Infants' tests 'unreliable'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.NATIONAL tests for 7-year-olds have produced unreliable results because of enormous variations in the ways they were carried out, according to research published today, writes Fran Abrams.
Some pupils were given more help than others, researchers at Bristol University found. One teacher rubbed out a boy's incorrect answer because she felt he could do better; another gave her whole class full marks for a science question because faulty equipment made it impossible to judge properly.
The team, which studied 150 teachers and 250 pupils between 1989 and 1992, said the teachers were not trying to fudge the results but were trying to shield pupils from formal tests in which they might be branded as failures.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments