Maralyn Parker - 老师校长们对于My School的意见没人有兴趣

patrickzhu

没有一个政府部长，在野党部长，教育部总长或者来自ACARA的高级官员参加上周五举行的题为National Symposium Advice for Ministers and ACARA on NAPLAN, the use of Student Data, My School and League Tables的研讨会。

我猜想他们所有人都预先认为这个研讨会会告诉他们不要My School网站和不要把NAPLAN考试数据公布于众。但是令人惊讶的是，从与会的一些发言人传达的信息反而与其相反。

这个研讨会是澳洲公立小学校长协会、澳洲中学校长协会和澳洲教师工会共同发起组织的。这大概也就是为什么没有一个政治人物或者是政府官员参与这次会议的原因。

当然因为会议议程也和选举无关。。。

但是我很高兴那天在会上听到了我们教育界的一些知名人士的意见。

University of Newcastle的教授James Ladwig说，我们需要更多的信息而不是减少信息。特别是我们需要知道更多在学校里发生了什么事情，和为什么有些班级、团体和学生表现得要比其他人好。我们知道学生的家庭背景造成了差别，我们知道高质量的教学造成了巨大的差别，我们也知道在一个高质量教师主导的班级里的学生很少有低水平的表现。但是我们还不是完全了解这些是如何影响学生群体在整个学校生涯里表现的，特别是在澳洲学校的课堂上到底发生了什么。

Ladwig教授说，我们不要光盯着澳洲学校之间的差别 - 这实际上在学生的学业成就上只占了10%-15%变量比例 - 我们应该着重于在澳洲学校里老师们做的事情，因为这是个占40%-50%比例的因素。

在研讨会上有一位老师告诉我们大家，当他看到My School网站上公布的他任教的学校的土著孩子的人数是非常不安。他说他写电子邮件给ACARA要求他们解释为什么My School网站要公布这样的信息，他一直没有得到回应。他说他坚持不懈地发电子邮件给ACARA，每隔几天就发一封信，甚至每次都加大信里的字体。最终他有了回答但是他说对这样的回答“非常不满意”。

Ladwig教授说，My School网站公布这样的信息的原因是因为这些数据是“不利因素”（disadvantage)的指标。在澳洲土著孩子和其他种族孩子的英文和数学表现上存在着巨大的差别。学校里土著孩子的比例越高，这个差别就越大。

QLD university of Technology的教授Alan Luke很清楚地告诉我们说，收集学校表现的数据并公布他们本身没问题，我们使用这些数据来进行比较衡量的做法也没啥错。错的是ACARA在My School网站上使用这些数据的所作所为，事实是ACARA不允许研究者们进一步的了解他们到底收集了些什么数据和如何来使用这些数据。

显然有些研究者已经要求ACARA开放原始的数据，比如他们已经收集的家庭背景资料，这样学者们就可以验证ICSEA值在教育不利因素上的有效性，但是ACARA迄今为止仍然拒绝公布这些原始数据给学者和研究者们。

来自于University of Melbourne受人尊敬的教授Margaret Wu指出，现在的NAPLAN考试每一科目只有40道考题，因此对于考试结果可以有12%误差幅度。也就是说，如果一个学生在同一科目里重复进行3-4次不同的考试，这个学生就有可能会有3-4次不一样的考试成绩。所以，比如70分的考试成绩可能意味着实际这个学生的成绩会在58分到82分的范围里上下浮动。这样大的区间就意味着NAPLAN成绩不适合用来进行学生之间的比较，也不适合判断几次考试之间学生是否有提高或者下降。

Wu教授说，另外一方面来说，使用学校的平均成绩来进行比较是有效的。然而My School网站所使用的方式的结果造成了最糟糕的学校排名（league table），因为网站使用了颜色指示（红色代表低于平均水平，绿色代表高于平均水平，无色代表在平均水平），因此这造成了指示学校很糟糕的误解。

在下几周里我会告诉你更多关于这次研讨会的内容，如果这些资料网上公布的话，我会让大家知道。

[ 本帖最后由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-27 18:10 编辑 ]

patrickzhu

Not much interest in what teachers and principals think about My School
   
Maralyn Parker
Monday, July 26, 2010 at 02:08pm  

Not one minister, shadow minister, director-general of education or senior officer from the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) attended the National Symposium Advice for Ministers and ACARA on NAPLAN, the use of Student Data, My School and League Tables last Friday.

I guess they all presupposed the symposium would tell them to dump the My School website and hide the results of NAPLAN tests from the public. Be surprised. The main message from some of the speakers was just about the opposite.

