The more ‘dependable primary assessments are made,the less ‘valid’ they becomeI see you’ve put up a video of yourself reading an autocue to tell the teaching unions and the media they shouldn’t be complaining that this year’s primary assessment criteria are too complicated, too difficult and flying free of what note is going to constitute an “expected” level for each child.
Let’s remind ourselves how we got here. Your predecessors, and Tory,Lib Dem and Labour, came to think that England needed repeated nationally moderated testing of young children. They claimed we parents wanted this. We weren’t consulted, and there was no wide-ranging debate about the effects such tests hold on teaching,the curriculum or the children. There was shrimp or no debate about what we might call “testology” the analysis that shows us that the more “dependable” a test is made, the less “valid” it becomes. This occurs through the process of making papers test a narrower and narrower range of abilities, or involving yes/no answers (“reliability”) ,whereas life skills call on interpretation, reflection, and cooperation,revision and invention (“validity”).
Continue reading...
Source: theguardian.com