Unfair analysis of schools' worth

Alfred Sangster, Guest Columnist

The Gleaner published on April 30, 2013 'Education 20/20', a supplement containing its annual report on the ranking of Jamaican secondary schools in CSEC English and maths passes for 2012. The report, under the authorship of Tripp Johnson, provides a ranking in the above two subjects in three types of secondary schools.

There are:

• The secondary high schools, also known as traditional high schools - a total of 64 schools
• The upgraded high schools, also known as the new secondary schools - a total of 81 schools.
• The technical high schools - a total of 15 schools.

The major points and issues to be noted in Johnson's report are:

A. Understanding the statistics. Some features of the statistics are the following;

Quality Scores (QS) are given for each school over a three-year period and then averaged and a Quality Score Index (QSI) calculated for the average. The QSI is used for the ranking of the three sets of schools.

QS and QSI numbers are derived from an arbitrarily assigned number to the CXC pass grades for each school. Thus, a CXC 3 is assigned 40; a CXC 2 is assigned 20; and a CXC 1 is assigned 10. The assignments are based on the alleged difficulties in achieving grades 1 or 2 or 3.

B. The cohorts being considered for statistics are different. It is noted that there are two different cohorts being used to evaluate performances. The Ministry of Education uses the figures of those actually sitting the examination, while Johnson argues that the cohort should be the total number that should have taken the exam. He further states that roughly 20,000 students did not sit the exam in 2012, and that some 7,500 more have since disappeared from the student body over the last five years. The Ministry of Education percentage passes are significantly higher than the Johnson's numbers. Comparison for the year 2012 is shown in Table 1.

C. Johnson argues, along with Dr Ralph Thompson, that disaggregating of the data into the three school types will be helpful in understanding issues of performance in the different types of school. This analysis is done using the total cohort number.

D. Whichever method is used - the total cohort or the disaggregated cohort - there is a general decline in the percentage of passes in the schools. English results have declined and the results for maths are at a six-year low. This must be cause for concern.

Johnson does, however, concede that those that pass the exams deserve the honour they achieve. In addition, high-achieving schools do have something to boast about. The author pronounces that on the basis of the test scores, the Jamaican educational system receives an overall failing grade (F).

Unfortunate conclusions

We might well be disillusioned if we were to accept, without reservation, the Johnson designation of the Jamaican educational system as having an overall grade of F. There are many other considerations which must be taken on board before we can accept the broad-brush fail grade.

The conclusion is unfortunate for a number of reasons:

First, the education system cannot be judged on the performance of the high schools alone. What about the basic, primary, and tertiary systems; the policy and administration, the JTA and its leadership; the teachers; the financing; or even the threats and challenges to the system?

Second, there are many highly successful examples in all the categories. There must be in the analysis a way to recognise excellence beyond the 'Top Ten Rankings'.

Third, using only two academic subjects, English and maths, to grade the system is patently inadequate. Other academic and technical subjects, sports, social activity, location, community and parental support, graduate support, or school leadership will count in any school evaluation.

What happens to the significant number of children that are 'lost' between their entry to schools at GSAT level and the number sitting the exams at grade 11? They need to be traced.

A number of schools consistently perform at the highest level and also get the brightest students at GSAT. Are there other reasons for their consistently high performance?

Some students in schools at the lower end of the rankings perform very well. What are the reasons for the disparity between individual performance and school ranking?

Is a snob system emerging between the high schools (the brand-name schools) and the upgraded and technical high schools?

What about the many other issues in the school system - crime (even murder) and violence, sex and condoms in schools; radio and TV shows and songs in the buses; sports and other school competitions; family life; financial worries and more.

The rankings do not take into account a number of historical realities.

The disparity between the high and upgraded schools.

The upgraded high schools, formerly known as new secondary schools, had their genesis in the 1970s when the decision was taken to upgrade the junior secondary schools by adding grades 10 and 11. The schools also had a different examination, the Secondary School Certificate (SSC) Exam, which has since been abandoned. What, however, was created was a parallel and second-class secondary system, expanded over time, and renamed the upgraded high schools, which exist to this day.

