PROJECT ENDED
[this page is no longer updated]

2006/7 European Forum navigation

• content and research questions
• activities and output

 

The book will be published by Springer Press in 2009

 

Preliminary content and abstracts of the book:

Assessing the Quality  of Education and Its Relationships
with the  Inequality in European and Other Modern Societies

Product of the European Forum 2006/7, edited by Jaap Dronkers

• Part 1 – Introdcution [no abstract]
• Part 2 – Institutional arrangements and educational outcomes
• Part 3 – Migration and educational inequality
• Part 4 – Education in Europe and Asia: analogies and differences

Part 2 – Institutional arrangements and educational outcomes

2.1. Influences of National Education Policies on the
Academic Achievement of High- and Low-Social Status Students
Stefanie Arnett

Though education is widely considered a means to economic and social mobility, sociological literature indicates that family background is frequently a stronger predictor of student achievement than are schools themselves in modern societies. Low socioeconomic status students often have a disadvantage that cannot be overcome by schools, and family socioeconomic status, not merit, often determines student academic success. This paper considers how family socioeconomic status, school factors, and the educational policies of nations interact in order to produce educational stratification. It argues and finds support for the idea that since educational policies vary across nations, the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement also vary on a cross-national basis. Moreover, it argues that certain educational policies of nations create mechanisms by which socioeconomic status influences student achievement. These mechanisms have the potential to create circumstances whereby socio-economically advantaged individuals are able to obtain greater benefits from schooling than their socio-economically disadvantaged peers. This work applies hierarchical linear models (HLM) to data from twenty-nine nations to explore how a number of educational policies—including tracking, curricular standardization, and mandated instructional time—influence the relationship between socioeconomic status and student achievement. Results confirm that educational policies do indeed have the potential to influence the relationship between socioeconomic status and student learning. Specifically, I find that countries with educational policies which aim to provide equal learning opportunities to all students have a weaker link between student socioeconomic status and learning outcomes. These findings of strong macro-level influences on student achievement have the potential to advance the objective of equal educational opportunities for all students, as they suggest ways to break the link between socioeconomic background and learning outcomes.

2.2. The Influence of Educational Segregation
on Educational Achievement
Peter Robert

The paper investigates the impact of homogeneous vs. heterogeneous grouping of students with respect to their social origin on the differences in educational achievement. There are two competing hypotheses in this respect: heterogeneous grouping increases students’ educational outcomes – this is the opinion of the majority of the experts. Nevertheless, a smaller group of experts believes that homogeneous grouping, less integration is the proper structural solution for improving students’ school achievement. Further hypotheses refer to the conventional beliefs that a.) students with underprivileged parental background benefit from being in heterogeneous schools where they study together with offspring of parents with better social standing; or b.) students with privileged parental background perform worse in integrated schools where they study together with offspring of parents with poor social standing. The paper uses the PISA 2003 data for investigating the consequences of these various possibilities in structural settings.

Social background is measured by parental occupation and education, expressing social and cultural status of the families. In addition to the main effects of social origin, contextual school level variables are used to investigate the impact of educational segregation. These indicators involve the general level of the school regarding the social and cultural status of the parents (mean level of parental occupation and education) as well as the degree of segregation as measured by the standard deviation of the parental characteristics on the school level. Interaction terms are used to express the relationship between students’ parental characteristics and school characteristics regarding level of segregation. As further controls, gender, age, grade, family intactness, location and size of the school are also considered. Regression models are fitted to the data predicting students’ achievement in math and reading. The analysis is carried out on the weighted sample (scaled down back to the original sample size) of the PISA data as well as on various smaller subsets of the countries. Hypotheses about the generally negative impact of school segregation on students’ achievement found more support, while the assumptions on the specific benefits of the underprivileged students or on the specific disadvantages of the privileged students are less supported. Country groups differ from the general picture to some extent.

2.3. The Impact of Institutional Tracking on Achievement Growth. Checking the Robustness of Difference-in-differences Approach to PIRLS, TIMSS and PISA
Maciej Jakubowski

This paper analyzes the impact of early institutional tracking on achievement measured through international educational surveys. Building on the seminal work of Hanushek and Woessmann (2006) the difference-in-differences approach was applied to assess whether tracking students into distinct types of schools have any impact on achievement growth. The growth is estimated based on achievement in primary school measured in PIRLS 2001 (reading) or TIMSS 2003 (mathematics, science) and achievement in secondary school tested in PISA 2000 and 2003 (all three subjects). It was assumed that by comparing the growth levels in tracking and non-tracking countries one could obtain the causal estimate of tracking on achievement. The paper presents several robustness checks to test the validity of this assumption in the case of Hanushek and Woessmann approach. It was argued that the official country-level results published by survey organizers are not directly comparable and using them was not valid in their case. Hanushek and Woessmann approach was repeated on more comparable samples obtained from PIRLS, TIMSS and PISA micro-data. Additionally, a new difference-in-differences method was proposed. It was found that while the seminal approach was not robust to sample and method modifications the newly proposed method partially supports earlier findings that early tracking negatively affects achievement growth, especially for unprivileged students. However, it is difficult to say whether tracking importantly increases inequalities or have any impact on countries which track students relatively late. The paper discusses more general methodological and practical problems of approaches where achievement measured through different international surveys is to be compared. The main conclusion is that while such attempts are much demanded and promising some additional efforts are needed to increase their validity. It is doubtful that without future adjustments and cooperation from the side of survey organizers similar research will be able to produce credible assessments of educational policies at the international level.

2.4. The Effects of School Regimes on Student Achievement.
A Cross-regional Comparison
Miquel Angel Alegre Canosa & Stephanie Arnett

The discussion about the limits and potentials of school comprehensiveness (defined as the extent to which the educational system tracks students into different educational programmes and institutions) has been reinvigorated as a result of the publication of the PISA data. Research has shown that more comprehensive school systems tend to lower the weight of the social background as an explanatory factor of the variance in results of the student body as a whole and between schools, while less comprehensive systems have the opposite effect.

However, the formal or structural comprehensiveness of the educational system is not the only explanatory factor for the existence of school situations that are more or less socially segregated. The level of comprehensiveness establishes the framework within which other variables act in the configuration of school social composition.

The purpose of this chapter is to take into account how other “intermediate” factors play a part in explaining educational outcomes inequalities between students (both within—and between—schools) and to assess to what extent these inequalities can be associated to processes of school social segregation. More precisely, we will measure the effects on student achievement that can be attributable to three levels of variables:

1. “School regimes”, which includes:
   a) types of school diversification: number and types of educational programmes and providers (public—state-run schools, local-run schools…—, private, independent…);
   b) levels of school autonomy, in deciding about curriculum, budgeting and staffing, and students’ recruitment;
   c) models of school choice (regulation vs. market context).

2. School factors, including two sets of variables:
   a) social and ethnic composition of student body;
   b) teacher experience and pedagogical approaches.

3. Individual variables (socioeconomic status and immigrant background)

We will proceed to a multilevel analyses applying hierarchical linear models (HLM) to data from 15 regions involved in PISA 2003. We operate at a regional (or sub-national) level, as far as it is can be better captured and featured. The selection of cases lies in the purpose of putting into analysis significant contrasting regional school regimes.

2.5. Educational Expansion and Social Class Returns
to Tertiary Qualifications in Post-communist Countries
Erzsébet Bukodi

Previous studies have consistently demonstrated the salient labour market advantages of tertiary educated individuals compared to those with lower attainment, and the strong linkage between the tertiary qualification and the type of job(s). Apparently, the expanding and differentiating tertiary education might have a strong impact on the structure of graduate labour market. Most European nations, and especially some former communist countries, had experienced strong expansion at tertiary level in the last two decades, and higher education systems have been differentiated via the introduction of new institutional forms. There is no doubt, that these changes might have significantly altered the relationship between the tertiary education system, the labour market outcomes and their social stratification consequence.

This chapter compares the impact of qualifications on social class in seven post-communist countries: Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, Estonia and Ukraine. The aim of the study is to investigate the effects of the vertical and horizontal dimensions of education, i.e. the effects of level of education and field of study, on the probabilities of individuals ending up in different classes. The main research question to be answered is: To what extent do educational expansion at tertiary level lead to labour market success differentially in these seven countries, and how can we explain these differences? These nations are interesting to compare as they bring the same communist legacy in all regards, but as the crucial aspects of their educational systems, including tertiary education, differ fairly strongly.

As the empirical basis, the second wave of European Social Survey is used. As regards the occupational class, the newly developed European Socio-economic Classification (EseC) is applied.

The main results are as follows. Level of qualification continues to exert a huge influence on class outcomes, just as it did under communism. However, there are differences across countries in the probabilities of individuals being found in the top classes, and these differences are especially apparent for those who entered the labour market in the post-communist era. There is no doubt that the higher education is horizontally stratified in contemporary post-communist countries: the class returns to tertiary degrees vary by specialisation. As in the majority of Western European countries and in the United States, economics/business and law are the most lucrative fields of study, while teacher training, the humanities and the social sciences are poorly rewarded. However, there are rather modest field-of-study differences in the probabilities of individuals being found in the higher managerial and professional class in countries having experienced a huge rate of expansion chiefly promoted by market-based private financing (Estonia, Hungary and Poland). In sum, this study clearly demonstrates that the main stratifying role of education in post-communist countries is still its vertical effects, and differences across levels are more significant than are differences within levels.

