Attainment and Attendance in Rother

What the national model behind How to Pull the Right Lever says about the district’s secondary schools, within East Sussex and alongside Brighton and Hove. Draft for discussion.

Author
Affiliation

Adam Dennett

Bartlett Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London

Published

November 2, 2026

WarningDraft for discussion

One of the district documents for Sussex. It sits beneath the East Sussex document, and the district summary compares all of the districts. Every figure comes from published Department for Education data and the national models of How to Pull the Right Lever. Nothing uses pupil-level records. The commentary is written to a common pattern from the figures; read it as a starting point for discussion.

Summary

Rother’s results are below the middle of England’s districts, on an intake less disadvantaged than England’s. Its 5 state secondary schools are in Battle, Bexhill-on-Sea, Robertsbridge and Rye.

  • Overall results: 45.4 in Attainment 8 in 2024/25, 153rd of 264 districts in England.
  • Disadvantage: 25.6% of pupils are disadvantaged, against 28.3% nationally.
  • Disadvantaged pupils average 34.5, below the national 37.8 (193rd of 264).
  • The gap between disadvantaged pupils and the rest is 14.6 points, the 66th widest of 264.

The other findings:

  • For all pupils, Rother is 1.5 points below England. The largest pieces in the national model are Ofsted ratings (-0.8) and absence (-0.7). The district’s schools do about what the model expects.
  • For disadvantaged pupils it is 3.0 points below England. The largest pieces are being in the South East (-1.3) and English as an additional language (-1.0), and the schools add 0.3 points beyond what the model expects.
  • No district effect can be found. Once intake, East Sussex’s county effect and the schools themselves are accounted for, nothing is left that all Rother schools share.
  • 2 of the 5 schools are above expectation over 2021/22 to 2024/25. The strongest is St Richard’s Catholic College (+3.9); the weakest Bexhill High Academy (-1.6).
  • Absence was 8.0% in autumn and spring 2025/26 (8.4% a year earlier), against 8.0% for England and 8.9% for East Sussex. Over 2021/22 to 2024/25 its schools ran 0.1 points above what their intakes predict, and Rye College and Robertsbridge Community College more than a point above.
  • Reduced timetables run at 1.1 times the national rate, and suspensions at 0.8 times (17.1 episodes per 100 pupils, against 21.2). That counts episodes, not pupils: 6.8 pupils per 100 were suspended at least once, about 2.5 times each, against 7.3 per 100 and 2.9 times in England.
  • Disadvantaged groups are small, 32 to 96 pupils a year per school. Every school-level figure for them moves from year to year and should be read over several years.

1 About this analysis

Rother is a district of East Sussex, not a local authority, and that shapes what can be said:

  • The national models place schools in local authorities. The “local authority effect” in this document is East Sussex’s, shared with every school in the county.
  • What is particular to Rother shows up in its schools’ own residuals, and in the district test of Section 6.
  • Absence and exclusions are summed over the district’s 5 schools, followed through any change of URN.

The methods are described in full in the East Sussex document.

2 The district’s schools

Rother’s state-funded secondary schools, coloured by overall absence in 2024/25. Choose another measure from the menu above the map; circle size is the school’s roll. Hover for figures and who runs each school.

Every state-funded secondary school in the district, 2024/25, with the size of its disadvantaged Year 11 group. Ofsted (model) is the rating the model uses, from the last graded inspection before September 2024. Ofsted, latest is the most recent judgement in Ofsted’s data as at 30 September 2026, which is a report card’s achievement and curriculum grades, the quality of education grade for an inspection between September 2024 and November 2025 that gave no overall grade, or otherwise the last graded inspection.
School Town Type Pupils FSM % Disadvantaged in Year 11 Absence % KS2 Att 8 Att 8 disadv. Ofsted (model) Ofsted, latest
Claverham Community College Battle Maintained 1148 21.6 47 7.2 4.8 50.2 40.9 Good (Oct 2018) Remains Good (Improving) (Apr 2024, ungraded visit)
Bexhill High Academy Bexhill-on-Sea Academy 1454 33.0 96 8.9 4.7 41.6 32.6 Requires Improvement (Nov 2022) No overall grade (May 2025): quality of education Good
St Richard's Catholic College Bexhill-on-Sea Maintained 1033 16.3 33 5.7 6.1 58.4 43.4 Good (Oct 2021) Good (Oct 2021)
Robertsbridge Community College Robertsbridge Maintained 733 26.0 38 12.3 6.6 40.2 29.4 Inadequate (Apr 2024) Inadequate (Apr 2024)
Rye College Rye Academy 616 31.1 32 12.9 3.7 36.7 26.1 Good (Jan 2023) Good (Jan 2023)

3 of the 5 schools are maintained by East Sussex County Council. The academies are run as follows:

  • Bexhill High Academy, a single-academy trust; it moved to Mulberry Schools Trust after 2024/25;
  • Rye College, in Aquinas Church of England Education Trust;
Figure 1: Who ran each school in 2024/25, and how far its results sat above or below the national model’s expectation over 2021/22 to 2024/25.

3 How Rother compares

Rother against East Sussex, Brighton and Hove and England, 2024/25. Means of school-level figures.
Measure Rother East Sussex Brighton and Hove England
Attainment 8, all pupils 45.4 43.8 45.5 46.8
Attainment 8, disadvantaged 34.5 33.0 33.9 37.7
Attainment 8, non-disadvantaged 49.1 47.5 49.6 49.9
Disadvantage gap (points) 14.6 14.5 15.7 12.2
Disadvantaged (FSM6) % 25.6 25.5 28.8 28.4
Overall absence % 9.4 9.7 11.3 8.6
Persistent absence % 26.2 26.4 30.6 23.9
Mean KS2 (centred) 5.18 3.79 4.71 4.47
EAL % 5.6 6.3 13.0 18.4
Figure 2: Attainment 8 for disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils in East Sussex’s districts, 2024/25, school means. The gap between the two is printed on each district’s line; Rother is in bold.

Across the years the model covers, the gap was 15.0 points in 2021/22 and 14.6 in 2024/25. Rother’s non-disadvantaged pupils were above England’s average in 0 of 4 years, and its disadvantaged pupils in 0.

4 What explains attainment in Rother

Figure 3: Why average Attainment 8 differs from England’s, by factor, all school-years 2021/22 to 2024/25, for Rother, East Sussex and Brighton and Hove. Approximate Attainment 8 points; the pieces sum to the total in each panel.
The decomposition for Rother, in Attainment 8 points. ‘Place’ is East Sussex’s effect plus the South East’s; ‘unexplained’ is what the district’s own schools add beyond everything the model accounts for.
Factor All pupils Disadvantaged Non-disadvantaged
Ofsted rating -0.80 -0.72 -0.72
Absence -0.69 -0.75 -0.55
English as an additional language -0.36 -0.98 -0.51
Teacher workforce -0.35 -0.13 -0.37
Unexplained (school residual) -0.03 +0.30 -0.00
Place (region and local authority) -0.00 -1.03 +0.28
Disadvantage (% FSM) +0.06 -0.04 +0.05
Other model terms +0.19 -0.25 +0.16
Prior attainment (KS2) +0.47 +0.42 +0.59

For all pupils, Rother is 1.5 points below England. The pieces of at least a quarter of a point:

  • Ofsted ratings (-0.80);
  • absence (-0.69);
  • prior attainment (+0.47);
  • being in the South East (-0.46);
  • East Sussex’s county-wide effect (+0.46);
  • English as an additional language (-0.36);
  • the teacher workforce (-0.35);
  • and the district’s schools themselves (-0.03), beyond what the model expects.

For disadvantaged pupils, Rother is 3.0 points below England. The pieces of at least a quarter of a point:

  • being in the South East (-1.32);
  • English as an additional language (-0.98);
  • absence (-0.75);
  • Ofsted ratings (-0.72);
  • prior attainment (+0.42);
  • admissions (-0.30);
  • East Sussex’s county-wide effect (+0.29);
  • and the district’s schools themselves (+0.30), beyond what the model expects.

5 The disadvantaged gap, school by school

Figure 4: Each school’s value added for its disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils, mean over the years available (2021/22 to provisional 2025/26). Above zero means better than the national model expects for similar pupils.

No Rother school is above expectation for its non-disadvantaged pupils while more than a point below it for its disadvantaged ones. Claverham Community College and St Richard’s Catholic College are above expectation for both groups. The table below gives each school’s own persistent effect, from the model with a school term, which is the steadier measure.

Table 1: Each school’s own persistent effect on the national model with a school term (%), for each group of pupils and for absence beyond what its intake predicts. Positive absence is worse.
School All pupils Disadvantaged Non-disadvantaged Absence (stage 1)
Claverham Community College +4.0 +4.7 +3.1 -21.1
Robertsbridge Community College -2.6 +1.0 -4.0 +13.7
St Richard's Catholic College +9.4 +7.2 +8.3 -26.7
Bexhill High Academy -3.5 -2.3 -3.0 +8.4
Rye College -3.4 -5.9 -1.8 +27.6
Table 2: Attainment 8 of each school’s disadvantaged pupils, year by year (2025/26 provisional), with the size of the group in 2024/25. Small groups make single years unreliable.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Disadvantaged pupils, 2024/25
Bexhill High Academy 29.9 28.7 33.3 32.6 35.2 96
Claverham Community College 40.6 43.0 33.3 40.9 32.7 47
Robertsbridge Community College 33.5 29.0 33.8 29.4 38
Rye College 31.1 27.1 26.7 26.1 32.0 32
St Richard's Catholic College 46.3 46.9 47.3 43.4 33

6 Is there a Rother effect?

The district test of the East Sussex document adds a district level to the national model, with and without each school’s own record.

Table 3: The Rother district effect, over and above East Sussex’s, with 95% intervals.
Specification Outcome Effect (%) 95% interval Significant
Published specification All pupils +0.5 -2.9 to +4.1 No
Published specification Disadvantaged +0.9 -3.1 to +5.1 No
Published specification Non-disadvantaged +0.6 -2.4 to +3.7 No
Published specification Absence (stage 1) -2.2 -9.1 to +5.3 No
With a school term All pupils +0.2 -3.1 to +3.6 No
With a school term Disadvantaged +0.2 -2.9 to +3.5 No
With a school term Non-disadvantaged +0.3 -3.1 to +3.9 No
With a school term Absence (stage 1) -0.3 -6.0 to +5.7 No

None of Rother’s district effects can be told apart from zero on either specification. The district’s results are explained by its intake, East Sussex’s county effect and its individual schools.

Figure 5: Each school’s own persistent effect, from the model with a school term: Attainment 8 for all pupils, and absence beyond what its intake predicts.

7 Absence

Figure 6: Overall absence, autumn and spring terms, 2016/17 to 2025/26. Sessions-weighted; 2019/20 not collected.
  • 8.0% absence in autumn and spring 2025/26, against 8.0% for England and 8.9% for East Sussex. A year earlier it was 8.4%.
  • Persistent absence is 21.9%, against 21.6% for England.
  • Against its intake, the district’s schools run 0.14 points above what their pupils’ profiles predict, on average over 2021/22 to 2024/25.
Table 4: Each school’s absence against what its intake predicts, mean 2021/22 to 2024/25, and its reasons in the latest year (percentage of sessions).
School Absence % Predicted by intake % Above prediction Illness Unauthorised Reduced timetable Suspended
Rye College 13.3 10.6 +2.7 4.6 3.6 0.13 0.29
Robertsbridge Community College 11.3 9.9 +1.4 5.5 2.4 0.59 0.45
Bexhill High Academy 10.6 9.8 +0.7 3.1 3.6 0.59 0.15
St Richard's Catholic College 5.9 7.9 -2.0 2.9 1.4 0.00 0.06
Claverham Community College 7.3 9.5 -2.2 3.8 1.6 0.30 0.18
  • Rye College and Robertsbridge Community College each run more than a point above their predicted absence.
  • Claverham Community College and St Richard’s Catholic College run more than a point below their predictions.

Reduced timetables account for 0.34% of sessions, against 0.29% in England, 1.1 times the national rate. Robertsbridge Community College’s rate is the highest in the district.