The Grade Six Achievement Test (GSAT) has inherited a number of features of the former Common Entrance Examination (CEE). One of these is the choice of school, which is particularly significant for those who do well at the GSAT. What this means is that the top - brand-name schools - get the top GSAT performers. Surprise, surprise!

HERCULEAN TASK

By default, the upgraded high schools, with fewer resources, have the Herculean task of dealing with poor performances, and their scores record this reality. It is this historical reality and perceived injustice that led one school principal last year to cry out "Unfair!" in the GSAT placements to her school.

The technical high schools suffer from a disadvantage in the school placement system. Some students are placed on the basis of GSAT, while others are placed on the basis of the Grand Nine Achievement Test (GNAT). The former students have five years at the technical school, while the latter have only two, but both are included in the cohort being evaluated. Clearly an unfair evaluation.

The rankings, realistic as they may be, and unfair as they are, do have some lessons for us and point to some of the issues to be faced in moving forward.

The perpetuation of the GSAT placement system, as exists, now will simply continue to enhance the quality difference that exists between the high schools and the upgraded schools.

There are other methods of grading schools, and we could well learn from the English system. These other items include evaluations such as co-curricular activities and other school achievements.

Academic grading systems vary with institutions and countries. It is unusual for a whole class to fail an exam, which is the current grading assigned to the Jamaican educational system by Mr Johnson. Has all Jamaica failed? Surely not? A suggestion made to Mr Johnson is to use the current levels of difficulty, and to divide the Quality Score Index (QSI) list into three passing grades as follows:

A QSI grade over 60 for a school would make for a grade I or A; a QSI grade of over 30 would make for a grade 2 or B; and a QSI above 15 would qualify for a grade 3 or C. Below 15 would be listed as ungraded. This would provide a measure of school ranking, and it would also enable the upgraded high schools to be ranked with the traditional high schools. It would provide a challenge to move to a higher grade, and by using the term 'ungraded' will withdraw the fail label and make schools aspire to higher levels.

RECIPE FOR SUCCESS

Research should be sponsored to find out the secret of the success (or failure) of the top and bottom achievers. This knowledge should then be shared with the wider system as a whole. The rankings should, therefore, be used as a comparative performance indicator for each school and be used to spur them on to greater effort. The lessons of success need to be shared.

The role of sports in a school's success. Sports and other non-academic programmes and national competitions are important contributors to the success of a school. Many of the upgraded high and technical high schools have been successful at the highest levels in all-island sports competitions and have got their names on the educational map.

Success is critically dependent on leadership and a team approach. The success of a team is fundamentally related to the quality and dynamic of its leader. The principals' role is critical in establishing the kind of school that will be part of his or her 'empire'.

The leader must build either by persuasion or discipline, a cohort of staff who are committed to the same goals and objectives. The circle must be enlarged with the parents, the community, the alumni and, above all, the students who must come to believe in the school and to want its success. On such partnerships, the sky is the limit.

Alfred Sangster is president emeritus of the University of Technology, Jamaica. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and sangsteralfred@yahoo.com.

Table 1: Comparison of Ministry of Education and Johnson Data

Ministry of Education Data

2012 English

No. Sat No. Passed Pass %27,626 14,366 52

2012 Maths

No. SatNo. Passed Pass %23,729 8,890 37

(1)

Note 1. Total number sitting the examNote 2. Postulated number that should have taken the exam

Johnson Data

2012 English

No. Sat No. Passed Pass %43,444 14,366 33

2012 Maths

No. Sat No. Passed Pass %43,444 8,861 20.4

(2)

TABLE 2: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT OF GRADES AND SCHOOLS TO THE QSI LISTINGS

ENGLISHMATHS

QSI No.Sec. Upgr. Tech Sec. Upgr. Tech Band/GradeHighHigh High HighHigh High

100-60 (A)12--6--59-30 (B)231-10--

29-15 (C)1310222--Below 15 16701326--

(Ungraded)

Totals648115648115