Method policy

Check the rules for methodology changes, rankings, SALSA and sensitive school claims.

Quick check

Verify

Which claims may be published, how methodology changes are documented and when review is needed.

Method status

Methods and calculations are reviewed internally; external expert review is the stated target.

Source

The policy points to the method page, changelog and machine-readable metric definitions.

Documentation principles

All calculations are documented in metric-definitions.json — a machine-readable data catalogue with 80+ metrics.
Each metric has: name, unit, range, data source and calculation method.
Definitions follow Skolverket's and SCB's official definitions by default.
Deviations from official definitions are explicitly marked in the variable dictionary.

See the variable dictionary for a complete listing.

Methodology change process

When a calculation method changes or a new data source is added, we follow these steps:

Identification — A new data source, changed calculation logic or correction to an existing method is identified.
Documentation — metric-definitions.json is updated with new or changed definitions.
Communication — An entry is added to the changelog describing what changed and why.
Verification — Results are compared with the previous version for a reasonableness check. Large deviations are investigated before publication.
Publication — Deployment includes updated documentation and data simultaneously.

Transparency

Methodology changes are published in the changelog before or at the same time as new data is published.
Backwards-incompatible changes are announced at least one version in advance.
Calculation methods and data sources are documented openly on the method page.

Ranking and sensitive school claims

Skolkoll only uses rankings and superlatives when the method, data coverage and selection are shown next to the list. Acceptable wording is, for example, "ranked highest by Skolkoll score" or "highest merit value in the data". Unfounded claims such as "best school", "worst school", "safest" or "bad school" must be avoided.

Lists must state which dimensions are included and which are not.
Uncertainty, missing values and small samples must be shown next to the comparison.
Local admission rules, queue position, the school route, open houses and a child's individual needs cannot be replaced by a score.
Paying customers cannot influence the score, ranking, method, sources or warning flags.

SALSA limitations

SALSA is a model measure from Skolverket that compares an outcome with a model-predicted expectation based on pupil composition. It is an interpretation aid, not a quality grade, and must never be used on its own to describe a school as good or bad.

SALSA does not fully capture teaching, school climate, support measures, leadership, absence or local priorities.
A positive or negative deviation must be described as "according to the model", not as proof of the effect of teaching.
Where possible, SALSA should be shown together with merit value, teacher certification, safety, the pupil base and qualitative questions.

Support needs and inclusion

Content about support needs should help families ask questions. It must not rank schools by children's needs, imply a diagnostic assessment, or promise a particular measure.

Avoid

"Best for neurodevelopmental conditions", "guaranteed support", diagnoses as a school profile, and legal promises of a place or resource.

Prefer

"Ask how the school works with support", "may need extra adaptations" and "decisions are made by the school, operator or municipality".

External expert or target-group review has not yet been carried out. Support-needs content is therefore published as conservative checklists and conversation aids, not as a filter or ranking.

Future signals and closure risk

Public pages must describe verifiable historical or decided facts — for example that pupil numbers have fallen or that an operator has published a decision. Speculative claims about closure risk must not be published without a named, reliable source, a date, a statement of uncertainty and a way to report errors.

The municipality product's internal future indicators must be kept separate from public school claims.
Phrase neutrally: "pupil numbers have fallen" rather than "at risk of closing".
Schools, operators and municipalities must be able to report errors via the corrections process.

Review process

Current state: Skolkoll is a one-person project. Methods and calculations are reviewed internally.
Goal: External review by statisticians or researchers with relevant expertise.
Next steps: We welcome reviewers — contact us at info@skolkoll.se or via the support page.

Limitations

Skolkoll is not an official statistics producer — we compile and make public data more accessible.
Data may differ from Skolverket's publications due to timing or aggregation level.
Model calculations (e.g. SALSA) follow the published methodology but may have implementation differences.
Comparisons between schools should always consider data quality and socioeconomic factors.

Method and variable documentation · Corrections policy