Flight paths in secondary are nonsense and demotivating for pupils SAY OFSTED

[noblegiraffe]

Ofsted finally saying what I’ve been banging on about for years. Flight paths are bollocks and schools shouldn’t be producing them.

So if your school does, hopefully Ofsted not being keen might make them reconsider!

Even in year 11 it is almost impossible with the new GCSE spec marple !

Cool I actually wish parents were more involved so that they would understand the pointless giving of grades. At consultation evenings I give lots of information about strengths and what they need to do to improve. I give parents the target the school provide and explain that pupils can improve on this or, in some cases, will need to work hard to achieve them.

I find it really sad that pupils feel like failures - I had one girl tell me she had let me down last year and had 'failed at life' because she didn't achieve the grade 4s that she had no chance of reaching anyway.

cool how do you think GCSE grade boundaries are set?

marco, I do have some sympathy regarding the problem of grading, assessment and progression mapping, in the context of exams being changed. However this current climate will only last a few years whilst the data is being compiled and analysed. Every year that goes by, the picture becomes clearer. And for that their needs to be data collection, compilation, continued analysis and parents should be put in the picture.

It is a closed shop you are capable of joining if you wish to change things from within.

I don't need to. I am well practiced at successfully dealing with 'closed shops'.

noble, wow! So sensitive! This is only a discussion on Mumsnet. I have learnt from it and I suspect others have too. Often annoyance goes hand in hand with the learning as rigidly held mindsets are broken.

I find it really sad that pupils feel like failures

So do I. It is important to show the limitations and benefits of statistical data, grading given etc. It's a good lesson because the same limitations and benefits occur elsewhere. But to show the limitations and benefits of something, there has to be an opportunity to experience it, if only to discredit it later.

Very true. Last year's papers were really difficult in my subject.

Am a bit out of date now having been out of secondary for a few years, but my experience of flight paths as an MFL teacher was seeing that some of my pupils were expected to achieve a higher grade for their foreign language (which they had only been doing at that point from Year 7) than they were for English - which they had done all along. This was because, as SATs are only for core subjects, they took an average of English and Maths results and gave that as the target for MFL. This meant that those who were stronger at Maths and weaker at English were supposed to get a higher GCSE grade in French or German than they would in English.

SLT wouldn't accept that this was complete nonsense and a lot of my poor children felt they had failed.

In my experience therefore, flight paths were shit.

. However this current climate will only last a few years whilst the data is being compiled and analysed

LOL : are you even vaguely aware how often the governement moves the goalposts in education??

LOL : are you even vaguely aware how often the governement moves the goalposts in education??

Of course I am. But the government have other stuff to do at the moment...

I’m going to ask again cool because this is absolutely key. How do you think they set GCSE grade boundaries? For actual GCSE exams, sat by thousands of pupils?

I’m going to ask again cool because this is absolutely key.

Me revealing my own understanding on this really isn't 'key'. However, I will answer anyway.

I know that there are different schools of thought, in theory, regarding how do this. From setting boundaries based on the percentages of pupils from a particular year achieving raw scores so only the top x% of pupils raw scores can be assigned top grade and so on, filtering down. Because the top grade has to have an aspirational value. However this doesn't allow for consistency of standards between different years or guard against varying political motivations in having a certain proportion of people achieving various levels of qualifications affecting results. So then a wider analysis has to happen looking at setting grade boundaries related to the percentage of understanding of course content demonstrated.

So, yes, I do appreciate the complexity. But I'm all for exposing it rather than scrapping the system altogether. Because, like it or not, people have a need for classification. If you remove one sort another, not necessarily a superior one, will rapidly replace it.

I know that there are different schools of thought, in theory, regarding how do this.

I didn’t ask for schools of thought about how to do it, I asked how it’s actually done.

Because when you know how it’s actually done, that’s when you realise that your notion of giving grade boundaries in Y8 to a topic test are just nonsense.

Because when you know how it’s actually done, that’s when you realise that your notion of giving grade boundaries in Y8 to a topic test are just nonsense.

Why don't you tell, me, then, noble if you want to attempt to prove your point.

The thing is, so far you have not actually offered any real alternative which even has any potential to communicate anything remotely intelligible to parents regarding their child's attainment and progress. You don't appear to believe the GCSE grades hold any validity, either.

