THERE is always controversy around the publication of league tables based on exam performance alone.
Opponents argue they are misleading because they focus only on one measure and do not inform parents about the wider context of education in the school or, crucially, how much it helps pupils improve.
It can also be argued league tables reward complacency in schools that appear to be doing well, having started with the advantage of high aspiration and parental support, but that fail to add as much as they could to pupils' attainment.
However, supporters of tables argue that, in a system run by local authorities, there can be a lack of accountability at school level and publishing performance indicators forces headteachers and directors of education to get to grips with poorly performing schools.
They also argue parents have a right to information, including how a school performs in exams.
Professor James Conroy, from Glasgow University's School of Education, believes league tables are misleading.
He said: "League tables can never be anything more than a rough guide because the starting point of different schools in so different.
"If you start out with pupils from highly educational supportive backgrounds it is not clear what the contribution of a school is to that. At the same time, teachers and schools working in very difficult circumstances might be making a much more significant contribution, but yet go unrecognised.
"However, there is no doubt schools with high number of pupils on free school meals who are also delivering exam success are performing well."
Brian Boyd, emeritus professor of education at Strathclyde University, said better baseline information about pupils when they arrived at school was required.
He said: "If you were trying to measure what a school does you need to measure what level a young person is when they enter the school and compare that to where they are when they leave – exams do not do that."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article