League Tables
If you aren’t league tabling your students, you are allowing 70% of them to fail.
By fail, I mean do worse than they would do without the league table. Before I prove that to you, let’s look at Gloucester Academy.
AI was not sure what to generate here - look at all those weak students at the front wearing glasses - no stereotypes here!
So, Gloucester Academy does this to make sure the weakest students get the most attention, and to create a sense of competition.
Does this make you uncomfortable? Does it work?
Back in 2019 its Progress 8 was -1.36, ranking it near the very bottom of its 50 similar schools on FFT’s Schools Like Yours. In 2023, it was -0.06, ranking 18th. So yes, this is one of the things which is probably working.
Relative Deprivation
This is the psychological effect where we all compare ourselves to our perceived peer group. If we don’t rank in the top 30%, we consider ourselves failures, and are much more likely to drop out, give up or simply underachieve.
This definitely suggests that the Gloucester Academy league tabling is working.
Let’s compare that to a league table where you set a ‘good’ standard. This might catch 50% or 70% of your class.
Or imagine the league table also measures improvement. Now the students in the bottom 30% for attainment can easily appear in the top 40% for progress.
Without league tabling, remember, most of your students see themselves as not good enough. Not league tabling makes their relative failure inevitable.
Would I choose the Gloucester Academy Model?
No. I make sure every question is random - I use lollipop sticks, so that it is inevitable.
I make use of teaching pairs - a more able student in my subject sitting next to a less able. I give them specific roles as teachers, and I measure their success. I league table that too.
But, I could be wrong.
To find out, I should possibly experiment with the Gloucester Academy method.