So the education system becomes more and more like a mystery cult whereby only initiates are the holders of the 'secret knowledge'. Elitist, divisive and open to corruption. That might reflect the reality of the education system now. However, I for one, will never support practices which allow this continue.

Why don't you tell, me, then, noble if you want to attempt to prove your point.

Glad you asked.
Currently, the exam boards look at the KS2 data for the cohort sitting the exams to decide whether they are brighter or less bright than the previous year’s cohort. They then look at the GCSE results of the previous year’s cohort. Then, to ‘maintain standards’ current Y11 need to get basically the same results as the previous Y11, slightly adjusted depending on whether their KS2 results were better or worse (so a brighter year group will have a higher pass rate).

Then, once it has been decided what percentage of pupils should be getting each grade, the kids sit their GCSEs and the results are looked at. The graph of how many pupils should be getting each grade is put against the graph of actual test scores, and a pin put in each test score that will make the actual results best fit the grades the pupils are meant to be getting. These are then the grade boundaries.

So basically, the results in terms of grades are pre-determined, and the grade boundaries are set to ensure this happens.

Now, how can you apply that to a Y8 end of year assessment?

Now, how can you apply that to a Y8 end of year assessment?

By applying similar measures and extrapolating.

Look at the KS2 data. Compare it the KS2 data of the previous year's cohort sitting exams. Devise an adjustment based on this comparison. Then decide how many pupils should be getting which grade. Then produce a graph of how many pupils should be getting each grade (as if time had gone forward and they had taken the GCSE) and put that against the graph of actual test scores, and put a pin in each test score that will make the actual results best fit the (virtual GCSE level) grades the pupils are meant to be getting. From this devise the grade boundaries. Then look at the grades previous cohorts got in Y8 compared to what they got in the GCSEs. Work out the average progression. From that extrapolate down the grading from the virtual GCSE level to what is being achieved currently.

So basically, the results in terms of grades are pre-determined, and the grade boundaries are set to ensure this happens.

As I mentioned, when I talked about 'deciding' the percentages of students achieving each grade. I acknowledged, also, political motivations affecting these decisions p. However every so often there is an examination of standards but nobody likes that as it usually means the system changes yet again which clouds comparisons further and creates more opacity within the system.

Oh, I forgot to say apply the score adjustment.

So what is your alternative, noble?

Cool you don't seem to understand the statistics. You can't take whole cohort descriptive statistics and use that to make predictions of individuals in a different population.
That's one issue I have about your ideas.
The other is that even to do that you'd need national tests every year (every unit?) to analyse the data for the whole cohort. Single schools are not large enough samples. That's a complete overhaul of our education system.
My suggestion is stop assigning grades to kids!

Interesting, though, that if a cohort has lower KS2 scores (than previous years) then they will actually have lower GCSE scores, as a cohort (than previous years). Essentially KS2 can effectively artificially cap attainment. I can appreciate secondary school teachers will find that pretty galling. Dread to think what effect that might have in wanting to manipulate admissions.

I think it is this that needs addressing, though, rather than removing the need to give any advise regarding the amount of progression that can be expected.

You can't take whole cohort descriptive statistics and use that to make predictions of individuals in a different population.

You can but accept this has limitations. Mathematically you could probably do some sort of Bayesian analysis...Anyway I diverge.

My suggestion is stop assigning grades to kids

This is where we differ. There needs to be some sort of grading system throughout if the aim is to achieve good grades at the end of the course. Otherwise there will be no consistent measure to ascertain whether a child is 'on track'.

Mathematically you could probably do some sort of Bayesian analysis...

Mathematicians would not do this, because mathematicians understand statistics.

Essentially KS2 can effectively artificially cap attainment.

Indeed it can, on a national scale, but not on an individual one.

This is why the DfE are introducing national reference tests in Y11 to stop relying on KS2 results to determine the ability of the cohort.

I don't put maths or mathematicians on pedestals either. And a lot, I know most definitely would give it a go just to look at the results. Because they are curious.

Ooh how many mathematicians do you know to know that most would do something monumentally stupid and ignore sample size?

Indeed it can, on a national scale, but not on an individual one.

That is a nonsensical statement. The cap is effectively applied across the board as it results in a lower actual probability of getting a high grade. As the overall grading is adjusted according to the KS2 results. This probability effects all who take the exam.