Part 3 – Migration and educational inequality

3.1. Educational Gaps between Immigrant and Native Students in Europe. The Role of Grade Retention
Hyunjoon Park & Gary Sandefur

Using data from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2000, we compare differences in reading performance between immigrant and native 15-year-olds in 10 European countries. Our results show considerable variation in the immigrant-native performance gap among our 10 European countries, even after socioeconomic conditions are taken into account. We examine the extent to which between-country differences in grad retention account for the cross-national variation in the effect of immigrant status on reading performance. In countries with grade retention, immigrant students are more likely to be in lower grades than their native peers of the same age, whereas in countries without grade retention, immigrant students do not differ in grade distributions from native students. Our major hypothesis is that countries, where immigrant students are more likely to be retained than their native peers of the same age, should have a larger performance gap between immigrant and native students given previous literature on negative consequences of grade retention. The regression analysis with country dummy variables and two-level hierarchical linear models provide evidence consistent with the expectation. Policy implications of the significant effect of grade retention are discussed for immigrant children’s educational integration in European societies.

3.2. Institutional Contexts and Social Selectivity.
The Situation of Migrants in Germany, Canada, and the USA
Susanne von Below

Educational Systems can provide quite different contexts for the students attending them. There are variations between national systems, but also within them. In the proposed paper, I will apply the question of how institutional contexts influence educational opportunity to the federal states of Germany, Canada, and the US. The focus of the analyses is the situation of migrants in these states.

These states are selected, since both Canada and the US are classic immigration countries; the comparison to Germany can show whether a longer and possibly institutionalized experience with migration can influence dealing with migrants, and their educational opportunities. Also, for Germany and Canada as countries in which the states have influence over the educational system, there can be an analysis of differences within one country. Last, but not least, the two waves of the PISA study have shown that Canada has been very successful in the integration of migrants, and these don’t do worse than the autochthonous population, different from the US or Germany.

The paper is based on two separate analyses: First, the immigration policy, background of immigrants, and educational institutional settings for immigrants in the three countries and in four states in Germany and Canada shall be analyzed. Second, analyses of the PISA 2003 study shall give insight about whether those regionally different educational systems have an influence on the competencies on 15 year olds overall, and for youths with a migrant background in comparison to the others.

Thus, I want to find out whether there are mainly national or regional differences below the national level that influence social inequalities in the PISA-study.

3.3. The Educational Attainment of First and Second Generation
Immigrants from Different Countries of Origin in
the Different EU Member-states
Jaap Dronkers & Fenella Fleischmann

Drawing on the second wave of the European Social Survey, we analyse the educational attainment of 1039 second generation immigrants from different countries of origin in 13 EU countries, relative to that of the natives of these EU countries. In addition to testing the effects of individual factors, such as parental education and religion, we estimate the effects of macro characteristics of both origin and destination countries. Next to parental educational level, the average educational level of the natives of the countries of destination and the generosity of the naturalization laws have positive effects on the educational level of both male and female second generation immigrants. Other macro-characteristics of countries of origin and destination have no significant effects on educational outcomes of these immigrants. Moreover, Muslim men of the second generation are found to have lower levels of education. Among female members of the second generation, we find a positive effect of speaking the national language of the destination country at home for those with highly educated parents, whereas the children of lowly educated parents profit from speaking a minority language at home.

3.4.Talking the Same Language. How Does Education in the
Mother Tongue Affect the Pupils’ Scholastic Achievement in the
Parallel School Systems?
Adel Pasztor

The preliminary PISA results of pupil’s reading, mathematical and scientific literacy skills showed that native pupils perform better then pupils with foreign background but we still don’t know much about the performance of pupils belonging to an indigenous and/or autochthonous minority group. The current sociological research fail to analyse the achievement and educational pathways of European autochthonous minorities, albeit there are now many international data sets available to conduct such a comparative research. The data supported by the PISA survey allow us to investigate ethnic differences in educational achievement in more detail.

From the methodological point of view, the analysis is not restricted to single comparisons of minority and majority school achievement. Factors such as family background and school characteristics are taken into account as well, as the socio-economic composition of the minority population might be completely different from majority, therefore it can affect the achievement of young people. Given that these groups have the right to be instructed in their mother tongue a comparison of their performance to the majority pupils could be of special interest to school officials or policy makers. Comparing the outcomes of the parallel educational systems may answer the question whether studying in minority schools offers the same educational outcome as the majority schools; an important fact by the school choice of parents belonging to a minority. Therefore, the inclusion of the autochthonous minorities adds not only a further interesting point to the analysis of ethnic inequalities in student performance, but is also a very reasonable step making the picture of ethnic differences in educational achievement complete.

