C16.2 Observations

[Guest]

Can someone please help me out ? I'm working on C16 and am stuck on a question - concepts of reliability, subjectivity, validity.

 

I guess reliability means would someone else have observed the child in the same way and come to the same conclusion - but need help defining the other 2.

 

many thanks

Dee

[Helen]

Hello Dee,

I think that subjectivity is what you mentioned, ie that your observations and evaluations of the child's learning should be along the same lines as those of your colleagues. In other words, your summary has been objective rather than subjective.

Reliability, I took to mean the reliability/accuracy of the significant achievement you have observed. Is this the first/only time the child has been able to do something, (in which case it might be wise to look for further examples in the future), or has s/he learned the concept or skill securely?

As for validity, I think it means "Is this an accurate interpretation of the child's ability?" Was he helped in anyway to achieve the goal, were there external influences that may have blurred the observation/evaluation. I'm a bit ropey on this one, and away from home so I don't have access to any paperwork or documentation. Hopefully someone else can make this clearer for you!

[AnonyMouse_73]

Thanks for interrupting your holiday Helen to start the ball rolling. I remember having terrrible trouble with this when i did my dissertation. What I can recall I think is that reliability is about consistency, so do you get the same information about a child in a number of contexts, rather than just once?

 

Validity is then assessing what you thnk you are assessing. An example i had very recently with a trainee at our school with regard to the FS profile. On tackling 'counts reliably up to 10 objects', she repsonded that the children could do this if they could sing '12345 once I caught a fish alive'. This would be invalid as singing this song doesnt really tell us how accurately a child can count objects. Many people also argue that SATS are not a valid measure of child prerfomance or school performance. They may also argue that they are not realible either as they test the child on only one occasion.

 

Subjectivity is as you have already said about your own interpretation. A joint observation is quite useful here, so that you are both 'seeing' the same things.

 

Im not really sure thats been very helpful?

[Guest]

 

thanks girls - tho' I have to admit, I'm still feeling a bit "muddy" on this one - must be too much chocolate !!

I'll read these through a few more times - but if anyone else can jump in and shed light please do !!!

 

Dee

 

 

Thanks for interrupting your holiday Helen to start the ball rolling. I remember having terrrible trouble with this when i did my  dissertation. What I can  recall I think is that reliability is about consistency, so do you get the same information about a child in a number of contexts, rather than just once?

 

Validity is then assessing what you thnk you are assessing.  An example i had very recently with a trainee at our school with regard to the FS profile.  On tackling 'counts reliably up to 10 objects', she repsonded that the children could do this if they could sing '12345 once I caught a fish alive'. This would be invalid as singing this song doesnt really tell us how accurately a child can count objects.  Many people also argue that SATS are not a valid measure of  child prerfomance or school performance. They may also argue that they are not realible either as they test the child on only one occasion.

 

Subjectivity is as you have already said about your own interpretation. A joint observation is quite useful here, so that you are both 'seeing' the same things. 

 

Im not really sure thats been very helpful?

28289[/snapback]

[Guest]

ok I think I've got it - thanks very much for your help ... Dee

[AnonyMouse_73]

Excellent Dee, can you explain it to me please?