You are here:

The relative and absolute risks of disadvantaged family background and low levels of school resources on student literacy
ARTICLE

,

Economics of Education Review Volume 29, Number 2 ISSN 0272-7757 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

There has been a long-lasting debate of whether the effects of family background are larger than those of school resources, and whether these effects are a function of national income level. In this study, we bring a new perspective to the debate by using the concepts of relative risk and population attributable risk in estimating family and school effects. The study uses data from the Programme of International Student Assessment (PISA), a large international comparative study of the skills of 15-year-old students in 43 countries. The study finds that: (1) there is a curvilinear association between family effects, measured by both relative and attributable risk, and national income level; (2) there is no association between school effects and national income level; (3) the risk associated with low levels of family background is larger than that of low levels of school resources, regardless of national income level.

Citation

Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y. & Willms, J.D. The relative and absolute risks of disadvantaged family background and low levels of school resources on student literacy. Economics of Education Review, 29(2), 214-224. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved February 1, 2023 from .

This record was imported from Economics of Education Review on March 1, 2019. Economics of Education Review is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2009.07.007

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Aitkin, M.A., & Longford, N.T. (1986). Statistical modeling issues in school effectiveness studies . Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 149, pp. 1-43.
  2. Alexander, K.L., Pallas, A.M., & Cook, M.A. (1981). Measure for measure: On the use of endogenous ability data in school process research . American Sociological Review, 46, pp. 619-631.
  3. Baker, D., & Goesling, B. (2005). Symbiotic institutions: Changing global dynamics between family and schooling . National differences, global similarities: World culture and the future of schooling, p. 46. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  4. Baker, D., Goesling, B., & LeTendre, G. (2002). Socioeconomic status, school quality, and national economic development: A cross-national analysis of the “Heyneman–Loxley Effect” on mathematics and science achievement . Comparative Education Review, 46, pp. 291-312.
  5. Beaton, A.E. (1975). Special studies of our nation's students . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
  6. Bowles, S., & Levin, H.M. (1968). The determinants of scholastic achievement: An appraisal of some recent evidence . The Journal of Human Resources, 2, pp. 3-24.
  7. Brookover, W.B., Schweitzer, J.H., Schneider, J.M., Beady, C.H., Flood, P.K., & Wisenbaker, J.M. (1978). Elementary school social climate and school achievement . American Educational Research Journal, 15, pp. 301-318.
  8. Card, D., & Krueger, A.D. (1996). Labor market effects on school quality: Theory and evidence. Does money matter? . The effect of school resources on student achievement and adult success Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  9. Coleman, J., Campbell, E.Q., & Hobson, C.J. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity . Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  10. Fuller, B. (1987). What school factors raise achievement in the third world? . Review of Educational Research, 57(3), pp. 255-292.
  11. Goldstein, H. (1987). Multilevel models in educational and social research . London: Griffin.
  12. Greenwald, R., Hedges, L.V., & Laine, R.D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement . Review of Educational Research, 66, pp. 361-396.
  13. Hanushek, E.A. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update . Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, pp. 141-164.
  14. Hanushek, E.A., & Luque, J.A. (2001). Efficiency and equity in schools around the world .
  15. Heyneman, S.P., & Loxley, W. (1983). The effect of primary-school quality on academic achievement across twenty-nine high- and low-income countries . American Journal of Sociology, 88, pp. 1162-1194.
  16. Levin, H.M., & Belfield, C.R. (2002). Families as contractual partners in education . UCLA Law Review, 49, pp. 1799-1824.
  17. Madaus, G.F., Kellaghan, T., Rakow, E.A., & King, D.J. (1979). The sensitivity of measures of school effectiveness . Harvard Education Review, 49, pp. 207-230.
  18. Nonoyama, Y. (2005). A Cross-National, Multi-Level Study of Family Background and School Resource Effects on Student Achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. New York: Columbia University.
  19. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, (2002a). PISA 2000 technical report. Paris: OECD Publications.
  20. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2002). Manual for the PISA 2000 database . Paris: OECD Publications.
  21. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2003). Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000 . Paris: OECD Publications.
  22. Peaker, G. (1971). The Plowden children four years later . London: National Foundation for Education in England and Wales.
  23. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (1986). A hierarchical model for studying school effects . Sociology of Education, 59, pp. 1-17.
  24. Shavit, Y., & Müller, W. (1998). From school to work: A comparative analysis of educational qualifications and occupational destinations . Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  25. Willms, J.D., & Somers, M.-A. (2001). Family, classroom and school effects on children's educational outcomes in Latin America . International Journal of School Effectiveness and Improvement, 12, pp. 409-445.
  26. Willms, J.D., & Flanagan, P. (2002). Programs to increase access to post-secondary education . Montreal: Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation.
  27. Willms, J.D. (2006). Learning divides: Ten policy questions about the performance and equity of schools and schooling systems . Montreal: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References