Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
SATs: Congratulations and a little perspective.
St Vincents has done very well in their SATs again this year! Almost as well, in fact, as they did in 2005.
This institution 
LA average 
National average
If this graph doesn't show properly you can find it here.
They just keep pulling it out of the bag every year. What an astonishing bunch of talented brainiacs, not unlike your humble blogger, tee hee.
The interesting part is that this is being hailed as something rather remarkable and evidence of a great 'turnaround'. A much needed justification for all the turmoil of the past year.
There was quite a heated debate about this on the blog here and (scroll through the earlier comments) here
Here are some of samples from both sides of the fence:
Hello, I just wanted to clarify, in light of w3 parents comment (See comments on previous post) that the Bishop did indeed, in his recent letter,express concerns regarding the "QUALITY OF EDUCATION" offered at St Vincents. He said that this was owing "IN PART" to the number of changes of head. I would like to put the question again. In the light of the astonishingly high acheivements in the 2005 SATs results by what other yardstick can he, or anyone else,be judging the quality of education prior to the current heads arrival,as lacking?
And:
The narrative that Mrs Cleugh would have you believe is that this was a failing school and she had some tough unpopular decisions to make in order to set it on the road to recovery. She set about 'setting the stage' for this narrative, I suspect, before she even arrived at St Vincents. Certainly, by her very first day some teachers realised that they were 'targets'.
No school is without areas that could be improved upon, but St Vincents really was an extremely successful and happy school which benefitted from a large body of staff who were committed to the school not least in terms of years of service but also in terms of being part of the local parish community ( and here I am not just talking about teachers, but administrative assistants, dinner ladies etc) We would see them at mass on Sunday, and it felt good that people who knew our children outside school were familiar faces watching over them during the day ( remember Caroline and Veronica in the school office? How reassuring it was to see them and pass over a forgotten lunch bag or PE kit, or explain to them that your child was a bit off colour today, and know that they knew who your child was and were people of goodwill and warmth who had real affection and concern for the families of St Vincents?) How is it possible to explain to a new parent what has been lost?
I find it sinister that community that is one of the areas that seems to have been targeted and destroyed.
And:
As for the remark about STATs they mean nothing. Any child can be taught how to pass exams, but do they know how to read, write and do maths? Many children have reached the merry highs of year 5/6 and are not compete in these areas. Can this be blamed completely on a new Head, or a long and steady run of the "wrong" teachers.
I confess to being a little curious at the reception given to the current SATs. Will the naysayers, like the last commenter above, still be dismissing their significance?
My instinct, however, tells me that the essence of a really good school is pretty unquantifiable. How is it possible to measure happiness and interest in life and learning? Sadly the only measurable elements are tests like the SATs and for now, that is all we have to go by. Which is why the Bishops comments about concerns regarding the 'quality of education' rang a little hollow, and certainly seemed hard to justify in any meaningful, or measurable way.
I can't help wondering, even if all this had been so, would it have therefore justified the treatment that some people have experienced? Some commenters seem to suggest that it would.
We had a comment from someone who wanted to let us know that St Vincents has appeared on a list of the 100 "most improved" schools. This kind of thing is really tiresome. It hinges on this old canard that until Mrs. Cleughs arrival St V's was a failing school. This has been put about time and time again. It is said with great confidence and bluster, but not a jot of supporting evidence has ever been forthcoming. It really is a tedious myth. Now we are told by this commenter that St Vincents' SATs results has put it in the 'most improved schools' bracket. I hope that you can understand from the above graph that St Vincents has not made a dramatic improvement at all. They have merely maintained their good SATs performance. For which they deserve congratulations. But please. Can we quit pretending that this is novel? It's not.
To the anonymous commenter: Here is the table of 100 'most improved schools'. Hope that helps. And no, we didn't post your comment. I am addressing it here, but this blog was not set up as a platform for misleading falsehoods but rather to counter them.
