Differential Secondary School Effectiveness: comparing the performance of different pupil groups

Abstract

This article reports the results of an Economic and Social ResearchCouncil (ESRC) funded study which focuses on the differential academic achievement of different groups of pupils. The paper describes the findings on the size and extent of school effects across 3 years (1990, 1991, 1992) for different groups of pupils (classified by gender, eligibility for free school means [FSM], ethnic group and by prior attainment). Pupils' overall General Certificate of Secondary Education performance and their performance in selected subjects (English, English literature, French, history, mathematics and science) have been analysed using multilevel modelling, employing a total sample of 94 inner London secondary schools. A 'value added' approach is adopted, controlling for selected student background measures of prior attainment (at secondary transfer), gender, age, ethnicity and low income to provide statistical controls for differences between schools in the characteristics of their intakes. Differential school and departmental effects were identified for all pupil groups examined. However, the strongest evidence of differential effects was found for groups classified by prior attainment and ethnicity. Overall, the findings indicate that schools that appear to be more or less effective for a particular group of pupils, such as non-FSM pupils, are likely to be more or less effective for all pupils. However, in some schools, substantial differences between groups were identified. The implications of these findings for the debate about the publication, presentation and interpretation of schools' examination results and the extent to which the overall concepts of 'effective' or 'ineffective' schools can be applied, are discussed.

Differential School Effectiveness in Relation to Sex and Social Class: Some Implications for Policy Evaluation

“…Some schools were markedly more effective than others in facilitating progress during the first 2 years of primary school. Finally, this study has in common with other studies (Jesson & Gray, 1991;Thomas, Sammons, Mortimore, & Smees, 1997), that it has shown that the schools were not differentially effective in the sense that the most effective schools overall were not more effective with working-class girls or pupils than other schools. Thus, even in the eight most effective schools the rate of progress made by boys was greater than the rate of progress made by the girls, and the rate of progress made by the middle-class pupils was greater than the rate of progress made by other pupils.…”

Conceptual and empirical differences among various value-added models for accountability

“…Evidence from research into the consistency of school effects between subjects (Luyten, 1998;Ma, 2001;Thomas, Sammons Mortimore, & Smees, 1997b) and differential school effects (Gray, Peng, Steward, & Thomas, 2004;Sammons, Nuttall, & Cuttance, 1993;Thomas, Sammons, Mortimore, & Smees, 1997a;Veenstra, 1999) shows that a general value-added indicator of school effectiveness masks all kinds of processes within the school that affect the progress of students. In an accountability system as in The Netherlands, which is based on identifying insufficient practices and schools as quickly as possible, a more sensitive system would be required in which multiple indicators of school effectiveness are simultaneously assessed, some of which are value added.…”

Do some schools narrow the gap? Differential school effectiveness by ethnicity, gender, poverty, and prior achievement

“…While it is not possible to test differential effects for all possible pupil groupings within a single model, it is important where possible to test effects in combination rather than singly, to allow for the possibility of variables being confounded (Thomas et al, 1997). The analysis presented some technical challenges.…”

“…There is very little research on this phenomenon and current evidence on the existence of differential school effectiveness is mixed. Nuttall, Goldstein, Prosser and Rasbach (1989) and Thomas, Sammons, Mortimore and Smees (1997) both researching in London secondary schools report significant differential school effects in relation to prior achievement and ethnicity, with the White British -Black Caribbean gap varying significantly across schools. Smith and Tomlinson (1989) also report significant differential effects in relation to ethnicity, but conclude they are 'trivial compared with the very large school differences across all ethnic groups" (p305).…”