The problem
A number means more beside schools like yours, but league tables strip out the context and invite the wrong conclusions. A board still needs comparison; the question is how to give it honestly.
What I built
A comparison that puts a school's published Year 6 result beside England and the nearby median for the same year, for reading, writing and maths combined or the reading and maths scaled scores. The board chooses the comparison set: the closest same-phase schools within a stated distance, or a wider set matched on phase, roll size within 30 per cent and recorded free school meals rate. Tables keep one school per row across headline data, attainment and progress, with outcomes shown beside pupil characteristics and the context of the surrounding area.
Design decisions
It refuses the simple ranking. Where a small group means a result is withheld, the table says why rather than leaving a blank. School-submitted assessments show their criterion, how many pupils were assessed and when. Neighbourhood measures are kept separate from the circumstances of the pupils actually enrolled, because the two are often confused and the confusion is unfair to schools.
What you can see
A like-for-like view a board can take to a meeting, with the comparison set and the definitions visible.
The result
Better questions about a result, rather than a ranking of schools.