一点点知识是危险的吗?:基于十分位数的NCEA排名表开发方法

M. Thrupp, Noeline Alcorn
{"title":"一点点知识是危险的吗?:基于十分位数的NCEA排名表开发方法","authors":"M. Thrupp, Noeline Alcorn","doi":"10.26686/NZAROE.V0I20.1570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years it has become increasingly common for New Zealand newspapers and magazines to publish “league tables” comparing schools’ performances in National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). Since these results strongly reflect socio-economic differences between schools, some media outlets have taken up the practice of arranging school results by socio-economic deciles and/or providing decile “averages”. Although this approach is intended to indicate more clearly “value added” than approaches that do not group schools by decile, this article urges caution towards decile-based comparisons on the grounds that schools have numerous contextual differences that are not reflected in decile ratings. The problem is illustrated here by comparing findings from research in two schools with the same decile rating. We conclude that taking account of deciles does not make judgments about school NCEA performance more defensible, and suggest that the practice be discouraged.","PeriodicalId":377372,"journal":{"name":"The New Zealand Annual Review of Education","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A little knowledge being a dangerous thing?: Decile-based approaches to developing NCEA league tables\",\"authors\":\"M. Thrupp, Noeline Alcorn\",\"doi\":\"10.26686/NZAROE.V0I20.1570\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In recent years it has become increasingly common for New Zealand newspapers and magazines to publish “league tables” comparing schools’ performances in National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). Since these results strongly reflect socio-economic differences between schools, some media outlets have taken up the practice of arranging school results by socio-economic deciles and/or providing decile “averages”. Although this approach is intended to indicate more clearly “value added” than approaches that do not group schools by decile, this article urges caution towards decile-based comparisons on the grounds that schools have numerous contextual differences that are not reflected in decile ratings. The problem is illustrated here by comparing findings from research in two schools with the same decile rating. We conclude that taking account of deciles does not make judgments about school NCEA performance more defensible, and suggest that the practice be discouraged.\",\"PeriodicalId\":377372,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The New Zealand Annual Review of Education\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The New Zealand Annual Review of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26686/NZAROE.V0I20.1570\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The New Zealand Annual Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26686/NZAROE.V0I20.1570","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

近年来,新西兰的报纸和杂志在国家教育成就证书(NCEA)中公布比较学校表现的“排名表”变得越来越普遍。由于这些结果强烈地反映了学校之间的社会经济差异,一些媒体机构采取了按社会经济十分位数排列学校成绩和/或提供十分位数“平均值”的做法。虽然这种方法的目的是比不按十分位数对学校进行分组的方法更清楚地表明“附加价值”,但本文敦促人们谨慎对待基于十分位数的比较,因为学校有许多背景差异,这些差异没有反映在十分位数评级中。这里通过比较两所具有相同十分位数评级的学校的研究结果来说明这个问题。我们的结论是,考虑十分位数并不能使对学校NCEA表现的判断更站得住脚,并建议不鼓励这种做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A little knowledge being a dangerous thing?: Decile-based approaches to developing NCEA league tables
In recent years it has become increasingly common for New Zealand newspapers and magazines to publish “league tables” comparing schools’ performances in National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). Since these results strongly reflect socio-economic differences between schools, some media outlets have taken up the practice of arranging school results by socio-economic deciles and/or providing decile “averages”. Although this approach is intended to indicate more clearly “value added” than approaches that do not group schools by decile, this article urges caution towards decile-based comparisons on the grounds that schools have numerous contextual differences that are not reflected in decile ratings. The problem is illustrated here by comparing findings from research in two schools with the same decile rating. We conclude that taking account of deciles does not make judgments about school NCEA performance more defensible, and suggest that the practice be discouraged.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信