{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02766798418972332, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03162055335968379, 'mean_word_length': 5.129032258064516, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Publishing School Performance Data

The second Trouw publication (June 1998) on school performance in secondary education provoked much less discussion than the first, which appeared in the fall of 1997. Hitherto the two most important elements in the discussion were whether it was advisable to publish school performance data, and whether the grading technique used by Dronkers was suitable (Veenstra, Dijkstra, Peschar, and Snijders 1998; Van der Werf and Creemers 1999; Van Putten and Van der Kamp 1998; Dronkers 1998). The discussion on the first issue gradually subsided, and, as regards the second issue, a confused babble developed over the concept of "value added." We shall try to present our standpoint on these matters in the article that follows.