AGGREGATE SCORE FOR ENGLISH, MATHS AND SCIENCE
| 267 | 234 | 237 | 295 | 238 | 240 | 275 | 237 | 242 | 292 | 243 | 245 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
KEY:
This institution LA average National averageIf this graph doesn't show properly you can find it here.
They just keep pulling it out of the bag every year. What an astonishing bunch of talented brainiacs, not unlike your humble blogger, tee hee.
The interesting part is that this is being hailed as something rather remarkable and evidence of a great 'turnaround'. A much needed justification for all the turmoil of the past year.
There was quite a heated debate about this on the blog here and (scroll through the earlier comments) here
Here are some of samples from both sides of the fence:
Hello, I just wanted to clarify, in light of w3 parents comment (See comments on previous post) that the Bishop did indeed, in his recent letter,express concerns regarding the "QUALITY OF EDUCATION" offered at St Vincents. He said that this was owing "IN PART" to the number of changes of head. I would like to put the question again. In the light of the astonishingly high acheivements in the 2005 SATs results by what other yardstick can he, or anyone else,be judging the quality of education prior to the current heads arrival,as lacking?
And:
The narrative that Mrs Cleugh would have you believe is that this was a failing school and she had some tough unpopular decisions to make in order to set it on the road to recovery. She set about 'setting the stage' for this narrative, I suspect, before she even arrived at St Vincents. Certainly, by her very first day some teachers realised that they were 'targets'.
No school is without areas that could be improved upon, but St Vincents really was an extremely successful and happy school which benefitted from a large body of staff who were committed to the school not least in terms of years of service but also in terms of being part of the local parish community ( and here I am not just talking about teachers, but administrative assistants, dinner ladies etc) We would see them at mass on Sunday, and it felt good that people who knew our children outside school were familiar faces watching over them during the day ( remember Caroline and Veronica in the school office? How reassuring it was to see them and pass over a forgotten lunch bag or PE kit, or explain to them that your child was a bit off colour today, and know that they knew who your child was and were people of goodwill and warmth who had real affection and concern for the families of St Vincents?) How is it possible to explain to a new parent what has been lost?
I find it sinister that community that is one of the areas that seems to have been targeted and destroyed.
And:
As for the remark about STATs they mean nothing. Any child can be taught how to pass exams, but do they know how to read, write and do maths? Many children have reached the merry highs of year 5/6 and are not compete in these areas. Can this be blamed completely on a new Head, or a long and steady run of the "wrong" teachers.
I confess to being a little curious at the reception given to the current SATs. Will the naysayers, like the last commenter above, still be dismissing their significance?
My instinct, however, tells me that the essence of a really good school is pretty unquantifiable. How is it possible to measure happiness and interest in life and learning? Sadly the only measurable elements are tests like the SATs and for now, that is all we have to go by. Which is why the Bishops comments about concerns regarding the 'quality of education' rang a little hollow, and certainly seemed hard to justify in any meaningful, or measurable way.
I can't help wondering, even if all this had been so, would it have therefore justified the treatment that some people have experienced? Some commenters seem to suggest that it would.
We had a comment from someone who wanted to let us know that St Vincents has appeared on a list of the 100 "most improved" schools. This kind of thing is really tiresome. It hinges on this old canard that until Mrs. Cleughs arrival St V's was a failing school. This has been put about time and time again. It is said with great confidence and bluster, but not a jot of supporting evidence has ever been forthcoming. It really is a tedious myth. Now we are told by this commenter that St Vincents' SATs results has put it in the 'most improved schools' bracket. I hope that you can understand from the above graph that St Vincents has not made a dramatic improvement at all. They have merely maintained their good SATs performance. For which they deserve congratulations. But please. Can we quit pretending that this is novel? It's not.
To the anonymous commenter: Here is the table of 100 'most improved schools'. Hope that helps. And no, we didn't post your comment. I am addressing it here, but this blog was not set up as a platform for misleading falsehoods but rather to counter them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
