School Effectiveness Research: criticisms and recommendations

Abstract

Much research on school effectiveness has been characterised by largely overstated claims and poor modelling. School effectiveness research (SER) has tended to define ‘effectiveness’ in terms of a restricted and often inappropriate range of outcomes, to overlook the issue of curriculum alignment, to be limited by the absence of longitudinal data, and it has often been characterised by unsupported assumptions about the homogeneity of school ‘effects’. SER needs to provide justification for the interpretation of ‘effectiveness’ defined as the unexplained part of performance in a statistical model, and a much clearer conception of why certain relationships exist is required. SER has yet to demonstrate the extent to which differences among schools in their ‘effectiveness’ are really caused by identifiable factors within the school and, more importantly, factors within the school's control; evaluations of school improvement interventions are generally unconvincing in this respect. Repeated findings of ‘correlates’ associated with ‘effectiveness’ (particularly when the strengths of the associations are not reported) are no substitute for a well grounded understanding of the specific mechanisms by which schools have their effects. A number of recommendations for future research are made.