首页> 外文OA文献 >The evolution of school league tables in England 1992-2016:‘contextual value-added’, ‘expected progress’ and ‘progress 8’
【2h】

The evolution of school league tables in England 1992-2016:‘contextual value-added’, ‘expected progress’ and ‘progress 8’

机译:1992-2016年英格兰学校排行榜的演变:“内容相关的增值”,“预期的进步”和“进步8”

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Since 1992, the UK Government has published so-called ‘school league tables’ summarizing the average General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) ‘attainment’ and ‘progress’ made by pupils in each state-funded secondary school in England. While the headline measure of school attainment has remained the percentage of pupils achieving five or more good GCSEs, the headline measure of school progress has changed from ‘value-added’ (2002-2005) to ‘contextual value-added’ (2006-2010) to ‘expected progress’ (2011-2015) to ‘progress 8’ (2016-).This paper charts this evolution with a critical eye. First, we question the Government’s justifications for scrapping contextual value-added. Second, we argue that the current expected progress measure suffers from fundamental design flaws. Third, we show that the differences between expected progress and contextual value added are considerable leading to fundamentally different school rankings. Fourth, we discuss how ‘progress 8’ attempts to address some, but not all, of the flaws in expected progress. We conclude that all these progress measures and school league tables more generally should be viewed with far more scepticism and interpreted far more cautiously than they have often been to date.
机译:自1992年以来,英国政府发布了所谓的“学校排行榜”,概括了英格兰各州政府资助的中学学生平均获得的普通中等教育证书(GCSE)的“成就”和“进步”。虽然对学校成绩的总体衡量标准一直是获得5个或以上GCSE的学生比例,但对学校进度的总体衡量标准已从“增值”(2002-2005年)更改为“上下文增值”(2006-2010年) )到'预期的进展'(2011-2015)到'进展8'(2016-)。首先,我们质疑政府取消上下文附加值的理由。其次,我们认为当前的预期进度度量存在基本设计缺陷。第三,我们表明预期进度和上下文附加值之间的差异很大,导致学校排名从根本上不同。第四,我们讨论“进度8”如何尝试解决预期进度中的部分但不是全部缺陷。我们得出的结论是,与迄今为止相比,所有这些进步指标和学校排行榜应该更普遍地持怀疑态度,并且在解释时要更加谨慎。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号