My School里ICSEA值的争论

patrickzhu

对于My School的种种争论仍在继续，今天SMH的报道。

公立学校校长们已经指出了联邦政府在My School网站里（比较学校表现和的社区社会教育优劣）的缺陷。

联邦政府将用这样的比较来决定所有的私立和公立学校未来得到教育拨款。

教育部长Julia Gillard说，My School网站里的数据从2013年开始将被用来作为衡量学校教育财政拨款的依据。

The Sun-Herald的独立分析表明，当在看待学校NAPLAN考试成绩表现方面，公立系统里社会教育优劣方面的指标是精确的。然而，中学校长和老师已经对于使用“社区社会教育优劣指标”（ICSEA）来作为相似学校比较的依据提出了质疑，因为这样做会把一个在偏远地区的小学校和在一个在主流大城市里的学校直接放在一起比较。

NSW Secondary Principals Council的执行主席Andrew Newman说，ICSEA是对于州际范围的学校表现是一个“合理的指标”，但是它对于个别学校的社区社会教育劣势层面上不是一个很精确的衡量指标。对比引用人口普查数据的方法计算ICSEA值，被地区政府（council）审核的学校招生的数据才能提供一个更精确的衡量。

Newman先生说，不是来自于相同人口普查地区的所有孩子都会去一个相同地区的学校的。

在今年一月My School网站开通之前，联邦政府已经被迫对全国9509所学校里的650所（大概是7%的比例）调整了ICSEA的排名，因为政府也发现人口普查的数据对于那些被调整的学校不可靠。

NSW Secondary Principals Council已经指出那些被调整的学校的ICSEA值里的改动多达285分。

基于人口普查的数据，My School网站最初给了Granville South High School的ICSEA值是995。但是后来根据其招收学校的情况调整到了710。

Newman先生说，Julia Gillard需要问所有学校相同的问题来得到更精确的ICSEA值。

The Sun-Herald的分析还表明，当学校的NAPLAN平均成绩被用来对比学校社区社会教育劣势的时候，其大部分的表现符合期待。

那些对应于有一定比例家庭教育背景弱的学生而学校表现优良的学校，包括James Ruse Agricultural High, St George Girls和North Sydney Boys。

NSW的绿党的MP John Kaye说，对比有NAPLAN的成绩表现，ICSEA值不是一个很好的用来预测小学考试成绩的工具。

patrickzhu

Furore over 'inaccurate' schools index ANNA PATTY
April 18, 2010

PUBLIC school principals have identified flaws in the way the federal government compares school performance and social disadvantage on its My School website.

The comparison will help dictate the way all schools – private and public – are funded in the future.

Federal Education Minister Julia Gillard said data from the My School website would be used in measuring the funding needs of schools from 2013.

Independent analysis commissioned by The Sun-Herald shows that the government's measure of social disadvantage is broadly accurate in determining how well schools perform in the NAPLAN tests. However, high school principals and teachers have criticised the use of the index of community socio-educational advantage (ICSEA) as a basis for like-school comparisons, because it has directly compared small schools in remote areas with large city high schools.

Acting president of the NSW Secondary Principals Council Andrew Newman said ICSEA was "a reasonable indicator" of school performance at a statewide level, but it was not an accurate measure of the level of educational social disadvantage at individual schools. School enrolment data, examined by the council, provided a more accurate measure than the broader census district data used in calculating the ICSEA.

"Not all kids from the same census district go to the same school," Mr Newman said.

The government was forced to adjust ICSEA rankings for 7 per cent, or about 650, of the nation's 9509 schools before launching the My School website in January after it was found that census data was not reliable for those schools.

The Secondary Principals Council has identified schools that had their ICSEA changed by as many as 285 points.

Based on census data, the My School website originally gave Granville South High School an ICSEA rank of 995. This was changed to 710 based on the profile of its enrolled students.

"Julia Gillard needs to ask all schools the same question to get a much more accurate picture of the ICSEA," Mr Newman said.

The analysis for The Sun-Herald shows that when average scores of school test results from NAPLAN are plotted against the school's index of social disadvantage, most perform as well as expected.

Schools that performed well above their level of social disadvantage included academically selective high schools such as James Ruse Agricultural High, St George Girls and North Sydney Boys.

NSW Greens MP John Kaye said the spread of NAPLAN results for a given level of socio-economic index suggested the ICSEA rank was not a good predictor of test score outcomes for primary schools.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/e ... -20100417-slgu.html

kunqin

儿子小学的通知说收到教师联合协会的通知，老师们不参加NAPLAN的监考