Why is it difficult for schools to establish equitable practices in allocating students to attainment ‘sets’?
Why is it difficult for schools to establish equitable practices in allocating students to attainment ‘sets’?
复制标题
为什么学校很难建立公平的做法来分配学生的成绩“组”？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Pepper
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Taylor;B. Francis;Nicole Craig;L. Archer;J. Hodgen;A. Mazenod;A. Tereshchenko;D. Pepper
研究一致表明，“能力”分组（跟踪）容易成为不良实践的牺牲品，并使不平等永久化。这些问题的一个特点是在分配群体或“轨道”方面的不公平和不准确的做法。然而，很少有研究调查这种做法是否可以得到改善。在此，我们对126所英国中学分组实践的大规模干预研究的调查和访谈结果进行了研究。我们发现，当鼓励学校通过参与“最佳实践”干预，根据公平原则分配学生并将他们在小组之间移动时，实践的公平性有所提高（即减少了分配中使用的非成就因素）。然而，大多数学校继续使用主观和可能有偏见的信息来对学生进行分组。此外，一些声称使用成就设置的学校似乎在使用不公平的分流做法。我们的研究结果表明，公平的改善受到运营和战略因素的制约，包括时间表、财务以及教师与学生能力和进步有关的价值观和信念。我们提出了鼓励学校改变分组做法的策略，借鉴与复杂组织合作的方法。
ABSTRACT Research has consistently shown ‘ability’ grouping (tracking) to be prey to poor practice, and to perpetuate inequity. A feature of these problems is inequitable and inaccurate practice in allocation to groups or ‘tracks’. Yet little research has examined whether such practices might be improved. Here, we examine survey and interview findings from a large-scale intervention study of grouping practices in 126 English secondary schools. We find that when schools are encouraged to allocate students and move them between groups according to equitable principles by participation in a ‘best practice’ intervention, there is some increased equity of practice (i.e. a reduction in non-attainment factors used in allocation). However, the majority of schools continue to use subjective and potentially biased information to group students. Furthermore, some schools that claim to be using attainment setting appear to be using the inequitable practice of streaming. Our findings show that improvements in equity are constrained by operational and strategic factors, including timetabling, finance, and teachers’ values and beliefs relating to student ability and progression. We suggest strategies for encouraging schools to change their grouping practices, drawing on approaches for working with complex organisations.