The symposium was a joint effort by the Australian Government Primary Principals Association, Australian Secondary Principal’s Association and the Australian Education Union. This probably explains why no-one of either political or bureaucratic prominence attended.

And don’t mention the election ...

But I was pleased to spend the day listening to some of our most eminent education academics give their opinions even if the pollies and DGs were not.

Associate Professor James Ladwig from the University of Newcastle said we need more information not less. In particular we need to know more about what happens within schools and why some classes, groups and students out-perform others. We know student background makes a difference. We know quality teaching makes a huge difference. We also know there is no low achievement from children from any background in high quality teacher classrooms. But we don’t know enough about how this works for groups and individual children throughout their schooling and especially what is happening in Australian classrooms.

Ladwig said instead of concentrating on differences between Australian schools - that actually only accounts for 10 to 15% of the variance in student achievement - we should be finding out more about what teachers are doing within Australian schools (that can account for 40 to 50 % variance).

One teacher at the symposium told us all how upset he was with the My School website publishing the number of Aboriginal students at his school. He said he emailed ACARA asking why such information was published on My School and he did not get an answer. He said he then re-emailed the question every few days increasing the font size each time. Eventually he got an answer that he said was “very unsatisfactory.”

Ladwig said the reason such information is on there is because it is an indication of disadvantage. There is a big gap in achievement in literacy and numeracy between Aboriginal children and children from other backgrounds. The larger the number of Aboriginal children at a school, the bigger the gap.

A clear message from professor Alan Luke, from the QLD university of Technology, was there is nothing wrong with collecting data on school performance and publishing it, nor the fact that we are measuring these things. What is wrong is what ACARA is doing with that data on My School and the fact that ACARA is not allowing researchers to look closely at what it is collecting and how it is being used.

Apparently several researchers have asked ACARA for the raw data it has collected on family backgrounds for example so they can check the validity of the ICSEA measure of educational disadvantage, but ACARA has so far refused to release it. So much for the transparency agenda there.

Highly respected researcher Barbara Preston put a very convincing argument that selective schools and private schools were advantaged by the ICSEA measure. This makes looking at the like school comparisons on My School a problem - with selective schools and private schools being compared much more favourably.

Associate Professor Margaret Wu from the University of Melbourne pointed out each of the NAPLAN tests consisted of only 40 questions and the margin of error in the results can be as much as 12%. That is if a child did three or four different tests in the same subject they could get three or four different scores. So for example a score of 70% could mean as wide a range as 58% to 82%. Such a range means the NAPLAN results are not very good for making comparisons between children or for judging whether they have improved or not between tests.

On the other hand it is valid to use school averages to make comparisons Wu said. However the way My School does this produces the worst league table of all - because it uses colours (red for below average, green for above, no colour for being at the average) therefore indicating that schools have failed.

I will tell you more about the papers presented at the symposium in the next few weeks. If papers are posted on line I will let you know.

Holly2010

感谢分享。（俺目前还没有扔分给别人的权利。 ）

虎妈

一直很喜欢阿朱（以前的朱版的风格），朴实，有说服力。知识性强。知道LZ不差分，所以我就省省了。。。

waterjuice

感谢朱版

SMART1968

喜欢朱版的朴实和智慧，非常感谢！

lilygarden

“James Ladwig说，我们需要更多的信息而不是减少信息。
我们应该着重于在澳洲学校里老师们做的事情，因为这是个占40%-50%比例的因素。”

我也很高兴听到了这样的意见。

谢谢分享。（俺也还没有加分的权利）

dongtian

朱版 ， 歪下楼，上次看到过过关于oc 的计分分法， 能不能给个链接，谢谢啦！

BaiXue

Thanks

patrickzhu

原帖由 dongtian 于 2010-7-27 15:41 发表
朱版 ， 歪下楼，上次看到过过关于oc 的计分分法， 能不能给个链接，谢谢啦！

OC (Opportunity Class) in NSW

patrickzhu

原帖由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-27 13:10 发表
来自于University of Melbourne受人尊敬的教授Margaret Wu指出，现在的NAPLAN考试每一科目只有40道考题，因此对于考试结果可以有12%误差幅度。也就是说，如果一个学生在同一科目里重复进行3-4次不同的考试，这个学生就有可能会有3-4次不一样的考试成绩。所以，比如70分的考试成绩可能意味着实际这个学生的成绩会在58分到82分的范围里上下浮动。这样大的区间就意味着NAPLAN成绩不适合用来进行学生之间的比较，也不适合判断几次考试之间学生是否有提高或者下降。