Table 5: Predicted Attainment 8 gain if each school’s absence fell to the national school average (2024/25). Indicative only.
School District Absence % FSM % Gain, all pupils Gain, disadvantaged Gain from FSM to area average
Rye College Rother 12.9 31.1 +3.2 +3.4 +0.4
Robertsbridge Community College Rother 12.3 26.0 +3.1 +3.4 +0.0
Bexhill High Academy Rother 8.9 33.0 +0.3 +0.3 +0.5

3 of the 5 schools are above the national average absence in 2024/25. Bringing them to it would add up to 3.2 points for all pupils, as an indication of scale.

Suspensions were 17.1 episodes per 100 pupils in 2024/25, against 21.2 for England and 28.0 for East Sussex. A rate per 100 pupils counts suspension episodes rather than pupils, and one pupil can be suspended several times in a year, so it is not a percentage of children: 6.8 pupils per 100 were suspended at least once, about 2.5 times each, against 7.3 per 100 and 2.9 times in England.

Table 6: Suspension episodes per 100 pupils, pupils suspended at least once per 100, and permanent exclusions, by school, latest year. One pupil can be suspended more than once, so the first rate runs well above the second.
School Pupils Episodes per 100 Pupils suspended per 100 Permanent exclusions
Rye College 616 29.1 12.0 2
Bexhill High Academy 1454 26.0 8.8 3
Claverham Community College 1148 16.7 7.1 1
St Richard's Catholic College 1033 9.8 5.5 0
Robertsbridge Community College 733 0.0 0.0 0

8 Contextual league tables

Value added, all pupils: observed Attainment 8 minus the national model’s expectation. 2025/26 is provisional.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Mean Years
St Richard's Catholic College +5.9 +4.2 +1.1 +4.3 +3.9 4
Claverham Community College -1.5 +3.7 -0.2 +1.5 -1.3 +0.4 5
Bexhill High Academy -2.1 -1.7 -1.6 -1.5 +0.7 -1.2 5
Robertsbridge Community College -2.5 -2.6 +1.6 -1.7 -1.3 4
Rye College +2.2 -1.8 -3.4 -3.3 -2.1 -1.7 5
Value added, disadvantaged pupils. Small groups; read across years.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Mean Years
St Richard's Catholic College +2.8 +4.7 +5.0 +1.6 +3.5 4
Claverham Community College -0.3 +6.1 -2.7 +3.9 -4.1 +0.6 5
Robertsbridge Community College -1.5 +0.2 +3.5 -0.7 +0.4 4
Bexhill High Academy -1.8 -3.2 +0.8 -1.0 -0.0 -1.0 5
Rye College -0.2 -2.7 -3.7 -3.9 -1.5 -2.4 5
Value added, non-disadvantaged pupils.
School 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 Mean Years
St Richard's Catholic College +6.2 +4.2 +0.6 +4.8 +3.9 4
Claverham Community College -0.9 +3.3 +0.7 +1.1 -0.5 +0.7 5
Rye College +3.6 -1.6 -2.3 -2.8 -1.7 -1.0 5
Bexhill High Academy -2.1 -0.4 -2.6 -1.2 +1.1 -1.1 5
Robertsbridge Community College -2.7 -4.0 +0.4 -2.3 -2.1 4

9 Questions for discussion

  1. Disadvantaged pupils. They average 34.5 in Rother against 37.8 in England, and the district’s schools add 0.3 points for them beyond what the model expects. What do St Richard’s Catholic College and Claverham Community College, above expectation for these pupils, do that the district’s other schools could share?
  2. Attendance is a modest lever. Absence costs the district 0.7 points against England for all pupils, and Rye College and Robertsbridge Community College run more than a point above what their intakes predict.
  3. Schools, not the place. There is no Rother district effect: the differences that matter are between its schools.
  4. Practice. Reduced timetables and suspensions are close to or below the national rate.
  5. The county. East Sussex’s own effect for disadvantaged pupils is +0.9% (60th of 151), not distinguishable from zero. The county questions in the East Sussex document apply here as well.

Notes on method

Methods and sources are those of the East Sussex document. District membership comes from each school’s postcode (ONS postcode directory, via postcodes.io). Absence and exclusions for the district are summed over its schools, including any predecessor or successor URNs. This document is generated from templates/district_report.qmd by R/20_district_reports.R, from data built by R/17_area_analysis.R, R/18_district_effects.R and R/19_trust_effects.R. Its format is described in AREA_REPORTS.md.