Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nerijus Pačėsa: Is School Ranking Necessary?
Erudito2024-09-19T11:02:15+03:00As debates over school rankings continue, discussions have moved to the Seimas, with a potential amendment to the Education Law under consideration. Dr. Nerijus Pačėsa, founder and director of Erudito Lyceum in Vilnius and Kaunas, believes that ranking schools is meaningless, as the methods used do not reflect the quality of education or the institution itself and may even negatively impact the national education system and contribute to social inequality.
Contradicting General Education Policy
“From the perspective of state education management, ranking encourages competition. The initial impression seems positive—those ranked strive to improve. However, competition is harmful in the education sector as it drives focus only on measurable indicators relevant to rankings. Education goals are much broader, involving the development of a holistic individual and the creation of a civic society. This requires collective efforts from all education participants, through cooperation and the sharing of good practices. Competition, however, does not encourage collaboration or sharing. A ranking by itself means nothing. The nature of rankings is that someone will always be at the bottom. With a finite number of schools, some will always be lower-ranked, which can demotivate the entire sector. There isn’t enough room at the top. This raises a natural question: at what point is a school considered good? If a school is in the fifth hundred of Lithuania’s 900+ schools, is it still a good school or not? Can we compare a school in Kapčiamiestis with one in Vilnius? Such ranking is utterly pointless. On a national level, ranking schools contradicts general education policy: public schools are assigned based on location (i.e., by place of residence). This alone is a reason for the state not to tolerate a ranking system, as it leads to contradictions. Admissions to all public schools would need to be open, leading to unhealthy competition, making it impossible to plan a general education system, further exacerbating dissatisfaction. This kind of ranking and sorting of schools contributes to reinforcing social inequality and widens gaps between different social and economic groups and the schools themselves. The state’s goal, meanwhile, is to ensure equal education across the country.
Proposal – Learning from Scandinavian Experience
To improve education quality, we need to focus on providing targeted support to schools rather than relying on rankings. A solution could be to adopt the Scandinavian approach, which we follow at Erudito Lyceum: schools are evaluated by external assessors. This happens at the university level and within the International Baccalaureate (IB) system. We also receive visits from IB consultants, and before obtaining accreditation, the school is assessed by external evaluators. The evaluation covers all areas, is repeated periodically, and checks how the program is implemented, how teachers work, and what feedback students and parents provide, among other things. There are more than 5,800 schools in over 160 countries with IB accreditation, offering over 8,000 IB programs, and all are able to implement a system allowing them to be evaluated every three years. At the national level, it should not be difficult to conduct external evaluations that show a school’s overall performance and what it needs to do to improve. Taking this path, we could systematically help schools that may be struggling or facing various challenges, rather than stigmatizing them by relegating them to the bottom of the rankings. There can be no “second-rate” schools in the public sector—they all must be reliable, and they all need to be nurtured and supported to ensure quality. Rankings are unnecessary to identify schools that need help.
Shifting Towards Holistic Evaluation Methods
Countries moving in a progressive direction, such as Switzerland, are gradually moving away from the school ranking system. There are no unified national school rankings there. Of course, Switzerland’s education system is quite decentralized, with national standards introduced relatively late in 2009, so it’s still difficult to compare school results nationally. However, according to Switzerland’s 2023 education report and data from the Swiss Education Advisory Service, many cantons are abandoning public school rankings due to concerns that they distort educational goals and negatively affect schools and students. Switzerland strives to ensure equal access to education and reduce social discrimination in the system, which is why public rankings are being abandoned, while educational institutions conduct internal assessments and set standards for use by policymakers and administrators—these data are becoming less available to the public. The Swiss education system supports the idea that rankings can do more harm than good, fostering unnecessary competition between schools instead of encouraging collaboration. Countries with official rankings, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, are also re-evaluating the issue of school rankings. Some schools in the United States use ranking systems like “GreatSchools” or “Niche,” analyzing various indicators—parent reviews, infrastructure, safety measures, and teacher competence—to provide a comprehensive school assessment. Of course, ranking criteria differ by country. Some systems include financial management, social and emotional support systems, and even community engagement. As we can see, international experiences are varied, but the U.S. education system also faces criticism, with growing concerns that a “test culture” can negatively affect student motivation and learning experiences. U.S. education policy is gradually changing. When we talk not only about school but also knowledge assessment, the ranking system is criticized for overemphasizing standardized tests, and there’s a growing trend toward alternative assessment systems and holistic evaluation methods that consider student well-being and individual needs, focusing on overall development, not just academic (test) results.
Focus on Education Quality
At Erudito Lyceum, we follow the example of Finland, which is known for its advanced education system: there is no traditional school ranking system, and the focus is on student well-being and individual needs. High-quality education in smaller classes and individual attention to each student are emphasized. Schools are evaluated based on their ability to provide high-quality education, not on comparisons with other schools. Numerous studies highlight the benefits of such an education system and how Finnish schools’ results relate to their education policy (e.g., PISA—Programme for International Student Assessment). Strengths include smaller classes, qualified teachers, and a strong emphasis on social and emotional development. Creativity and critical thinking are encouraged, leading to less stress for students, who feel like equal participants in the educational process. PISA studies measuring reading, math, and science skills consistently highlight the high level of student achievement in Finland, where students often rank among the best globally, showing greater motivation, engagement, and a positive attitude toward education. Finnish schools and teachers are generally evaluated using internal assessment methods, focused on student progress and well-being. The importance of highly qualified teachers is emphasized, contributing significantly to student success. Of course, national standards exist, but they are not used for ranking schools. For these reasons, Finland’s education system is often cited as a model we could learn from.”