关于这段，她的博客里的读者有不同的意见：

Technically true but as any kind of tests, you cannot test all areas of learning. The NAPLAN is designed to test the cummulative performance from the areas of learning rather than the direct result of each area. Therefore it is not fair to use this argument. The objective of the NAPLAN is to test what students could use their knowledge to solve general daily problems. Therefore there is little excuse. The problem here is that you don’t have enough tests. If you have a NAPLAN test each year for each grade from grade 1, you know what is going on. The answer is simply having more tests in regular intervals. Those who argue against more tests simply miss the point. Kids do internal tests all the time. Just drop these tests and do more independent tests like the NAPLAN. Also make the NAPLAN completely independent by using external test supervisors will help. The net result will be less tests for students and more objective results for every one.

patrickzhu

这段也很有意思

Maralyn, if they will do testing every from grade 3-10, a lot of people will cry foul as usual. They will sound the old trumpet about the stress on the kids, waste of money, unreliable result, ... Apart ditching internal tests to reduce the amount of pressure on the kids, we also have to look at what happen in other countries. One huge problem in Australia is that teachers pass the buck from Kindie to grade 10. They always assume that kids can pick it up later through recovery learning. The mentality is “Next year some one else will do it”. We have done away with repeating grades. We don’t have entrance tests between PS, HS and Senior HS. There should be tests in between to make sure kids to move up to the next level of education (where you can no longer provide recovery learning for the lower level) to have the minimal basics to advance. Frankly, many kids at HS should be repeating maths and English at PS level. This makes our education a mockery. This is purely a system that avoids dealing with an age old problem about a percentage of the population that would never become educated. Schools become teen care centres trying to keep a lot of kids away from the streets.

Currently the NAPLAN tests have little purpose beyond letting parents know how their kids perform relative to the rest of Australia. The NAPLAN is not serious enough until certain important decisions are based on it. The government should consider introducing repeat, summer recovery learning classes, entrance to HS test and entrance to Senior HS test. We need a more rigorous system to make sure that those who don’t have academic aptitude should make early decision to change path to the trades (and may find way back to academic stuff later in life through the mature age matriculation program).

Elite private schools have done all this (albeit under some less visible rules). Most of them would not enroll kids into grade 7 unless they have great school reports, great NAPLAN results and many even force the kids to do an entry test and put them on a waiting list. Weak students are advised to consider repeating or taking recovery learning sessions (meaning private coaching). Their classes are streamed by grading test to make it easier to educate kids at similar levels.

Why can’t the NAPLAN result be used for some of these actions? Public education has no stomach to pursuit excellence. This is what I don’t understand. Why do we have to vote and elect leaders who have no stomach to deal with these problems!

dongtian

thks。朱版。我看了，因为听我女儿说， 学校给她的学校分，english 才68点几分，很忧闷阿！平时一直在叶老师那里补习的，成绩中上阿！平时是数学好过英文，但是也不之余，还没考丢了10分，都不知道该则么说拉！

patrickzhu

原帖由 dongtian 于 2010-7-27 22:12 发表
thks。朱版。我看了，因为听我女儿说， 学校给她的学校分，english 才68点几分，很忧闷阿！平时一直在叶老师那里补习的，成绩中上阿！平时是数学好过英文，但是也不之余，还没考丢了10分，都不知道该则么说拉！ ...

你女儿在叶老师补习班啊，那就是实力很强啦，呵呵。

关于学校评分部分，根据我们在论坛上过去的讨论，学校评分虽然表面上占了OC最终成绩的一半比例，但是这个学校给的这个评分的高低在没有OC考试之前并不是决定性的，具体我解释给你听：

学校给你99分或者68分的学校评分这个绝对值不重要，重要的是这个分数排在学校所有在这个科目里考生里的第几名！
然后根据你孩子所在学校所有考生在OC考试中的这一科目的成绩来决定如何调整前面给学校评分。

比如，你孩子英文学校评分68分，排在学校里所有考生里的第20名，然后进行OC考试。结果这个学校所有考生的英文成绩的第20名是88分，那么前面学校评分你孩子的68分就会被调整到88分。
反之，孩子英文学校评分99分，排在学校里所有考生里的第一名，而实际OC考试中这个学校考生英文成绩的最高分是80分，那么你孩子英文的学校评分就会被调整到80分。

这个叫做Scale和Alignment。

从中可以看到两点：
1.学校评分分数不要紧，这个分数在学校里排名更要紧
2.你孩子所在学校所有考生在实际OC考试中的整体成绩是最重要的，在academic整体很差的学校里最后被计入总分的学校评分不会很高，原因就是实际OC考试的成绩一般是可以预期的。

[ 本帖最后由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-28 09:31 编辑 ]

patrickzhu

原帖由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-27 21:47 发表
这段也很有意思

Maralyn, if they will do testing every from grade 3-10, a lot of people will cry foul as usual. They will sound the old trumpet about the stress on the kids, waste of money, unreliable ...

