you're reading...
Education, Research on Education

John Hattie admits that half of the Statistics in Visible Learning are wrong

Given Hattie’s influence in the education arena, particularly in policy making, he really should be far more careful to ensure his calculations and analysis is correct.  This is abysmal, really.

See also: http://academiccomputing.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/book-review-visible-learning/

ollieorange2

At the researchED conference in September 2013, Professor Robert Coe, Professor of Education at Durham University, said that John Hattie’s book, ‘Visible Learning’,  is “riddled with errors”. But what are some of those errors?

The biggest mistake Hattie makes is with the CLE statistic that he uses throughout the book. In ‘Visible Learning, Hattie only uses two statistics, the ‘Effect Size’ and the CLE (neither of which Mathematicians use).

The CLE is meant to be a probability, yet Hattie has it at values between -49% and 219%. Now a probability can’t be negative or more than 100% as any Year 7 will tell you.

This was first spotted and pointed out to him by Arne Kare Topphol, an Associate Professor at the University of Volga and his class who sent Hattie an email.

In his first reply –  here , Hattie completely misses the point about probability being negative…

View original post 315 more words

About Save Our Schools NZ

"One needs to be slow to form convictions, but once formed they must be defended against the heaviest odds." Gandhi

Discussion

One thought on “John Hattie admits that half of the Statistics in Visible Learning are wrong

  1. A classic response to those resistant to change is to attack the statistics. It would be more balanced if you at least addressed the noted that if the statistics quoted, were transformed to a more conventional measure (which, I acknowledge, would be better) the rank order would remain the same.

    The only question remaining for me would then be the level of materiality between each level of ranking.

    Either way, the research remains useful to schools.

    Going a little further, I encourage schools, when in doubt about the clustering of research topics, to look, wherever possible, at the original research paper and evaluate it for themselves.

    Like

    Posted by bsme1 | September 28, 2014, 5:48 pm

Share your thoughts:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow Save Our Schools NZ on WordPress.com

Category list:

StatCounter

%d bloggers like this: