Despite our best efforts, the academic performance of our more and less advantages refuses stubbornly to close. In fact, as a recently shows from the Institute of Educational Policy, the gap seems to be expanding.
At the national level, disadvantaged students at the end of primary school were 10.3 months behind their classmates in 2023, an increase of the entire month of 2019.
…
At the national level, the disadvantage gap is extended as students progress through schooling, reaching 19.2 months at the end of high school in 2023, an increase of one month since 2019.
Some of these increases are undoubtedly connected with the increase in apple in child poverty during the last decade. According to the sources, “in half of the cities of the United Kingdom, the poorest families today are worse in real terms than the poorest families a decade ago” with the government estimating that “4.3 million children, or 30% of all children in the United Kingdom, lived” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” “” in
These terrible statistics are not, of course, any excuse and suspicion is still that it could be done more in schools.
There are no schools in England where disadvantaged students work well and their classmates do not.
None.
So, our Kpi number 1 should be the achievement of disadvantaged students.
– Stuart Lock (@stuartlock) July 16, 2024
To understand the previous point, we need to see the results of the students through the lens of ‘despite’ and ‘because’. In a nutshell, we should see the results of students like this:
The most advantageous students will tend to be successful academics although What we do, while it is more likely that the performance of less advantages is because Or what we have done.
What this means is that Altheghe may feel very proud of the results of the most advantageous students, they are likely to succeed in the legs regardless of their actions and decisions. An argument accountant is repeated axiom, “an ascending tide lifts all ships.” But the performance of the most advantageous does not tell him anything about the ‘tides’ in his school. As in the economy, so it is in education: there is no ‘drip’ effect.
Taking credit for the success of students with advantages ignores the role of family history, private tutors, extended social networks and a large number of other invisible factors. These same factors, due to their absence, explain to a large extent that the performance of the less privileged is much more likely to be due to the efforts and elections of school staff. We should make the achievements of thesis students, since they are much more retreat for us to do things well.
We also or ignore or excuse the low performance of the most disadvantaged students, we can point out the relative performance of their richest classmates. Instead, we must assume responsibility for the performance of our most vulnerable cohorts. Your performance is the clearest criteria for the success of our school improvement efforts. If these children are not doing well, we cannot conclude that we are doing a good job. On the contrary, if thesis students are doing well[1]This will really constitute an ascending tide.
Ignoring this is pernicious. If we exhaust the results of our most vulnerable students, we risk deceiving our releases so that we believe that we are better than we really are. Whether the course should deceive the success of all students, but we want to know how effective we are, we must retain our own grantors to take into account looking first and harder the results of our disadvantaged students.
