International Comparisons of School Effectiveness: the second component of the 'crisis account' in England?

Schools and students in Britain have been compared unfavourably with those elsewhere for many years now. International comparisons of school effectiveness and outcomes have been used to suggest that British schools are underperforming, and consequently that British students are underachieving. This has led to repeated calls by researchers and politicians for policy borrowing from countries with more 'successful' educational systems. In the same way, the growth of 'home- international' comparisons has suggested marked differences between the increasingly devolved regions within Britain. This view of the relative ineffectiveness of schools has permeated both official publications and regional attainment targets in the 1990s. This article considers some of these findings from the perspective of England, and the associated problems in studies involving international comparisons. It concludes that, viewed proportionately and in the light of background factors, there is little evidence of either failing or falling standards. Although, as always, absence of evidence should not be taken as evidence of absence there is certainly little reason to agree with the 'crisis account' of English schooling. The implications for the role of international league tables are discussed briefly. Cross-national comparisons, seen in this light, are open to misinterpretation and are therefore potentially dangerous.