我很是赞同这些评论，因为的确听到很多说法，澳洲的公立小学教育整体上来说没有让尽可能多的孩子打好基本功，结果就是到了Level 7中学以后，很多孩子还在struggling小学的内容，需要中学老师重复小学的的内容。。。
原因就是公立小学的整体环境特别是老师对academic不重视。

dongtian

谢谢朱版解惑，现在木已成舟，希望她考试能考得好点就行啦！

虎妈

原帖由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-28 09:39 发表

我很是赞同这些评论，因为的确听到很多说法，澳洲的公立小学教育整体上来说没有让尽可能多的孩子打好基本功，结果就是到了Level 7中学以后，很多孩子还在struggling小学的内容，需要中学老师重复小学的的内容。。。
原因就是 ...

这是不是澳洲小学没有统一的教科书有关，老师虽然有教学大纲，但不同的老师可以根据自己的需要来安排教学内容，这主要看老师的自觉性，和责任感。不知道这边老师的关于教学任务有没有什么标准，学生碰老师，有时就像撞彩票一样。无怪乎，家长要把孩子送补习学校，自己有个坐标轴可以参考。

但如上所述：The government should consider introducing repeat, summer recovery learning classes, entrance to HS test and entrance to Senior HS test. We need a more rigorous system to make sure that those who don’t have academic aptitude should make early decision to change path to the trades (and may find way back to academic stuff later in life through the mature age matriculation program). 上一般的high School也要考试，那澳洲也和中国一样了，初中，高中一级级考上去。澳洲本地的土著，不知会不会同意？

[ 本帖最后由 虎妈 于 2010-7-28 10:42 编辑 ]

缓缓

我有个感觉，现在越来越证明中国式的教育体系是对的：

- 小学里基础要打扎实
- 小学，初中，高中有入学考
- 全国性统考要年年考 （这个好像连中国也还没有做到“年年”）

虎妈

原帖由 D妈妈 于 2010-7-28 10:40 发表
我有个感觉，现在越来越证明中国式的教育体系是对的：

- 小学里基础要打扎实
- 小学，初中，高中有入学考
- 全国性统考要年年考 （这个好像连中国也还没有做到“年年”） ...

但这样出来的人，可以是考试性人才。很多人可能考试不行，但实际能力很强的人也有。这个考试机构每年过滤的人也太多了。

缓缓

那要看考试怎么个不行。

如果选拔型考试“不成功”，没考进TOP 10精英或私校奖学金，我也承认，这些孩子里有很多能力强的。

但如果NAPLAN还考个不及格，那真的说明-- 要么老师能力不行，要么孩子能力不行。如果一个人连基本的阅读，计算能力也没有，以后怎么混？

patrickzhu

原帖由 虎妈 于 2010-7-28 10:40 发表

这是不是澳洲小学没有统一的教科书有关，老师虽然有教学大纲，但不同的老师可以根据自己的需要来安排教学内容，而且我看这完全看老师的自觉性，和责任感。不知道这边老师的关于教学任务有没有什么标准，学生碰老师，有时就像撞 ...

我没看过教学大纲，因为看不懂
但是看了一些相关的评论和新闻，感觉上是澳洲公立学校的教学大纲在academic上的部分其实不差，也可以这样说，一点也不比中国的要求低。但是在公立小学的执行度很一般（但是不能说很差），城市里的小学都还行，但是本地媒体的关注焦点往往是在主流城市之外的公立小学里，那里的执行度就很差了。

我们刚来澳洲往往得到的信息是，澳洲小学就是玩玩没作业没考试，对Year 9的中学生对7以上的乘法口诀还不熟之类津津乐道，但是其实你一旦多关心关心本地媒体和教育界人士的评论，就会知道，实际这不是政府或者教育部的要求，反映在公立小学里，老师们很多不重视基本功和academic performance，对教纲的执行限于表面文章，如上文所述把问题“自然地”留给下个年级的老师，这样的系统就造成谁也不负责。公立小学没有这么多“明星老师"，要的是整体的水平才有用。

