curriculum specifications

  3. The TGAT reports • Main report published January 1988 • Group of 11 members • 100 pages including 44 recommendations • Plus 65 pages containing 14 appendices • Three Supplementary Reports March 1988 - Reactions to main report - Subject specific issues - Support system

  4. The TGAT levels arguments A • 35 We recommend that an individual subject should report a small number (preferably no more than four and never more than six) of profile components reflecting the variety of knowledge, skills and understanding to which the subject gives rise. • 100 . . scales should be used that indicate where a pupil has reached in a profile component. We shall use the word level to define one of a sequence of points on a scale to be used in describing the progress of attainment in the profile component. The sequence of levels represents the stages of progression.

  5. The TGAT levels arguments B • 101. . . . .For the purposes of national assessment, a broad indication of progress is required. We propose that the criteria defining successive levels be so chosen that a pupil could reasonably be expected to progress by one level in two years of work in that profile component. Over the age range 7-16 this would imply a need for 5 or 6 levels. At both ends of the age range, however, some will be unable to progress as fast as others, and some will be able to make quicker progress. This leads us to recommend that a total range of ten levels will need to be defined . . .

  6. TGAT’s 10 level framework

  7. TGAT recommendations A • Recommendations for age 16 will need to relate to the criteria in the appropriate GCSE subjects. • Subject working groups should specify, in broad terms and for each profile component, the appropriate tests (standardisedassessment tasks) which should be prepared, and the advice and help which should be given to teachers about their corresponding internal assessments.

  8. TGAT recommendations B • 14. The national assessment system should be based on a combination of moderated teachers’ ratings and standardised assessment tasks. • 30. The only form in which results of national assessment for, and identifying, a given school should be published should be as part of a broader report by that school of its work as a whole • 31. Any report by a school which includes national assessment results should include a general report for the area, prepared by the local authority, to indicate the nature of socio-economic and other influences which are known to affect schools. This report should give a general indication of the known effects of such influences on performance.

  9. TGAT recommendations C • 44. The new assessment system should be phased in over a period adequate for the preparation and trial of new assessment methods, for teacher preparation, and for pupils to benefit from extensive experience of the new curriculum. This period needs to be at least 5 years from the promulgation of the relevant attainment targets.

  10. Margaret Thatcher’s opinion • Ken Baker warmly welcomed the report. Whether he had read it properly I do not know: if he had it says much for his stamina. Certainly I had no opportunity to do so before agreeing to its publication . . .that it was then welcomed by the Labour party, the National Union of Teachers and the Times Educational Supplement was enough to confirm for me that its approach was suspect. • Pp.594-5 in THATCHER, M. (1993) The Downing Street Years (London, Harper Collins).

  11. Lessons from Research in Mathematics Education • Denvir, B and Brown, M. (1987) The feasibility of class-administered diagnostic assessments in primary mathematics. Educational Research 29(2) 95-106 • Aims: to explore 1 What the child knows 2 How it fits in to an overall framework 3 How children learn • Some children at age 16 show the same level of attainments as the average 11-year old

  12. Key to the numbers3 - Mentally carries out two-digit ‘take away’ with re-grouping4 -Models two-digit ‘take-away’ without re-grouping using ‘base-ten’ apparatus14 - Models two-digit addition without re-grouping using‘base-ten’ apparatusDenvir, B. & Brown, M. (1987)Educational Researcher 29(2),95-107

  13. Report by Brown & Denvir, commissioned by education minister on feasibility of targets and assessment in the primary phase If it is decided, nevertheless, to go ahead with introducing a system of national attainment targets we believe that the scale of the programmes we have described is both realistic and essential. If any attempt is made to cut corners, for example by asking the Working Group to propose detailed targets without a basis of adequate research , or by economizing on the initial trialling or on the in-service training required to implement the system in schools, we believe that there is a vastly increased risk that the undesirable effects will outweigh the desirable ones.

  14. Example of a Science Attainment Target Component 4: physical processes (1999 version) • Level 5 Pupils demonstrate knowledge and understanding of physical process drawn from the key stage 2 or key stage 3 programme of study. They use ideas to explain how to make a range of changes. They use some abstract ideas in descriptions of familiar phenomena. They use simple models to explain effects that are caused by the movement of the earth. • Level 6 Pupils use and apply knowledge and understanding of physical processes drawn for the key stage 3 programme of study. They use abstract ideas in some descriptions and explanations. They recognize and can give examples of the wide application of many physical concepts. They give explanations of phenomena in which a number of factors have to be considered.

  15. National Curriculum Attainment Targets for Forces and Motion vs. Progression proposals from King’s-Leeds science group Level 5 • AT . . for example forces are balanced when an object is stationary King’s Leeds proposal: • For an object at rest, pupils should be able to identify several forces that oppose one another and are in balance. For turning forces, they should relate balance to equality of moments. Level 6 • AT . .for example forces determining changes in the direction or speed of movement of a body • King’s Leeds proposal: • Pupils should relate changes in pressure to changes in the size of forces and in the areas over which they act, and be able to make simple calculations about pressure. Report to SCAA on revision proposals from King’s-Leeds group May 1994

  16. The Framework for the National CurriculumA report by the Expert Panel for the National Curriculum review Dec. 2011 . • Attainment Targets should be statements of specific learning outcomes • Pupils have become more concerned with their levels than with what they know • We should stress effort : that all can succeed. Other countries do this and have lower spread in pupils’ performance • Quote Carol Dweck and Assessment for Learning

  17. The Framework for the National CurriculumA report by the Expert Panel for the National Curriculum review Dec. 2011 . • . . .constant assessment to levels is over-burdensome, obscures the genuine strengths and weaknesses in a pupil’s attainment, obscures parental understanding of the areas in which they might best support their child’s learning, and likewise, weakens teachers’ clear understandings and identification of pupils’ specific weaknesses or misunderstandings. (para 8.24, p.50) • Reporting, according to our suggested model, could be based on a ‘ready to progress’ measure broken down into key areas of subjects. (para. 8.26, p. 51).

