Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The use of ‘value-added’ measures in school evaluation: A view from England

  • School Autonomy And Evaluation
  • Published:
Prospects Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bird, M., et al. 1998.Educational research in action. Milton Keynes, United Kingdom, The Open University. (Open University study guide for the MA in education, E835.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudley, P. 1999a. Primary schools and pupil ‘data.’In: Southworth, G.; Lincoln, P., eds.Supporting improving primary schools: the role of heads and LEAs in raising standards. London, Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1999b. Using data to drive up standards: statistics or psychology?In: Conner, C, ed.Assessment in action in the primary school. London, Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitz-Gibbon, C.T.; Tymms, P. 1993.Value added: a perspective on the contribution from examination results Northampton, United Kingdom, Centre for the Study of Comprehensive Schools. (CSCS discussion paper, no. 1.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, H. 1997. Methods in school effectiveness research.School effectiveness and school improvement (Lisse, Netherlands), vol 8, no. 4, p. 369–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, H.; Myers, K. 1996. Freedom of information: towards a code of ethics for performance indicators.Research intelligence (London), no. 57, p. 12–16.

  • Gray, J. 1994.Value-added approaches in school evaluation: the experiences of three LEAs in England-lessons and challenges. Edinburgh, United Kingdom, The Scottish Office Audit Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 2000. How schools learn: common concerns and different responses.School effective-ness and school improvement (Lisse, Netherlands), vol. 15, no. 3, p. i-v.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J., et al. 1995. A multi-level analysis of school improvement: changes in schools’ performance over time.School effectiveness and school improvement (Lisse, Netherlands), vol. 6, no. 2, p. 98–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J.; Jesson, D.; Jones, B. 1986. The search for a fairer way of comparing schools’ examination results.Research papers in education (London), vol. 1, no. 2, p. 91–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J.; Jesson, D.; Sime, N. 1990. Estimating differences in the examination performances of secondary schools in six LEAs: a multi-level approach to school effectiveness.Oxford review of education (Oxford, United Kingdom), vol. 16, no. 2, p. 137–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, D. 1996. Teaching as a research-based profession: possibilities and prospects. Annual lecture delivered to Teaching Training Agency, April.

  • Hutchison, D. 1993. School effectiveness studies using administrative data.Educational research (London), vol. 35, no. 1, p. 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jesson, D. 1996.Value-added measures of school GCSE performance: an investigation into the role of key stage 3 assessments in schools. Interim report. London, HMSO. (DfEE research studies, no. 14.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Karsten, S.; Visscher, A. 2001. What can be learned from the experience with publishing school performance indicators in England and France?Prospects (Paris, UNESCO), vol. 31, no. 2, p. 239–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, L. 1995.Examination results in context: report on the analysis of 1994 examination results. London, Association of Metropolitan Authorities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maw, J. 1999. League tables and the press-value added?The curriculum journal (London), vol. 10, no. 1, p. 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortimore, P.; Sammons, P.; Thomas, S. 1994. School effectiveness and value-added measures.Assessment in education (Abingdon, United Kingdom), vol. 1, no. 3, p. 315–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuttall, D., et al. 1989. Differential school effectiveness.International journal of educational research (Kidlington, United Kingdom), vol. 31, no. 7, p. 769–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbusch, S.; Bryk, A.S. 1986. A hierarchical model for studying school effects.Sociology of education (Washington, DC), vol. 59, no. 1, p. 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sammons, P., et al. 1997.Forging links: effective schools and effective departments. London, Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, L. 1999a. A brief history of educational ‘value added’: how did we get to where we are?School effectiveness and school improvement (Lisse, Netherlands), vol. 10, no. 2, p. 233–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1996.Value-added measurement of school effectiveness: a critical revietu. Slough, United Kingdom, NFER.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 2000. Understanding schools use of Value added’ data: the psychology and sociology of numbers.Research papers in education (London), vol. 15, no. 3, p. 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, L.; Rudd, P. 1999. Schools’ use of ‘value added’ data: a science in the service of an art? Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association annual conference, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom, 4 September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schagen, I. 1991. Beyond league tables. How modern statistical methods can give a truer picture of the effects of schools.Educational research (London), vol. 33, no. 3, p. 216–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenhouse, L. 1975.An introduction to curriculum research and development. London, Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, S.; Mortimore, P. 1996. Comparison of value-added models for secondary-school effectiveness.Research papers in education (London), vol. 11, no. 1, p. 5–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tymms, P.B. 1990. Can indicator systems improve the effectiveness of science and mathematics education? The case of the UK.Evaluation and research in education (Clevedon, United Kingdom), vol. 4, no. 2, p. 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikeley, F. 1998. Dissemination of research as a tool for school improvement?School leadership and management (Abingdon, United Kingdom), vol. 18, no. 1, p. 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, J.; Fitz-Gibbon, C.T. 1990. The lack of impact of information: performance indicators for levels.Educational management and administration (London), vol. 18, no. 1, p. 37–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, J.; Tymms, P.; Haddow, M. 1992. ALIS through the looking glass: changing perceptions of performance indicators.Educational management and administration (London), vol. 20, no. 3, p. 179–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. United Kingdom

    Lesley Saunders

Authors
  1. Lesley Saunders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Original language: English

Until recently, principal research officer at the School Improvement Research Centre, National Foundation for Educational Research. Her main areas of expertise were schools’ use of value-added measures of performance, self-evaluation and school improvement. She has written extensively for policy, academic and practitioner audiences and spoken at many national and international conferences. She recently joined the General Teaching Council for England as policy adviser for research and is now engaged in developing a research strategy for the GTC.

About this article

Cite this article

Saunders, L. The use of ‘value-added’ measures in school evaluation: A view from England. Prospects 31, 489–502 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03220035

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03220035

Keywords

Search

Navigation