Analysis of National Value‐added Datasets to Assess the Impact of Selection on Pupil Performance

Schagen, Ian; Schagen, Sandie

doi:10.1080/01411920301841

Cited by 22 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The OECD has conducted a series of comparative studies of national educational performance and these have concluded that more differentiated systems, where children are selected onto different tracks at an early stage, are less effective in achieving higher overall attainment than less differentiated systems (OECD/UNESCO‐UIS, 2003). With regard to the relative effectiveness of schools Schagen and Schagen (2002, 2003a, b) and Atkinson and Gregg (2004) found that while standards at school level showed that children at grammar schools performed better than children at secondary modern schools, the standard at LEA level showed little difference compared with non‐selective LEAs. Pupil level data also reveal that grammar schools are still strongly associated with the social segregation of intakes.…”

Section: Historical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selection by Attainment and Aptitude in English Secondary Schools

Coldron

Willis

Wolstenholme

2009

British Journal of Educational Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 1997 the Labour government's policy has been to allow grammar schools to continue but for no more such schools to be introduced. The same applied to schools that selected part of their intake by attainment. At the same time the specialist school programme has been greatly expanded and these schools have been allowed to select up to 10% of their intake on the basis of aptitude in a specialist subject. There has been considerable debate about whether selection by aptitude is significantly distinct from selection by attainment (Education and Skills Select Committee 2004;West and Hind 2003). In 2000 (Flatley et al 2001) and 2001 (West and Hind 2003) reasonable estimates were made of the number of schools selecting by aptitude but none since the expansion of the numbers of specialist schools. Behind these debates is the concern that both kinds of selection are unjust and lead to greater educational and social inequality. This paper reports on the results of a study of the admission arrangements for all secondary schools in England in 2006 together with a nationally representative survey of parents who had applied for a secondary school place for September 2006. It provides an update on the admission arrangements of all maintained secondary schools that select all or part of their intake by attainment/ability or aptitude. The paper reports on how many schools in England selected by attainment in 2006 and the proportions of children within each Local Authority so selected. It reveals that in the most highly selective authorities the proportions range from 19% to 39% and that some are affecting the intakes not only of the population in their Local Authority but also substantially in that of neighbouring authorities. The first comprehensive analysis is made of all schools that select part of their intake by attainment. Also, prior to this study we only had out of date estimates of the proportion of schools that select by aptitude. This study presents an up to date count of these schools, the methods they use for testing and the proportions of their intakes selected. The debate concerning the similarity between selection by aptitude and by attainment is critically reviewed and it is argued that they differ significantly in the social narrative they support but are similar in their contribution to social segregation.

show abstract

Section: Historical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selection by Attainment and Aptitude in English Secondary Schools

Coldron

Willis

Wolstenholme

2009

British Journal of Educational Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has been justified by the increasing amount of evidence to suggest that variables describing the financial circumstances of pupils are reliable in predicting many outcome measures relevant to educational research (for example, Schagen and Schagen 2003;Ruddock et al 2004;Strand and Demie 2005). In the UK the most accessible indicator of an individual pupil's socio-economic background is whether they are eligible for free school meals (FSM).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Models of attainment data (for example, Schagen and Schagen 2003) almost invariably contain eligibility for FSM as a significantly influential background variable. Eligibility for FSM is used in the calculation of the contextualised value-added measure by the UK Department for Children, Schools and Families (http://www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/performance).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving on from free school meals: national census data can describe the socio-economic background of the intake of each school in England

Styles

2008

Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Data for England from the national census can provide the socioeconomic background of individual pupils and therefore the intake of schools. In many respects, this is more useful than the conventional measure of 'free school meals', which has historically been used in the UK as a proxy measure for disadvantage. Prior to the advent of the English Pupil-level Annual School Census in 2001, using census data for research concerning schools was problematic as the immediate location of the school is often socio-economically different to areas in which the pupils live. Now and in future, working with the national census is considerably more attractive as data on individual pupils can be matched and information aggregated to school level to provide measures that reflect intake rather than immediate location. Purpose: This paper discusses the details, merits and uses of this approach. It considers whether derived census data for England can replace or augment the traditional proxy measure for disadvantage, eligibility for free school meals. Sources of evidence: Statistical comparisons of derived data from the 2001 England national census and the free school meals measure were used to clarify strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches. A literature review concerning the measurement of socio-economic disadvantage for educational research provided background to the discussion. Educational researchers at the UK's National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) provided details of what variables from the 2001 national census would be useful to derive. Data descriptions provided with the English Pupil-level Annual School Census and the 2001 England national census formed the basis of the data derivation. Main argument: Eligibility for free school meals has a number of problems when used as a proxy measure for disadvantage. The use of derived national census data to illustrate the socio-economic background of pupils and schools' intake is free of these problems. However, it has its own collection of setbacks that should determine how and when it is used. Conclusions: Derived national census data should be used in conjunction with eligibility for free school meals to enhance our knowledge of the important part background has to play in the education of children in England.

show abstract

“… The present article does not discuss whether selection is a good thing—this important question is separate from the question of quality of selection in the selective system. For relevant research, see for example Schagen and Schagen (). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present article does not discuss whether selection is a good thing-this important question is separate from the question of quality of selection in the selective system. For relevant research, see for exampleSchagen and Schagen (2003). 2 Exact years are not given to protect the privacy of the school and pupils.3 In the psychometric literature, this scale is called 'Deviation IQ'.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How valid are 11‐plus tests? Evidence from Kent

Brown

Fong

2019

British Educational Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite profound influence of selection‐by‐ability on children's educational opportunities, empirical evidence for the validity of 11‐plus tests is scarce. This study focused on secondary selection in Kent, the largest grammar school area in England. We analysed scores from the ‘Kent Test’ (the 11‐plus test used in Kent), Cognitive Assessment Tests (CAT4) and Key Stage 2 Standardised Assessment Tests (KS2) using longitudinal data of two year cohorts (N1 = 95, N2 = 99) from one primary school. All the assessment batteries provided highly overlapping information, with the decisive effect of content area (e.g. verbal vs maths) over task type (e.g. knowledge‐loaded vs knowledge‐free). Thus, the value in differentiating ‘pure’ (i.e. knowledge‐free) ability in 11‐plus testing is questionable. KS2 and Kent Test aggregated scores overlapped very strongly, sharing nearly 80% of variance; moreover, KS2‐based eligibility decisions had higher sensitivity than the Kent Test in predicting the actual admissions to grammar schools after Head Teacher Assessment (HTA) appeals have taken place. Finally, the use of multiple pass marks for each Kent Test component, as well as the total score, was found to increase the chance of false rejection. This study provides preliminary evidence that national examinations could be a good basis for selection to grammar schools; it challenges the use of complex admission rules and multiple decisions, and questions the value of 11‐plus tests.

show abstract

Analysis of National Value‐added Datasets to Assess the Impact of Selection on Pupil Performance

Cited by 22 publications

References 1 publication

Selection by Attainment and Aptitude in English Secondary Schools

Selection by Attainment and Aptitude in English Secondary Schools

Moving on from free school meals: national census data can describe the socio-economic background of the intake of each school in England

How valid are 11‐plus tests? Evidence from Kent

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About