This was a collaborative research project by academic and local authority researchers. Our aim was to investigate the impact of performance management and increased accountability on schools and local authorities - including the intended and unintended consequences. The research design comprised 4 strands.
1. Review and analysis of relevant publications issued by the government in Scotland or by identified agencies such as HMIE from 1988 to 2007.
2. Analysis of a questionnaire sent to all Directors of Education in Scotland asking about the measurement and analysis of attainment and school ethos. 27 of the 32 authorities responded with evidence of considerable variation in policy and practice between local authorities.
3. Examination of Standard Tables and Charts (STACS) – a major investment by government in quantitative data for secondary schools.
4. Case studies of six schools in six local authorities in Scotland positively engaged in producing different kinds of performance data.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education (HMIe) has played a key role in developing the framework of quality assurance and evaluation in Scotland, with its emphasis on quantitative performance data. The Inspectorate definition of “Quality Indicators” for use in self evaluation and inspection has the effect of setting out what is valued (and measured) in Scottish education.
The quantity and nature of performance data provided by government and its agencies places heavy demands on the abilities of staff in schools and authorities to interpret and use statistical information.

The key purposes for which schools use performance data are accountability (both internal and external), to identify problems and issues, to monitor pupils’ progress, and to inform parents.

All the schools evaluate their attainment data to find out how well their pupils are performing in different areas of the curriculum, and to identify any weaknesses in provision. Other types of data evaluated in some schools include attendance/absence, referrals and exclusions. Schools find it more difficult to evaluate wider achievement because of the absence of appropriate data.

While senior management teams found Standard Tables and Charts (STACS) a useful tool for identifying problems, our analysis of the effects of STACS on school improvement found no substantial effect.

Paper-based systems for recording each pupil’s attainment are the main method used by teachers for monitoring pupil performance in five of the six case study schools. However, electronic monitoring systems are more effective in facilitating the linkage of pastoral with attainment data, sharing of information between staff, and the tracking of pupil progress over a range of subjects, or over time.

Data on attainment are an important part of the formal accountability processes in all the case study schools. In some schools the processes of self-evaluation and improvement planning, including evaluation of performance data, are consciously used to challenge complacency and drive school improvement. In other schools the processes are more bureaucratic.

Early intervention is essential for tackling educational inequalities, but evidence from the case studies suggests problems may not be identified early enough because of a lack of valid measures at the primary stages.

The focus of accountability systems on comparing school performance creates pressures on schools to concentrate resources on marginal pupils who can affect measurable performance indicators in a short space of time. We found that some practices adopted by schools to improve performance indicators – especially setting, streaming and broad banding - may exacerbate inequalities within schools.

Research findings have been widely disseminated through Briefing documents but we have no information about their impact.

Published and working papers from this project have been posted on this site.