An article posted by The Guardian on December 11, 2013 explains a criticism given by Ofsted chief Sir Michael Wilshaw: depending on the area where
you live (England is being used in this story) heavily dictates the standard of
education you will receive.
The story provided much data that was mostly made
up of percentages. The story did a good job of explaining the data. It provided
percentages of students who attended good or outstanding schools and also
compared them to other areas.
It started to become unclear when multiple
percentages and numbers were included in the same paragraph. When a lot of
numbers are presented in such a close range of time, the numbers begin to sound
unclear and may start to confuse the reader.
To provide the story with more clarity, data percentages could be better
spaced out throughout the story and broken
up in different paragraphs, allowing the mind to have a breather after
absorbing the group of numbers just presented to them.
Another thing that could
have been done to make the story a bit clearer is giving a little more
background to the cities and regions that were described as having or not
having outstanding schools in their area.
It's understood that this story is in
a European newspaper, but it shouldn't be under the impression that only
Europeans would be reading or be interested in these stories. Providing a bit
more background (such as the level of wealth or poverty) with the cities and
regions that were mentioned would make the story more clear to those who are
not familiar with England.
The interactive graphic that was included was simple
to use and was probably the most simple as it could be. There is a drop-down
menu bar that allows the reader to select the type of school (nursery, primary,
secondary, etc.) and once one is
selected, then the bar graph underneath will alter depending on the related
data.
If a story
like this were to be conducted in B.C., the agency that would have similar data
would be the B.C. Ministry of Education. Some of the data they collect include provincial exam marks, average mark
in grade 10, 11, and 12 courses, and graduation rates. Government agencies
allow the public to view raw data based on a variety of subjects for free. With
that said, a journalist in B.C. should have no issues accessing this data.
Hi Stacy,
ReplyDeleteGood job on the article. Just one thing though: the interactive graphic you talked about wasn't in the link provided, or maybe that's just me getting lost in all the numbers.
I agree with the lack of context and assuming the reading audience would strictly be European.
Overall, well done. It would be interesting to see which schools are doing well here in B.C. I'm sure there's a story that's already been produced following the same lines of which I'm just unaware of. :)
I agree with Sarah, an interactive graph would have made the analysis more involving, but i also forgot mine in my analysis =)
ReplyDeleteThe part where you talked about background of area I totally agreed with. I wondered if there was a correlation between the area and the education the individuals receive.
@Alex and Sarah - the interactive graph was the bar graph in the middle of the article, and I agree it was very simple. I was also waiting for them to make an indication as to a reason why these areas might have better or worse schools. It would be interesting to see if the same type of trends happen in B.C. too.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Stacy, there was too much data and numbers and not enough information explaining exactly what everyone is supposed to be looking at. I like that in your analysis you provided tips on how they could have done this story differently or how it could better. Great analysis, I also agree it would be an interesting read if done for BC schools.
ReplyDeleteGood analysis Stacy. I definitely agree that the bar graph was simple and easy to use but that the story didn't provide us with enough information. I found that not knowing any background on the cities was definitely a problem, and I'm sure that even people who live in London wouldn't know information on all of them either. I also really wanted to know throughout the whole article what it is that made a "good" school and one that made a "bad" school. I ended up clicking on the link to Ofsted's annual report to find that out, but that definitely should have been in the data article. I think that you understood the necessity for that when you said that the same thing here could be done based on provincial exam marks.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that there was too much data and not enough text explaining the data, spacing them out (like you said) would probably help clarify it more. The bar graph was simple to use, but maybe too simple because there could have been more clarification on what they mean by "good" or "inadequate."
ReplyDeleteI liked the bar graphic but I felt that between it and the lack of story, the Guardian didn't provide the readers with enough information to properly assess the data. I also agree with Cindy in that I would have like a bit more info on what made something a good or bad school. I did like the bit where they mentioned that it's worse, school-wise, to be a poor kid in a rich area but I wish they would have explained more rather than just giving a link. Good story analysis!
ReplyDeleteThis article was really insightful. It would be interesting to see this kind of analysis done in the lower mainland and I agree with you in the fact that although there is a long list of data, the information could have been a little clearer.
ReplyDelete