MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389111038 · doi:10.55016/ojs/ajer.v68i2.70880

The Practice of Excluding Students from Large-scale Assessments: Interviews with Principals

2022· article· en· W4389111038 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tess Miller, Anne Marie FitzGerald, Han Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionPsychologyCLARITYAccountabilityDocumentationPedagogyPromotion (chess)HumanitiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the shortage of literature examining exclusion rate practices in Canada, this study reported on exclusion rate practices from principals' perspectives. Specifically, factors influencing principals’ decision-making regarding excluding students from large-scale assessments (LSAs) were explored. We inquired about factors and implications of social promotion as well as decision-making based on compassion, particularly in relation to students who were working below grade level. Using a qualitative research design, we conducted interviews with eight school principals and one vice-principal. Findings revealed an absence of clarity and governance in LSAs that likely influenced differences in principals’ decision-making. Some principals would automatically exclude students who had an Individualized Education Plan, while others would review student files to determine which students to exclude. There was also a discrepancy surrounding which educational supports were permitted on the LSAs. Keywords: Large-scale Assessment, Exclusion Rates, Social Promotion, Principal Leadership, Accountability Étant donné le manque de documentation sur les pratiques en matière de taux d'exclusion au Canada, cette étude porte sur les pratiques en matière de taux d'exclusion du point de vue des directeurs d'école. Plus précisément, nous avons exploré les facteurs qui influencent la prise de décision des directeurs d'école concernant l'exclusion des élèves des évaluations à grande échelle (EGE). Nous nous sommes renseignées sur les facteurs et les implications de la promotion sociale ainsi que sur la prise de décision fondée sur la compassion, en particulier en ce qui concerne les élèves qui travaillent en dessous du niveau scolaire. À l'aide d'un modèle de recherche qualitative, nous avons mené des entretiens avec huit directeurs d'école et un directeur adjoint. Les résultats ont révélé un manque de clarté et de gouvernance dans les EGE, ce qui a probablement influencé les différences dans les décisions des directeurs d'école. Certains directeurs d'école excluaient automatiquement les élèves qui avaient un plan d'enseignement personnalisé, tandis que d'autres examinaient les dossiers des élèves pour déterminer lesquels exclure. Il y avait également une divergence quant aux soutiens éducatifs autorisés dans le contexte des EGE. Mots clés : évaluation à grande échelle, taux d'exclusion, promotion sociale, leadership du directeur d'école, responsabilisation

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.185
GPT teacher head0.575
Teacher spread0.389 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicEducation Discipline and InequalityFrench-language works237,207