  18. Structure of Matter Learning Progression

  19. “Prehistory” of ECC Atomic-Molecular Theory of Macro-Properties 6 – If a substance is made of molecules, then the molecules determine its macro properties. 5 – All matter is made up of atoms and molecules and empty space between them. Molecules are made up of atoms. 4 – Molecules and atoms are matter—they take up space and have weight, but do not have macro-properties such as hardness and temperature. 3 – Molecules and atoms are matter—they take up space, have weight (mass), hardness, temperature, etc. 2 – Only some material things are made of molecules, e.g., solids and liquids are made of molecules, but not gases; visible things are made of molecules, but not invisible things, and living things are not made of molecules. 1A-Molecules and atoms exist in matter (like raisins in fruitcake)

  20. Initial Progress Map 6: Particulate Evidence Based on Chemical Change ECC-5Chemical Changes Produce different molecules ECC-4Chemical & Physical Change – Particulate Explanations of Differences ECC-3Atoms & Molecules ECC-2Chemical & Physical Change – Observable Differences ECC-1Conservation of Matter ECC-0Matter not conserved Black,P., Wilson, M. and Yao, Shih-Ying. (2011). Road Maps for Learning: A guide to the Navigation of Learning Progressions. Measurement9 (2-3), 71-123.

  21. How to represent chances of success?Probability of student’s success on a given item depends on student ability/ item difficultySo outcomes are a set of ratiosThe logarithm of this probability depends onlog of ability – log of item difficultySo outcomes are represented by differencesChoose a function which can describe the variation of the probability of success with this difference between measure of ability and question difficultyWilson, M. (2005) Constructing Measures. Mahwah, N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum

  22. The Wright Map Pupils’ overall scores Difficulty of each question Hard QuestionEasy question • X | • XXX | • XX - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | - - - - 50% succeed - - - - - - 80% succeed • XXXXXX | • XXXXXXX | • XXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXXXXX - - - - - - - - | - - - - 25% succeed - - - - - - 50% succeed • XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXXXX | • XXXXXXXXX- - - - - - - - - - - | - - - - 10% succeed - - - - - - 25% succeed • XXXXXXXX | • XXXXXX | • XXXXXXX | • XXXX | • XXX | • X | • XX | • X |

  23. The problem with ECC

  24. Diagnosis – what could have gone wrong ? Four possible causes Bad Map Bad Items Bad Students Bad Idea

  25. A way forwardSeparate strands • ECC-A Chemical or physical changes: knowing that atoms and molecules do or do not change in these two types of change • ECC-B Chemical or physical changes: changes in macroscopic properties • ECC-C Molecular representations of elements and compounds

  26. New ECC Wright Map ECC-A ECC-B ECC-C

  27. Still some problems • A general problem with this three-strand structure is the dividing line between molecular models representing differences and molecular models representing changes. • This difference interacts with the difference in difficulty between items asking with pictures of models and those asking only with verbal descriptions. • Given the model of three separate strands (a) should each strand have its own levels, and (b) are there links of dependency across the three

  28. Rasch modelRasch ModelThis function is known as the Rasch modelLet A measure of ability, and D item difficulty: For high ability pupil: say A is 2.0 Then if D=1.0 : probability of success will be = 0.73But if D=2.0 : probability of success will be = 0.50For low ability pupil: say A is1.0 Then if D=1.0 : probability of success will be = 0.50But if D=2.0 : probability of success will be = 0.27

  29. Rasch modelRasch ModelProby(X=1 | Øi, ∂i) = e(Øi-∂i) 1+ e(Øi-∂i)Proby(X=1 | 1.0, 1.0) = e(1.0-1.0)1+ e(1.0-1.0)= e(0) = 0.51+ e(0) For bright pupil: Øi=2.0, ∂i=1.0 : proby = 0.73For bright pupil’s 0.5: Øi=2.0, ∂i=2.0 : proby = 0.50

  30. Initial Progress Map 6: Particulate Evidence Based on Chemical Change ECC-5Chemical Changes Produce different molecules: Atoms combine in different ways, and/or molecules break apart, to produce new molecules ECC-4Chemical & Physical Change – Particulate Explanations of Differences: In a chemical change, the molecules/atoms of the products are different; in physical changes they are the same ECC-3Atoms & Molecules: The smallest possible particles of a substance may either be atoms, or combinations of different kinds of atoms: the latter are called molecules. ECC-2Chemical & Physical Change – Observable Differences: Chemical produces new substances. Changes are often irreversible. Mass is conserved ECC-1Conservation of Matter: In both chemical and physical changes, total volume may change, total mass unchanged. ECC-0Matter not conserved: In all types of substance change, the total mass may change.

  31. Particulate explanations of chemical change

  32. Particulate explanations of chemical change

More Related