Replacing the sats test with guess what? Tests!

[Anna B]

Isn't this where a test of the kids would be useful? Genuine question...

 

Mmmm, it's debatable... Personally I think it's also unreliable. There are too many variables.

 

What about the teacher who is in charge of the 'C' stream of lower achievers? Or who has a quirky class, (say with a midterm influx of non-English speaking pupils.) Or quite a few special needs children, or a epidemic of mumps... There are a lot of things beyond the teacher's control, that can make a big difference to a child's performance.

 

The Ofsted inspection still seems the best way of judging a school's /teacher's performance as it looks at a variety of different aspects of the teacher's job, (including pupil progress,) but there will still be anomalies.

 

AS for Sats results; 'Value added' is used in the published league tables which measures improvement against expectation using a complicated algorithm. This gives a more precise measure but it requires a lot more data (supplied by the overstretched teacher) to calculate it, and most parents don't know how to use it.

[sutty27]

You have demonstrated no understanding of the topic at all,

 

Yet you agreed with me that testing kids is a good way to assess teacher.

 

 

This article is one of many that discusses the assessment of professional performance, there are countless other proposals related to all sorts of different professions. They all share the same focus though - you have to assess holistically. That means that the teacher is assessed on how well the kids do, but also on how they engage with the material, how they relate to parents and colleagues, how they ensure they stay on top of developments in their field and the material they teach.

 

 

Or did you.

 

No, the government should stop measuring performance of professionals on the basis of tests of kids with no perception and underdeveloped understanding.

 

So which is it test kids or don't test kids.

[tzijlstra]

Yet you agreed with me that testing kids is a good way to assess teacher.

 

Or did you.

 

So which is it test kids or don't test kids.

 

It is about HOW you assess the teacher as a holistic approach, that means that assessing pupil performance is one part of the assessment, unlike the current situation where it is the majority of the assessment. You do know what holistic means, right?

[sutty27]

It is about HOW you assess the teacher as a holistic approach, that means that assessing pupil performance is one part of the assessment, unlike the current situation where it is the majority of the assessment. You do know what holistic means, right?

 

Its the most important part.

[tzijlstra]

Its the most important part.

 

Read sutty, it might enlighten you.

[sutty27]

Read sutty, it might enlighten you.

 

I'm already enlightened thanks.

 

And I agree with you when you said.

 

you have to assess holistically. That means that the teacher is assessed on how well the kids do,

 

And disagree with you when you said.

 

the government should stop measuring performance of professionals on the basis of tests of kids

[Berberis]

Not sure what your source is, but there are many conflicting reports on this topic - the Guardian reported this in 2010.

 

I am not saying the education system in the UK is horrible by the way, I am saying the assessment system and its impact on professional teachers is.

 

75% of teachers choose to leave the profession before retirement age, I'd argue many of those are pushed (too expensive due to archaic payment-ladders) or as I have seen happen with family and friends, due to burn-out and a complete distrust of the authorities.

 

PS - HE in the UK is very good, it is a real bonus to the country and if included in education statistics will probably push the end-figures up positively.

 

Data from 2010/11 is pretty old.

 

My source is here: http://www.mbctimes.com/english/20-best-education-systems-world