IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bri/cmpowp/05-128.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who wins and who loses from school accountability? The distribution of educational gain in English secondary schools

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Burgess
  • Carol Propper
  • Helen Slater
  • Deborah Wilson

Abstract

In 1988 the UK government introduced greater accountability into the English state school sector. But the information that schools are required to make public on their pupil achievement is only partial. The paper examines whether accountability measures based on a partial summary of student achievement influence the distribution of student achievement. Since school ratings only incorporate test results via pass rates, schools have incentives to improve the performance of students who are on the margin of meeting these standards, to the detriment of very low achieving or high achieving pupils. Using pupil level data for a cohort of all students in secondary public sector schools in England, we find that this policy reduces the educational gains and exam performance in high stakes exams of very low ability students.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Burgess & Carol Propper & Helen Slater & Deborah Wilson, 2005. "Who wins and who loses from school accountability? The distribution of educational gain in English secondary schools," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 05/128, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    • Handle: RePEc:bri:cmpowp:05/128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/CMPO/workingpapers/wp128.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andy Wiggins & Peter Tymms, 2002. "Dysfunctional Effects of League Tables: A Comparison Between English and Scottish Primary Schools," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 43-48, January.
    2. Julie Berry Cullen & Randall Reback, 2006. "Tinkering Toward Accolades: School Gaming Under a Performance Accountability System," NBER Working Papers 12286, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Deborah Wilson, 2004. "Which Ranking? The Impact of a 'Value-Added' Measure of Secondary School Performance," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 37-45.
    4. Glennerster, Howard, 1991. "Quasi-markets for Education?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1268-1276, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deborah Wilson & Anete Piebalga, 2008. "Accurate performance measure but meaningless ranking exercise? An analysis of the English school league tables," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 07/176, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    2. Deborah Wilson & Bronwyn Croxson & Adele Atkinson, 2004. "“What Gets Measured Gets Done”: Headteachers’ Responses to the English Secondary School," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 04/107, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    3. Allen, Rebecca & Burgess, Simon, 2013. "Evaluating the provision of school performance information for school choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 175-190.
    4. Jane Gibbon & John Fenwick & Janice McMillan, 2008. "Governance and Accountability: A Role for Social Accounts in the Sustainable School," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(6), pages 353-360, December.
    5. Richardson, J.T., 2015. "Accountability incentives and academic achievement: Distributional impacts of accountability when standards are set low," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-16.
    6. Seth Gershenson, 2016. "Performance Standards and Employee Effort: Evidence From Teacher Absences," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(3), pages 615-638, June.
    7. Pierre Koning & Karen Wiel, 2012. "School Responsiveness to Quality Rankings: An Empirical Analysis of Secondary Education in the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 339-355, December.
    8. Aucejo, Esteban & Romano, Teresa & Taylor, Eric S., 2019. "Does evaluation distort teacher effort and decisions? Quasi-experimental evidence from a policy of retesting students," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102689, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. repec:ief:reveye:v:43:y:2005:i:2:p:109-129 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Helen Simpson, 2009. "Productivity In Public Services," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 250-276, April.
    11. Barr, Nicholas, 1993. "Alternative funding resources for higher education," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 280, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. David N. Figlio, 2003. "Fiscal Implications of School Accountability Initiatives," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 17, pages 1-36, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Gibbons, Stephen & Silva, Olmo, 2008. "Urban density and pupil attainment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 631-650, March.
    14. Coelli, Michael & Foster, Gigi, 2024. "Unintended consequences of school accountability reforms: Public versus private schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    15. Burgess, Simon & Propper, Carol & Gossage, Denise, 2003. "Explaining Differences in Hospital Performance: Does the Answer Lie in the Labour Market?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4118, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Feng, Li & Figlio, David & Sass, Tim, 2018. "School accountability and teacher mobility," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-17.
    17. Eric Zitzewitz, 2012. "Forensic Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(3), pages 731-769, September.
    18. Alois Guger & Silvia Rocha-Akis, 2016. "Umverteilung durch den Staat in Österreich," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 89(5), pages 329-345, May.
    19. Takashi Oshio & Shinpei Sano & Yuko Ueno & Kouichiro Mino, 2010. "Evaluations by parents of education reforms: evidence from a parent survey in Japan," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 229-246.
    20. M J Mancebón & M A Muñiz, 2008. "Private versus public high schools in Spain: disentangling managerial and programme efficiencies," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(7), pages 892-901, July.
    21. Bertoni, Marco & Brunello, Giorgio & Rocco, Lorenzo, 2013. "When the cat is near, the mice won't play: The effect of external examiners in Italian schools," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 65-77.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    school accountability; high stakes exams; educational value added;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bri:cmpowp:05/128. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmbriuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.