Comments on: Assessment in UK schools: a convenient hypocrisy?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 21:05:00 +0000

I completely agree. Very well put.

By: ThisTeachingLifeUK

ThisTeachingLifeUK — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 11:27:00 +0000

This is a very interesting blog and I have concerns about the mis-use of AFL myself. I’d be interested to know your thoughts on my blog post: http://thisteachinglifeuk.wordpress.com/2011/07/23/afl-a-force-for-good-and-a-force-for-evil/. I agree that AFL can be mis-used to such an extent that doing such activities badly can have a worse effect than not doing them at all; also 100% agree that there is an incentive to inflate levels so as to attract students for GCSE, which of course undermines the whole process. As for not knowing the differences between sub-levels….not completely convinced. Thanks for the thought provoking blog post!

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:40:00 +0000

I’m with you Doug, and as you say in your opening lines levels were never designed for this. In moderation we often talk about this and I wonder if we should not spend more time planning and teaching. If a student has shown level 4 skills reward them and show them how to get to level 5 not 4a!

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:39:00 +0000

Exactly. But the answer isn’t to, as you say, cater for the ‘lowest common denominator’ and pull the rest down. The answer is to re-professionalise those who don’t know (or don’t care) enough to be able to move students forward.

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:38:00 +0000

‘Stock control’ – absolutely right, Roger!

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:38:00 +0000

“I know my students and I shouldn’t have to produce meaningless evidence to back myself up.” Bang on. :-)

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:36:00 +0000

There’s *so many* factors that it doesn’t actually tell you anything useful. And, in fact, it’s pretty invidious as it makes students focus on improving their level rather than their skills and knowledge of the subject.

And yes, they *are* two separate things.

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:35:00 +0000

We may be talking at cross purposes, but the level descriptors for subjects in the Secondary phase are so vague sometimes that it would be easy to place a student at Level 4 or Level 6, never mind the sub-levels…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:31:00 +0000

But the accusation will be that we do not want to be accountable if we say that we don’t think that we need to produce evidence. Unfortunately there are too many horror stories (certainly in primary education) of teachers without a foggiest notion of where their children are to push that line.
I suppose that means that I find myself arguing that educational practice should be aimed at the lowest common denominator which is an uncomfortable place to be!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:20:00 +0000

One of the many contradictions in teaching…
You need to assess, but you want students to think creatively and not have to jump through loops and rubrics, but you need them to pass exams and do well in coursework, so they end up jumping through hoops anyway.

Every subject is so different at Secondary that these assessment tools and levels vary so much – I can’t assess a student that I teach one hour a week in as much detail as an English or Maths teacher that sees them 2/3 hours a week. I can’t physically mark their work as often as a teacher who sees half the number of students I do… and most importantly I think it’s much more effective spending time planning great lessons than assessing out of lessons. I know my students and I shouldn’t have to produce meaningless evidence to back myself up.