Cited by 56School Choice and PerformanceEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessSociology and Education Studies

The impact of tracking by attainment on pupil self-confidence over time: demonstrating the accumulative impact of self-fulfilling prophecy

Open access
Francis, Becky, Craig, Nicole, Hodgen, Jeremy, Taylor, Becky, Tereshchenko, Antonina, Connolly, Paul, Archer, Louise·2020·British Journal of Sociology of Education

Abstract

The impact of self-fulfilling prophecy in education, and of attainment grouping on pupil self-perception, remain topics of longstanding debate, with important consequences for social in/justice. Focusing on self-confidence, this article draws on survey responses from 9,059 12-13 year olds who were tracked by subject (‘setting’). They provided survey responses when placed in ‘ability’ sets at the start of their secondary schooling, and again late the following year; enabling analysis of impact over time. After controlling for prior attainment, the gap in general self-confidence between students in the top and bottom sets for mathematics is shown to widen over time, and high set students’ self-confidence in English had also grown significantly; although there was not further widening in the cases of self-confidence in mathematics or in general self-confidence between students in the top and bottom sets for English. Implications of these findings for interventions directed at addressing educational disadvantage are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01425692.2020.1763162

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The process triggers students to move from lower performing or remedial academic tracks to higher performing tracks, leading to increased self-confidence and more effective preparation for admission to college.

    “This in turn triggers students to move from lower performing or remedial academic tracks to higher performing tracks, leading to increased self-confidence (Francis et al., 2020) and more effective preparation for admission to college (Goyer et al., 2017).”

    From Tackling Educational Inequalities with Social Psychology: Identities, Contexts, and Interventions (2021) · cites this paper as Francis et al., 2020

    The Findings report that pupils placed in top sets tended to have higher self-confidence over two years than those in middle sets, while pupils in bottom sets tended to have lower self-confidence. The methods passage under “Table 1 here” records movement between sets in either direction, but the paper does not show that a process triggered moves from lower to higher tracks or that such moves increased confidence. The college-preparation clause is attributed to Goyer et al., not Francis et al. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Setting tends to have negative effects on attainment and confidence.

    “Setting tends to have negative effects on attainment and confidence (Education Endowment Foundation, 2015;Francis et al., 2017Francis et al., , 2020))”

    From Tackling Educational Inequalities with Social Psychology: Identities, Contexts, and Interventions (2021) · cites this paper as Francis et al., 2020

    The Introduction reports that pupils in low attainment groups make poorer educational progress than peers in higher groups, and the Findings report decreased self-confidence in the lowest sets. The claim omits that these negative outcomes concern pupils in lower sets; the paper also reports increased confidence in the highest sets. The cited paper does not establish a negative effect of setting on pupils overall. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. review". Educational Research Review 7: 62-74.
  2. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Academic Press.
  3. Kutnick P., Sebba J., Blatchford P., Galton M., Thorpe J., with MacIntyre H., Berdondini L. 2005. The Effects of Pupil Grouping: Literature Review. Research Report 688: London: DfES.
  4. Lemert E. M. 1951. Social Pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  5. Martin, M. O., & Mullis, I. V. S. (Eds.). 2012. Methods and procedures in TIMSS and PIRLS 2011.
  6. Oakes, J. 1985. How schools structure inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  7. Oxford Reference (2019) https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100453192 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Francis, B., Craig, N., Hodgen, J., Taylor, B., Tereshchenko, A., Connolly, P., & Archer, L.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • Lancaster University (GB)
Corresponding author
Francis, Becky
Venue
British Journal of Sociology of Education
Published
2020-06-08
Volume
41
Issue
5
Pages
626-642
ISSN
  • 0142-5692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3346
OpenAlex
W3033096012
Cited by
56
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2
FWCI
9.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Sociology of Education (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Ulster University Research Portal (Ulster University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Sociology and Education Studies
Keywords
self-fulfilling prophecy, ability grouping, educational disadvantage, high school students, student self-confidence in mathematics, social justice in education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review