Part 4 – Education in Europe and Asia: analogies and differences

4.1. Intergenerational Transmission of Income and Education
in France and Japan
Arnaud Lefranc, Fumiaki Ojima & Takashi Yoshida

The paper compares the extent of intergenerational earnings and educational correlation in Japan and France. it uses very similar repeated surveys that provide information on educational attainment and family background, conducted in Japan and France. To insure comparability, similar sample restrictions and specifications are imposed. For Japan, we use waves 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995 and(?) 2005. For France, we use waves 1965, 1970, 1977, 1985, 1993 and 2003. Intergenerational elasticity in years of education can be readily estimated using available information. On the other hand, intergenerational earnings elasticity can not be directly measured given the lack of information on parental income in both surveys. This leads us to apply Bjorklund and Jantti (1999) two sample instrumental variables estimation strategy. Lastly, we discuss to what extent differences in earnings mobility is related to differences in educational mobility and to differences in returns to education between the two countries.

4.2. The Trace of Colonization: Comparing Hong Kong-China and Macao-China with Their Former Occupying Countries, UK and Portugal, on Their Adolescents’ Educational Achievement and Future Career Expectation
Ling Li

Both Hong Kong- (HK) and Macau-China (MC) are the former European colonies that were integrated into China at the end of the last century. The political changes in these two regions before the integration have affected their education substantially. However, due to the unique geographical position and economical status in the world trade, these two Chinese regions manage to survive between the Western colonization and the Eastern tradition. The former published results of country / region average (OECD, 2004) indicate that the average scores for HK and MC are about half a standard deviation higher than their colonizing counterparts United Kingdom (UK) and Portugal (PT) in both math and reading. However, a clearer picture about the differences between the two parties is yet to be depicted and explanations addressing the differences are to be sought.

The current study compares HK and MC with UK and PT on the fifteen-year-olds’ educational outcomes and future career expectations, by using PISA (Programme of International Students Assessment, OECD) 2003 data. The general goal is to find out how the differences in educational policies and schooling practices lead to the different educational outcomes.

The following hypotheses are to be tested in the study:

1. In general, students’ achievement in math and reading in the HK and MC are significantly higher than UK and PT, after having adjusted for various significant influences from students’ characteristics and diversified family backgrounds.

2. Substantial differences in the mean differences between the two parties can be attributed to their educational policies and schooling practices.

3. Asymmetry is found between students’ learning outcomes and future career expectations. Students’ in HK and MC on average have a relatively lower future career expectation compared to their actual outcomes, while the students in UK and PT have a relatively higher expectation on their future career.

Two-level hierarchical models with students nested in schools are used to model students’ educational outcomes and future career expectations. After having controlled for the impact of diversified family backgrounds and students’ individual characteristics, special focus is on the general educational policy and specific schooling practices on the dependent variables. We want to investigate to what extend students’ outcomes are shaped by school features. Random-intercept/slope models as well as cross-level interaction between schools and individuals students are explored to capture the complex reality in education.

4.3. Japanese and Korean High Schools and Students in
Comparative Perspective
Hyunjoon Park

Using data from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2003, this study examines problem solving skills among 15-year-old Japanese and Korean students in comparative perspective. Problem-solving skills represent student’s capacity of solving real-situation problems, which is not acquired simply by rote learning, memorization and repetition of school subjects. Comparing problem-solving skills across countries demonstrates that the extraordinary academic performance, which has been widely known to Western audience, of Japanese and Korean students is not simply the result of practice drill, rote learning, or memorization. The analysis also shows that top performers in Japan and Korea exceed top performers in other countries, debunking the stereotyped criticism on Japanese and Korean education that their standardized education makes talented students mediocre. This study, furthermore, challenges the existing literature’s insensitivity of differences between Japanese and Korean education, by highlighting that Japanese and Korean high school systems significantly differ in the ways in which students are selected into high schools. Discussed are differences between the two countries in the extent to which between-school differences account for students’ performance.

4.4. Family Background, School System and Academic Achievement
in Germany and in Japan
Fumiaki Ojima & Susanne von Below

The 2003 PISA report shows Japan and Germany have similarity and dissimilarity in family background influence on educational achievement. The regression coefficient of the Index of Socio-Economic and Cultural Status (an overall index of socio-economic status of family) on student performance is almost same but its correlation (the amount of variation explained by socio-economic background) is different. Although the 'native' (both of student and their parents were born in test countries) students’ performance is almost the same in Japan and in Germany, 534 and 530 respectively, the relationship between test score and socio-economic background in Germany is still larger than that in Japan.

In this paper, we explore the institutional settings that make this difference. Especially we focus on educational system of both countries. The difference of ‘tracking’ system may become a focal point. To clarify the features of educational system which have an influence on educational achievement, comparison with other European or Asian countries will be helpful: Netherlands and Belgium (Western European countries with early start tracking system), France, Italy and Spain (Western European countries with late start tracking system), and Korea (East Asian country with late start tracking system).