Reply to: For a minute I thought I was reading the daily mash

[doodab]

the way I read the link is that if 65% of pupils fail to reach above average achievement then the school will be subject to attention.

There are two separate criteria

In key stage 2 tests in 2014, primary schools will be below the floor standard if:

• fewer than 65% of its pupils do not achieve level 4 or above in reading, writing and maths
• it is below the England median for progression by 2 levels in reading, in writing, and in maths

not sure what is difficult with that?

No well you wouldn't be, because you've not actually understood it.

[xoggoth]

Gosh what a lot of argument. Obviously people trying to prove they are brilliant. Whereas a real genius does not need to and will come on here and start rambling about BumbleBees. Saw a fantastic big one today.

[speling bee]

not sure it counts as a relationship, more of an observation. Once people start to insult each other they seem to have realised they have lost the argument.

How would they both have lost the argument?

[vetran]

What do you think is the causal relationship between losing an argument and insulting an opponent in an argument?

not sure it counts as a relationship, more of an observation. Once people start to insult each other they seem to have realised they have lost the argument.

[vetran]

It doesn't matter because whichever you choose not all of the data in the set can be greater than the chosen definition.



As opposed to those well known non-mathematical averages?



It's the DoE who've decided that the standard to be met is to be "above average".



That is to say that schools are expected to be above average (specifically the median) on this measure. This is official government policy, not wordplay on behalf of the questioner. Now it might be that only those schools that fail on the exam results criteria are required to be above average on the progress indicator, but that doesn't seem to be the intent.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/p...-and-standards

They can be if they are above last years average as the average climbs year by year.

2013 - mean attainment = 50%
school is inspected in 2014 has 51%
2014 - mean attainment is 52%

The adjective usage of average - Joe Average, average looking , average diet which are almost impossible to represent with maths and are subjective. Those ones.

the way I read the link is that if 65% of pupils fail to reach above average achievement then the school will be subject to attention.

the floor standard will go up from 2014 - primary schools where fewer than 65% of pupils achieve the expected level (level 4) in the 3 Rs, and which do not achieve above average progress in these subjects, will be below the floor. The current floor standard requires schools to have 60% of their pupils at level 4 or above in English and maths, plus the progress measures

Primary schools which fall below the new 65% floor, and particularly those with a long history of underperformance, face being taken over by an academy sponsor. The expertise and strong leadership provided by sponsors is the best way to turn around weak schools and give pupils the best chance of a first-class education.

They are setting the point at which intervention happens based on progress.

if you have 100 students and 65 are initially able to count to 100 and now can count to 151 that gives 51% progress compared to the rest of the country which shows 50% (they could count to 50 and can now can count to 75) and 35 students who can still only account to 10 and achieve 0% of improvement then its above the floor. The attainment of the other 35 students doesn't count. You are talking about a cut off point not an absolute.

You still have 65% above average and a school average of 33% dragged down by the 35 failures. The country average is based on the school average which includes the 0% scores.

not sure what is difficult with that?

[scooterscot]

They're probably mostly right - There are lots of ways of being intelligent, and of being stupid.

Agreed. It's just that SAS is so unbelievably unintelligent that the majority of the population score above average.

[speling bee]

Average - Mode, median or mean?

if you have 7 values


1 3 3 4 3 5 21

the Modal value is

3


The median is

4

The mean is

5.71

so which average do you want mathematically speaking ?

Of course by using the mathematically speaking the questioner tried to limit it purely on the type of mathematical averages. Of which you can see there are many. I think you are fixating on mean.

But by bringing Good into it he then took it out of the pure maths arena (good isn't a maths term in general) and into the other definitions and the use of an adjective so the following example sentence from the definition covers it perfectly:



it was a trick question and Gove did badly on it. Sort of thing a teacher loves to expose, frequently corrected by someone pointing out there are multiple answers to their perfect question like a bad joke with multiple punchlines.

the left now see it as some sort of blinding light exposing his incompetence.


have you lost as well? you started the insults.

What do you think is the causal relationship between losing an argument and insulting an opponent in an argument?

[doodab]

Average - Mode, median or mean?

if you have 7 values


1 3 3 4 3 5 21

the Modal value is

3


The median is

4

The mean is

5.71

so which average do you want mathematically speaking ?

It doesn't matter because whichever you choose not all of the data in the set can be greater than the chosen definition.

Of course by using the mathematically speaking the questioner tried to limit it purely on the type of mathematical averages. Of which you can see there are many. I think you are fixating on mean.

