New tables are more complex

The government’s school league tables are often presented as a key indicator of performance, but the constantly changing criteria means it’s more difficult than ever for parents to get their heads around standards and achievements.

In our coverage of the publication of the tables this week, we’re having to explain how the new indicators – Progress 8 and Attainment 8 – are calculated and measured, which is indicative of a system perhaps more complicated than it needs to be. Not that Progress is an entirely unreasonable concept – the idea of having a formula that demonstrates how well children of all abilities have done compared to similar schools is surely something to aspire towards.

However, as some of the head teachers of local schools deemed to be performing “well below average” in these league tables told us this week, the system is flawed in its use of mean averages. They insist marked improvements in performance are not tracked under these government measurements, though frustratingly they were likely to have been championed as a success story under previous calculations.

Schools are being told where they need to improve, doing so, only for the goalposts to be changed dramatically, putting them back to square one again.

In a climate where schools are suffering something of a funding crisis as well, this lack of consistency must be immensely frustrating for staff, parents and pupils alike. You only need to look at Maidstone’s Cornwallis Academy, described as underperforming in the league tables, but in receipt of a glowing review from Ofsted, as evidence of this inconsistency.

Different schools offer different experiences for our children, and maybe it’s time we stop jumping immediately to league tables as evidence of performance.