Dear Editor,
Recently, Educatejamaica.org published a report highlighting the "best" and "poorest" performing schools in the island. Schools were ranked based on the number of students graduated with five or more Caribbean Secondary Examination Certificate (CSEC) subjects. Essentially, institutions that had the highest number of students to have obtained five or more subjects are, according to Educatejamaica.org, "the schools where your child is most likely to have the greatest level of success", with the converse true.
In making these correlations, the researchers seemingly disregarded a number of glaring variables. In the end, they fed us a parochial and spurious assessment, and, sadly, many of us have gulped it down unquestioningly.
First, the study preempted the 2013 release of the CSEC results, and as such there was no consideration of the noted improvements in this year's sitting of the examinations. Nevertheless, the title of the research boldly projects "Academic Champions 2013". And as if readers were not sufficiently beguiled, the subtitle furthered the intent with "Helping you choose the best school for your child". Certainly, since many parents are already using GSAT and CSEC grades as the yardsticks of "brightness" and "dunceness", they have been further hoodwinked into believing that institutions milling out the best CSEC passes are the best and the most suitable for their children, regardless of their offsprings' needs and abilities.
The report is even more unsettling due to its overt oversight of the disparities among many of the schools and the potential impact of such on students' performances. The most dominant variables include the following: the academic capacity of students enrolled at the institutions, instructional resources, and the socio-economic background of students. In light of this, we simply cannot make comparisons. The field is too uneven.
The report also conflicts with the National Education Inspectorate's (NEI) assessments. For example, the NEI rated Jamaica College as satisfactory in its overall performance. However, the institution is ranked rather lowly on Educatejamaica's scale. NEI, of course, appears more comprehensive and credible as principals, teachers and students are intimately assessed over a period of time before conclusions are drawn. It is therefore clear where the discrepancy lies.
Besides, we cannot measure students' abilities based on the grades they achieve. Some students simply do not do well under examination conditions, but can apply critical academic content and skills in real-life contexts.
Furthermore, examinations are sometimes flawed by their inherent construction causing students to perform poorly.
Consequently, although Educatejamaica has informed us that the study was conducted by "some of the greatest minds Jamaica has to offer," their research method and their omission of the variables could have easily skewed their findings.
To all educational analysts and researchers, ensure you are objective and comprehensive in your studies and in your representation of emerging data so as to avoid the undue slander and stereotyping of institutions and their members.
Shawna Kay Williams
shawna201@gmal.com
Blessings
Unfair ranking of schools
-->
Recently, Educatejamaica.org published a report highlighting the "best" and "poorest" performing schools in the island. Schools were ranked based on the number of students graduated with five or more Caribbean Secondary Examination Certificate (CSEC) subjects. Essentially, institutions that had the highest number of students to have obtained five or more subjects are, according to Educatejamaica.org, "the schools where your child is most likely to have the greatest level of success", with the converse true.
In making these correlations, the researchers seemingly disregarded a number of glaring variables. In the end, they fed us a parochial and spurious assessment, and, sadly, many of us have gulped it down unquestioningly.
First, the study preempted the 2013 release of the CSEC results, and as such there was no consideration of the noted improvements in this year's sitting of the examinations. Nevertheless, the title of the research boldly projects "Academic Champions 2013". And as if readers were not sufficiently beguiled, the subtitle furthered the intent with "Helping you choose the best school for your child". Certainly, since many parents are already using GSAT and CSEC grades as the yardsticks of "brightness" and "dunceness", they have been further hoodwinked into believing that institutions milling out the best CSEC passes are the best and the most suitable for their children, regardless of their offsprings' needs and abilities.
The report is even more unsettling due to its overt oversight of the disparities among many of the schools and the potential impact of such on students' performances. The most dominant variables include the following: the academic capacity of students enrolled at the institutions, instructional resources, and the socio-economic background of students. In light of this, we simply cannot make comparisons. The field is too uneven.
The report also conflicts with the National Education Inspectorate's (NEI) assessments. For example, the NEI rated Jamaica College as satisfactory in its overall performance. However, the institution is ranked rather lowly on Educatejamaica's scale. NEI, of course, appears more comprehensive and credible as principals, teachers and students are intimately assessed over a period of time before conclusions are drawn. It is therefore clear where the discrepancy lies.
Besides, we cannot measure students' abilities based on the grades they achieve. Some students simply do not do well under examination conditions, but can apply critical academic content and skills in real-life contexts.
Furthermore, examinations are sometimes flawed by their inherent construction causing students to perform poorly.
Consequently, although Educatejamaica has informed us that the study was conducted by "some of the greatest minds Jamaica has to offer," their research method and their omission of the variables could have easily skewed their findings.
To all educational analysts and researchers, ensure you are objective and comprehensive in your studies and in your representation of emerging data so as to avoid the undue slander and stereotyping of institutions and their members.
Shawna Kay Williams
shawna201@gmal.com
Blessings
Unfair ranking of schools
-->