There is a commonly held belief, known as the 'Matthew effect', that students who start with poor academic attainment early in school make less progress over time than their higher-achieving peers. But recent research has shed new light on this topic. A study examined patterns of growth in literacy and numeracy among more than 150,000 young people in Australia. Researchers tested pupils regularly between year 3 and year 9. They found that students who began with high achievement in reading and numeracy tests in year 3 were not making the amount of progress to year 9 of which they were capable. On the other hand, students starting with below average test scores made more progress from year 3 to year 9 than students starting above average. This compensatory growth pattern was seen in both reading and numeracy but was especially significant in reading.
Which one of the following can be drawn as a conclusion from the above passage?
A) The 'Matthew effect' is the result of low expectations by teachers.
B) It is easier to teach brighter students than those who are below average.
C) Rates of improvement from a low base will always be more rapid than progress from a higher base.
D) Numerical skills are harder to improve than language skills.
E) Early promise does not guarantee high achievement in the long-term.
IMAT 2023 · Question 9
Q9 - Critical thinking
Pinned
The correct answer is E) Early promise does not guarantee high achievement in the long-term.
The study found that low starters made more progress than high starters, and that high achievers in year 3 weren't reaching their potential by year 9. So doing well early doesn't guarantee doing well later.
C is tempting but says "always", and one Australian study can't support a rule about every case. D misreads the detail about reading: the catch-up effect was bigger in reading, which says nothing about which skill is harder to improve. Teachers' expectations (A) never come up.
Replies 0
No other replies yet.
Log in to reply.