ABSTRACT
The term ability usually refers to a pupil’s potential for success in school. Attainment, on the other hand, relates to what a child has actually learned. Both terms have been widely used in general education, and their implications for SEN are significant. Traditional forms of assessment in education have been tests to
‘measure’ ability (an intelligence quotient (IQ) test is a good example of this) or attainment (as in the case of a test of a pupil’s level of reading). Historically, both approaches were widely applied as a tool to identify pupils who needed remedial help. Unfortunately, measures of ability can imply that this is something that is fixed in a child, and not amenable to development over time. Moreover, there is a presupposition that intelligence can be measured, and that such ‘tests’ are culturally fair. Similarly with attainment scores: these have been used to deter-
mine the level of performance of a given skill. Whilst this can be a useful means of gathering baseline performance data (in order, for example, to accurately target a lesson to meet the capability of pupils), it also can be a highly problematic issue. Many attainment tests are norm referenced, so that one child can easily be compared with the next. For instance, reading tests are frequently norm referenced, so that a child’s performance is expressed as a reading age, thus making comparison with other pupils straightforward. Both ability and attainment tests have been used throughout the development of SEN by educational psychologists, and have come to be regarded as a quantitative measure of performance. In reality, however, such approaches assessed only a small element of a child’s overall functioning. Nevertheless, the Education ‘Reform’ Act 1988 introduced
standard attainment tests (SATs) so that all children could be compared across all national curriculum subjects. This, like the widespread application of ability and attainment tests before it, had major implications for pupils with SEN. One way in which such tests have had an impact is their use as
devices to sift and sort groups by performance in a limited range of aspects of learning. Little attention has been given to alternative ways in which ability and attainment can be quantified, so that learners who have skills and aptitudes in areas outside a relatively narrow set of test items might be deemed as underachieving, or as having an SEN. Discussion point/question: To what degree is the term ‘ability’
located predominantly in traditional, socially acceptable interpretations
not pupils be assessed as ‘differently able’?
