School and College Performance Tables

In one LEA, there were two contrasting schools. School T had one of the highest value added scores in the area. Because it was popular, School T was able to take a large proportion of high achievers in Year 7. It had few students with English as an additional language, and a low proportion of special needs students. The majority of its permanent excludees and the majority of students who left before Year 11 were SEN or EAL students. It had a poor record of keeping these students for the whole of the five years between Years 7 and 11. Consequently, by the time it came to Year 11 most of the students who would have negatively skewed the value added score had left. School U had one of the lowest overall value added scores in the LEA. It had a higher number of SEN and EAL students in Year 7.There were very few permanent excludees. Students who were most likely to leave before Year 11 were high achieving students, who were on the waiting list for School T. School U added value to a much greater degree than School T for its SEN and EAL students. Interestingly, if you compared School U’s added value for its very highest achievers with School T’s, School U did significantly better. However, the national tables do not measure these elements of value added, so their achievements were not reflected by the national data.


Comments are closed.