The NVR tests pattern spotting and better predicts Maths and Science -
Is there anything published which shows that NVR is a better predictor of Maths and science? Or for that matter whether VR is a good predictor of success in English and language based subjects?
I too am inclined to favour testing both VR and NVR, but share the concern over the reliability of using just one test in each.
I must say I find it surprising that there is such a high correlation between VR and NVR scores this year in Lincs. and that boys have not seemingly done any better with the introduction of NVR.
There are so many questions about what would really constitute a fair test of ability. As far as I am aware the only stipulation about which tests should be used to select children for Grammar schools is that they should be "fair", but there is a plethora of different systems of testing thoughout the country and apparently little evidence as to which ones really are most useful. It seems clear that much of the testing is not "fair" on children without good English and it can only be a matter of time before there is a legal challenge about the discrimination inherent in these tests. It would be interesting to know whether other areas are dicussing this probem and what solutions they have come up with.
NVR has the advantage that it can be used for non-English speakers with only the instructions needing to be translated. The VR tests disadvantage those without good English skills. They do not even translate well as there are quite a few questions which are culturally specific.