As opposed to those well known non-mathematical averages?

But by bringing Good into it he then took it out of the pure maths arena (good isn't a maths term in general) and into the other definitions and the use of an adjective so the following example sentence from the definition covers it perfectly:

It's the DoE who've decided that the standard to be met is to be "above average".

the floor standard will go up from 2014 - primary schools where fewer than 65% of pupils achieve the expected level (level 4) in the 3 Rs, and which do not achieve above average progress in these subjects, will be below the floor.

That is to say that schools are expected to be above average (specifically the median) on this measure. This is official government policy, not wordplay on behalf of the questioner. Now it might be that only those schools that fail on the exam results criteria are required to be above average on the progress indicator, but that doesn't seem to be the intent.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/p...-and-standards

[vetran]

The only reason I can see for you to think I am talking bollocks is because yours are hanging in your eyes and making it hard for you to read. The OED definition of average you've linked to says the average refers to one of a number of statistical properties of a set of data, which is exactly what I said it was. It's also quite explicit that the term expresses "the central or typical value in a set of data", meaning that for all the data in the set to be "above average" is clearly impossible unless one also redefines "central" to mean "at the end" and typical to mean "atypical".

Average - Mode, median or mean?

if you have 7 values


1 3 3 4 3 5 21

the Modal value is

3


The median is

4

The mean is

5.71

so which average do you want mathematically speaking ?

Of course by using the mathematically speaking the questioner tried to limit it purely on the type of mathematical averages. Of which you can see there are many. I think you are fixating on mean.

But by bringing Good into it he then took it out of the pure maths arena (good isn't a maths term in general) and into the other definitions and the use of an adjective so the following example sentence from the definition covers it perfectly:

According to the survey, the quality of the average diet of Chinese people has improved significantly.

it was a trick question and Gove did badly on it. Sort of thing a teacher loves to expose, frequently corrected by someone pointing out there are multiple answers to their perfect question like a bad joke with multiple punchlines.

the left now see it as some sort of blinding light exposing his incompetence.


have you lost as well? you started the insults.

[vetran]

so behaving like a politician?

indeed!

not sure why the teachers get so excited.

they really hate Gove.

Education reform: Gove battles the blob | The Economist

[doodab]

average: definition of average in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

good: definition of good in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

in a nutshell so are you.

The only reason I can see for you to think I am talking bollocks is because yours are hanging in your eyes and making it hard for you to read. The OED definition of average you've linked to says the average refers to one of a number of statistical properties of a set of data, which is exactly what I said it was. It's also quite explicit that the term expresses "the central or typical value in a set of data", meaning that for all the data in the set to be "above average" is clearly impossible unless one also redefines "central" to mean "at the end" and typical to mean "atypical".

[speling bee]

average: definition of average in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

good: definition of good in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

in a nutshell so are you.

I said it could happen if an improvement happened since the last figures were obtained.

The term good in this arena refers to the quality of the school not the achievement of the school.

I agreed it was a badly explained but wondered why spelling Bee is so fascinated and holds it up as a shining example of incompetence when its so obviously the questioner trying to be clever with words instead of doing something clever.

it's

It's just a bit of fun, within the context of a thread which is about people thinking they are more clever than average. Nothing really to see, here, so move along please.

[mudskipper]

... its so obviously the questioner trying to be clever with words instead of doing something clever.

so behaving like a politician?

[vetran]

The term "average", however you define it, refers to a statistical property of a particular set of data. While it may be perfectly possible to define "good" in terms of the average of some set of data which excludes the points you are comparing to the average you need to be specific about the set of data you are using to compute the "average" in that case, and calling such a yardstick "the average" is at best misleading as it's obviously not the average of the data you are talking about.

In a nutshell, he was talking bollocks and so are you.

average: definition of average in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

good: definition of good in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

in a nutshell so are you.

I said it could happen if an improvement happened since the last figures were obtained.

The term good in this arena refers to the quality of the school not the achievement of the school.

I agreed it was a badly explained but wondered why spelling Bee is so fascinated and holds it up as a shining example of incompetence when its so obviously the questioner trying to be clever with words instead of doing something clever.

[speling bee]

The term "average", however you define it, refers to a statistical property of a particular set of data. While it may be perfectly possible to define "good" in terms of the average of some set of data which excludes the points you are comparing to the average you need to be specific about the set of data you are using to compute the "average" in that case, and calling such a yardstick "the average" is at best misleading as it's obviously not the average of the data you are talking about.

In a nutshell, he was talking bollocks and so are you.

It's only a game.