原来NAPLAN之前，各州都有Basic Skill Test，但是因为这些成绩也不知道教育部和政府拿去干了什么，反正没有下文，所以学生考试好坏对教师来说无所谓，因此NAPLAN的改革的头两年，每人对NAPLAN很重视，因为在教师们看来和过去没啥两样，换汤不换药。。。

但是My School出现后，直接的链接到了NAPLAN成绩，“变相地”造成了league table，教师们和校长们就有压力了。。。

所以从这个层面上来说，My School可以极大的提高公立学校对academic的重视，过分重视的确不好，但是澳洲公立基础教育的问题如很多媒体的报道所述，现状不是重视的过头，是根本不重视。有媒体说过，这个国家到底是要什么？体育明星？音乐明星？社交明星？还是一些可以将来为国家建设出力的中间力量？为啥不能有academic比较好有没有忽视运动和social skill的基础教育体系？

[ 本帖最后由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-28 11:02 编辑 ]

patrickzhu

反观私校，为啥很成功？
上文里的那个读者说了：
1. 私校的高学费，保证的他们只要ICSEA高的孩子。
2. 私校的入门测试（考试和面试），保证了只有好的能够掌握相应年级教学大纲的学生才能进入。

公校的现状就是大家都在“混”，没有一个“相对严格”体系来保证基础教纲的执行，看上去好像到Year 10 leaving school可以去TAFE做学徒之类的，好像能够让不爱读书没有读书那个筋的孩子们可以选择不同的道路，但是问题是，这些中学year10的学生基础不行，学个TAFE也不容易（因为有可能TAFE的老师还得教小学数学。。。），更不要说在将来工作岗位上是合格的。澳洲工业协会的主席已经警告过公立教育界，现在的Year 10 leaving school的学生有一半对于澳洲工业是“不合格的”，注意他可不是说这些人要成为工业界的精英或者领导，而是指实实在在干活的人。所以你在外头碰到不会做减法的店员就不是啥稀奇的事情了，对于基础教育来说这绝不是一件让澳洲人很自豪很好玩的事情。

[ 本帖最后由 patrickzhu 于 2010-7-28 11:16 编辑 ]

patrickzhu

这个读者又继续评论了一段
After I typed a lot, I decided to hit the DELETE button because most people here don’t want to hear my view of.

what people here consider to be a competitive education level. On the issue of providing jobs to the under average people, we are stuffed!

This globalised labour market seeing top engineers flying in from overseas to set things up and middle skilled young people from India coming to do the good jobs at lower pay rate and unskilled people coming to do other dirty jobs that Aussies don’t want to do. Unless our kids can be good enough to join the global labour market and work around the globe doing stuff that Americans and Germans do, we are stuffed.

And now people don’t beleive me when I tell them that our students in OC and SS classes are only matching with the average performers in many Asian countries like Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and China, there is little I can say to convince people that they should encourage their kids to work 3 times harder to keep up.

The fact that we have high unemployment and still face skills shortage for so many decades still does not sink in. Our unemployed people are so used to having a quality of life better than professionals living in poor overseas countries but that will not last forever. It never made sense in the past and it makes no sense now. Nearly 300000 migrants came last year under skilled migration! That discounts everything from professional jobs to jobs Aussies don’t want to do. What is left to do?

缓缓

同意这个思路。而且我一早已经给孩子灌输过了类似概念了。

但是MS这类思路不主流？most people here don’t want to hear my view of.

patrickzhu

原帖由 D妈妈 于 2010-7-28 12:28 发表
同意这个思路。而且我一早已经给孩子灌输过了类似概念了。

但是MS这类思路不主流？most people here don’t want to hear my view of.

是的，这个叫做DAO的人在Maralyn Parker的博客里从来就是被批斗的对象，不过他很锲而不舍。
看这个ID的名字像是华人，但是他的英文表述能力非常强，别人说一句他来十句回应，以量取胜

缓缓

原来是他。

以前老朱贴过他的言论的，我记得。

qqe

别太担心。我知道一女孩去年考OC时学校给的英语，数学都是70分，照样考上了OC. 关键还要看孩子最后考试发挥的情况。

海之女

原帖由 dongtian 于 2010-7-27 22:12 发表
thks。朱版。我看了，因为听我女儿说， 学校给她的学校分，english 才68点几分，很忧闷阿！平时一直在叶老师那里补习的，成绩中上阿！平时是数学好过英文，但是也不之余，还没考丢了10分，都不知道该则么说拉！ ...

你女儿的学校分在考OC之前就公开了？

dongtian

没有,是我女儿拿资料从这个老师受伤给校长助理是看到的,看安格分数都有小数点觉得挺像的,而且这种小学很少评分的