I was reading this: https://www.tes.com/news/school-new...-heads-and-teachers-are-stuck-a-zero-sum-game And was quite taken aback by this : Comparative outcomes is the name given to a system designed to address the problem of year-on-year grade inflation of GCSE and A-level results. Its effects are not as widely known as they should be. Essentially, it means that the levels a pupil cohort achieves nationally at key stage 2 in any one year will determine the grades available to that same pupil cohort five years later at GCSE. The result of comparative outcomes for secondary schools is a zero-sum game. If one secondary school manages to develop more effective classroom strategies that raise pupil performance, another school’s GCSE results must drop, even if there has been no decline in the standards achieved by that school. Now feel free to call me naive or stupid or a purple dinosaur, whatever takes your fancy, but this for real? How have I got through 10 years in this job and not known this! So if one school has a big rise in results then another school suffers? Am I reading this right? Am I wrong? Am i wrong to feel very angry right now?