|
Method |
Strengths |
Limitations |
| National Curriculum Tests |
Judged against school curriculum.
Measure of longitudinal progress.
Easy Transferable data across schools & LEAs.
Based on clear criteria |
High levels of achievement
dependent on access to appropriate curriculum opportunities.
Unit of measurement can be too broad,
particularly with the youngest children |
| Baseline |
Breadth of assessment issues
Can involve qualitative and quantitative data |
Can vary across the country
Some schemes lack experience |
Ability Profile Tests
(eg. CATs) |
Useful screening procedure.
Objective evaluation of performance on certain skills
in comparison
with others of similar age.
Relatively inexpensive.
Can be useful in identifying able children who are
under-achieving. |
Only able to give information on the limited range
of
skills measured.
Usually limited to measuring analytic skills and do
not reward
divergent thinking.
May not identify pupils with different cultural/linguistic
backgrounds or dyslexic pupils.
Format may be daunting for some
pupils.
Less robust at the extremes of the range.
Less reliable for younger pupils. |
National Curriculum
Teacher Assessment |
Based on clear criteria.
Linked to the school curriculum. |
High levels of achievement dependent on access
to
appropriate curriculum opportunities.
Open to interpretation. |
| Teacher Nomination |
Makes use of teacher’s ongoing assessments of pupils.
Closely linked to provision.
Facilitates recognition of pupils’ responses to teaching,
levels of
initiative and interest, lateral thinking and
extent of high level
problem solving. |
Subjective if not undertaken against agreed criteria.
Clearly linked to generality of practice.
Relies on teaching approaches which are confident,
challenging and
flexible.
Can be disrupted by teacher changes or supply issues. |
|
Classroom Observation
|
May help to confirm other assessments
through systematic data collection based on agreed criteria.
Assesses child in familiar context doing familiar tasks. |
Time consuming if done in addition to normal
classroom practice.
Can be subjective if not undertaken rigorously and on a series of
occasions (including variety of teaching
contexts). |
| Examination of Pupil Work |
Good measure of written outcomes.
Helps refine teacher expectations through analysis of high
quality
work.
Can allow children with specific learning disabilities
(e.g.
dyslexic children) opportunity to demonstrate ability
in other
subject areas |
Can be subjective if not undertaken rigorously.
Only measures achievement not potential.
High performance reliant on good opportunities and
high teacher
expectation.
Over reliance on written work can hide wider
potential, especially
for younger children.
|
| Subject Specific Checklists |
Useful in assisting teachers to explore ability in
their
subject and thereby recognise those with high ability.
Discussion generated in departments can serve to
facilitate
curriculum design. |
Checklists cannot be relevant for each individual.
Extensive lists can be unwieldy to manage and time-consuming to administer.
|
|
Generic Checklists |
Easily accessible.
Simple to handle. |
Can run the risk of creating stereotypes.
Too general to be useful in curriculum terms.
Validity remains questionable. |
| Reading Tests |
Easy to administer.
Reading competence gives some indication of likely
exam performance.
Some schools have access to some standardised score
which allows for
‘Summer born’ factor to be considered. |
Reading is a skill rather than an ability and high
scores on reading tests are not a reliable indicator of cognitive
ability. |
| Creativity Tests |
Measures ability not normally assessed as part of
school
assessment.
Offers divergent thinkers a chance to display their ability. |
Time-consuming to administer.
Validity remains questionable. |
| Educational Psychologists |
Invaluable in identifying high ability linked to
complex
issues e.g. areas of SEN. |
Time-consuming and expensive.
Unnecessary for most gifted pupils. |
| Parents and Peers |
Intimate knowledge of the individual.
Takes account of performance outside school. |
Subjective, based on own experience and knowledge.
Difficult to give clear criteria. |
|
Using Community Resources |
May be the only source of information
concerning talents
e.g. sports academies, theatre groups.
Offers a dimension that may not be possible within a
school context
(e.g. playing for a national team). |
Specific channels of communication need to
be
established, which may not be reliable. |
Identification through
provision* |
Helps pupils develop a desire to learn and
sustain the
personal drive required to fulfil their potential.
Key to addressing underachievement. |
Demanding in terms of teacher time and
resources. |
