Discussion in 'Education from Thailand' started by trnwrk, 21 Mar 2017.
12th year students fail four of five O-Net exams | Bangkok Post: news
12th year students fail four of five O-Net exams
21 Mar 2017 at 06:45 1,042 viewedNEWS | WRITER: DUMRONGKIAT MALA
Year 12 students sat the O-Net exams last month and results released Monday showed that on average they failed four of the five subjects. (Bangkok Post file photo)
The results of nationwide O-Net tests for students in the 12th grade, or Mathayom 6, which came out Monday showed students failed four out of five subjects on average, according to the National Institute of Educational Testing Service (Niets).
O-Net stands for Ordinary National Educational Test. It is conducted annually by Niets to measures students' basic knowledge in five key subjects -- mathematics, English, Thai language, social studies and general sciences. All grade 6, 9 and 12 students must take the test to assess their academic proficiency. O-Net scores are used for university admission. The number of students taking the O-Net each year is about two million.
Overall, average scores for over 380,000 Mathayom 6 students tested nationwide this year in four subjects were under 50%, with mathematics and English remaining students' least favourite subjects with average scores of 24.8 and 27.7, respectively, Niets said.
High school seniors did best in Thai language with an average score of 52.29, while the results for social studies and general science were 35.89 and 31.62, respectively.
Read the full article here: 12th year students fail four of five O-Net exams | Bangkok Post: news
Reading between the lines, the students are getting smarter, right?
This is in-line with Teacher performances on the same tests. Teachers can't teach what they do not know. The conversation goes no further.
Most teachers of any subject are totally lost without the "answer sheet."
Does anybody know the results of Prathom 6? The students at my school wouldn't even achieve 24 %, that's for sure.
The Thai Engish teachers failed miserably in their CEFR test.
Only one scored B 1, the rest A 1 and A 2. Some even A 0.
So how should these teachers be good at what they're doing?
The average in itself has little statistical value (I said little not no) more worryingly is the disparity between urban and rural students. We need figures to analyse to what extent the urban elite is pulling away, longitudinal information would be useful. How about gender figures, how about regional cities compared to rural surrounding areas. These figures are just part of:
a: the annual media circus
b: an excuse for further spending/policy
c: control by numbers. The masses are fooled into accepting their station by standardised tests which favour the elite
The 'urban elite' is nothing but a boogie man for you to wave a finger at. You have an ax to grind, I get it.
There is no indication one way or another that urban elites do better or worse than provincial schools, yet you bang on about it.
Meanwhile, here are a list of reasons that urban kids might do better that has precisely NOTHING to do with your boogie man.
1) higher standards of living
2) greater access to quality health care
3) access to support services
4) access to better jobs
and so on ...
Do you know in the US and UK students in affluent neighborhoods do much better than students in poor neighborhoods? Is this because of urban elites? or is it a reality that wealthier families have more stable home lives, parents exert greater influence over education, and there is more accountability.
Before inventing some bogus 'ooh that person's politics don't align with my uber-liberal mindset ergo he must be vile' monolith, look at, and address the REAL reasons for inequality.
We agree to disagree. Perhaps where you live there is no inequity, perhaps those that have do their most to help those less fortunate than themselves.
There is a country which is about to cut out how any millions from free healthcare? That is what I'm talking about. Social capital elites who protect their positions.
Inequity is alive
perhaps we are talking about the same thing?
If I gave a test where a high majority of students fail, I would look at where I designed a test made for failure. Is there too many "trick" questions? If multiple choice, is there only one correct answer? Did I allow enough time for the test to be completed? Did I use language appropriate to the student's level?
One thing that I've noticed here in Thailand, teachers, schools, and government organizations love designing tests made to be failed. The tests are not an evaluation; they are a snubbing.
I come from a country with 511 billionaires. Of those, the richest 5 control about 330 billion of the total 1 trillion or so in wealth held by the billionaires. The top 5 (Gates, Buffet, Bezos, Zuckerberg, and Ellison) have each pledged to give away 99% of their wealth to philanthropic causes in their lifetime. I think this is exactly what you are protesting. However it is not based in reality. More than 1/2 the US billionaires have signed this pledge (Donald Trump being an exception). Do we see this level of philanthropy in the UK? or anywhere else in Europe?
before blaming the elites look at what is different between the two. I guarantee the biggest difference is the degree to which the parents take an active role in their children's education.
The biggest difference in school is the difference in the quality of teacher each community attracts. It takes a special sort of mental gymnastics make it anything else.
absolutely. I would look at where I failed to teach the material properly. I have written tests that more than half of my students fail. And I struggle with where I went wrong teaching it.
To understand how weird the whole tests really are, it's worth to read some of the test questions here:
Thai education failures - Part 1: Ridiculous O-NET questions
These tests are insane and do not show the English ability of a student.
BTW, what's a "naga egg"?
A naga is a mythical water serpent...
An attempt by the locals to mix science and mythology.
Sadly time is not always available to those on low income.
Separate names with a comma.