The evolution of school league tables in England 1992-2016: 'Contextual value-added', 'expected progress' and 'progress 8'

Since 1992, the UK Government has published so-called 'school league tables' summarising the average General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) 'attainment' and 'progress' made by pupils in each state-funded secondary school in England. While the headline measure...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British educational research journal 2017-04, Vol.43 (2), p.193-212
Main Authors: Leckie, George, Goldstein, Harvey
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Academic Achievement
Accountability
Achievement Rating
Bias
contextual value‐added
Educational Assessment
England
Error of Measurement
Exit Examinations
expected progress
Failure
Foreign Countries
Hunger
Journalism
Predictive Measurement
Predictor Variables
progress 8
Progress Monitoring
Ratings & rankings
school league tables
Scores
Secondary education
Secondary School Students
Secondary schools
Statistical Significance
Success
United Kingdom
Value Added Models
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Since 1992, the UK Government has published so-called 'school league tables' summarising the average General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) 'attainment' and 'progress' made by pupils in each state-funded secondary school in England. While the headline measure of school attainment has remained the percentage of pupils achieving five or more good GCSEs, the headline measure of school progress has changed from 'value-added' (2002-2005) to 'contextual value-added' (2006-2010) to 'expected progress' (2011-2015) to 'progress 8' (2016-). This paper charts this evolution with a critical eye. First, we describe the headline measures of school progress. Second, we question the Government's justifications for scrapping contextual value-added. Third, we argue that the current expected progress measure suffers from fundamental design flaws. Fourth, we examine the stability of school rankings across contextual value-added and expected progress. Fifth, we discuss the extent to which progress 8 will address the weaknesses of expected progress. We conclude that all these progress measures and school league tables more generally should be viewed with far more scepticism and interpreted far more cautiously than they have often been to date.
ISSN:0141-1926
1469-3518
DOI:10.1002/berj.3264