You are here:

Render unto primary the things which are primary's: Inherited and fresh learning divides in Italian lower secondary education
ARTICLE

Economics of Education Review Volume 35, Number 1, ISSN 0272-7757 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

We employ a pseudo-panel approach to link the achievements of the same cohort of Italian students over two waves of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. As we investigate the determinants of learning divides in math and science at the end of the lower secondary school (grade 8), we are able to tackle cumulative effects of education by controlling for the estimated prior score (grade 4). We find that the gender gap in math observed at grade 8 should actually be ascribed to primary education, while both school levels contribute to the emergence of the girls’ gap in science. In both subject, lower secondary schools are responsible for the largest part of the learning divide due to family background. On the other hand, foreign-origin students show a remarkable recovery at the lower secondary school, once their entry-level of competence is taken into account.

Citation

De Simone, G. (2013). Render unto primary the things which are primary's: Inherited and fresh learning divides in Italian lower secondary education. Economics of Education Review, 35(1), 12-23. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved September 22, 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.2013.03.002

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Alspaugh, J. (1998). Achievement loss associated with the transition to middle school and high school. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), pp. 20-25.
  2. Bedard, K., & Do, C. (2005). Are middle schools more effective? The impact of school structure on student outcomes. The Journal of Human Resources, 40(3), pp. 660-682.
  3. Berchialla, P., Cavallo, F., Colombini, S., De Simone, G., & Lemma, P. (2011). Associazione delle caratteristiche individuali, del benessere psico-fisico e del clima di classe con gli outcomes scolastici. Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli Working Paper No. 41.
  4. Bratti, M., Checchi, D., & Filippin, A. (2007). Territorial differences in Italian students’ mathematical competencies: evidence from PISA 2003. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2603.
  5. Brodaty, T., Gary-Bobo, R. J., & Prieto, A. (2008). Does speed signal ability? The impact of grade repetitions on employment and wages. CEPR Discussion Papers No. 6832.
  6. Brown, S., & Taylor, K. (2008). Bullying, education and earnings: Evidence from the National Child Development Study. Economics of Education Review, 27(4), pp. 387-401.
  7. Brunello, G., & Checchi, D. (2005). School quality and family background in Italy. Economics of Education Review, 24(5), pp. 563-577.
  8. Checchi, D. (2010). Percorsi scolastici e origini sociali nella scuola italiana. Politica Economica, 3, pp. 359-388.
  9. Checchi, D., Fiorio, C. V., & Leonardi, M. (2008). Intergenerational persistence in educational attainment in Italy. IZA Discussion Paper No. 3622.
  10. Checchi, D., & Flabbi, L. (2007). Intergenerational mobility and schooling decisions in Germany and Italy: The impact of secondary school tracks. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2876.
  11. Chevalier, A., Denny, K., & McMahon, M. (2007). A multi-country study of inter-generational educational mobility. Education and inequality across Europe Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Pub.
  12. Chiswick, B.R., & DebBurman, N. (2004). Educational attainment: Analysis by immigrant generation. Economics of Education Review, 23(4), pp. 361-379.
  13. Crockett, L.J., Peterson, A.C., Graber, J.A., Schulenberg, J.E., & Ebata, A. (1989). School transitions and adjustment during early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 9(3), pp. 181-210.
  14. Ferrer Esteban, G. (2011). Beyond the traditional territorial divide in the Italian education system. Effects of system management factors on performance in lower secondary education. Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli Working Paper No. 43.
  15. Hanushek, E.A., Kain, J.F., Markman, J.M., & Rivkin, S.G. (2003). Does peer ability affect student achievement?. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18(5), pp. 527-544.
  16. Hertz, T., Jayasundera, T., Piraino, P., Selcuk, S., Smith, N., & Verashchagina, A. (2007). The inheritance of educational inequality: International comparisons and fifty-year trends.. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, 7(2).
  17. Hoxby, C. M. (2000). Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation. NBER Working Paper No.7867.
  18. IEA (2004). Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Boston College.
  19. IEA (2005). TIMSS 2003 user guide for the international database. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Boston College.
  20. IEA (2008). TIMSS 2007 International Mathematics Report. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Boston College.
  21. IEA (2008). TIMSS 2007 International Science Report. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Boston College.
  22. INVALSI (2010). Il Servizio Nazionale di Valutazione. Aspetti operativi e prime valutazioni sugli apprendimenti degli studenti. Rome, Italy: Istituto Nazionale per la Valutazione del Sistema educativo di Istruzione e di Formazione.
  23. Jacob, B.A., & Lefgren, L. (2009). The effect of grade retention on high school completion. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(3), pp. 33-58.
  24. Juvonen, J., Wang, Y., & Espinoza, G. (2011). Bullying experiences and compromised academic performance across middle school grades. Journal of Early Adolescence, 31(1), pp. 152-173.
  25. MacDonald, K. (2011). PV: Stata module to perform estimation with plausible values.
  26. Manacorda, M. (2012). The cost of grade retention. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(2), pp. 596-606.
  27. Manski, C.F. (1993). Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. The Review of Economic Studies, 60(3), pp. 531-542.
  28. Meghir, C., & Rivkin, S. (2011). Econometric methods for research in education. Handbook of the economics of education, Vol. 3(1–87).
  29. Meyer, R. (1997). Value-Added indicators of school performance: A primer. Economics of Education Review, 16, pp. 183-301.
  30. Meunier, M., De Coulon, A., Vignoles, A.F., & Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O.D. (2011). A longitudinal analysis of UK second-generation disadvantaged immigrants. Education Economics, pp. 1-30.
  31. MIUR (2009). La scuola in cifre 2008. Rome, Italy: Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione dell’Università e della Ricerca.
  32. Mocetti, S. (2011). Educational choices and the selection process: Before and after compulsory schooling. Education Economics, 20(2), pp. 189-209.
  33. Mocetti, S., & Porello, C. (2010). Labour mobility in Italy: new evidence on migration trends. Bank of Italy Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) No. 61.
  34. Montanaro, P. (2008). Learning divides across the Italian regions: some evidence from national and international surveys. Bank of Italy Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) No. 12.
  35. Moffitt, R. (1993). Identification and estimation of dynamic models with a time series of repeated cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics, 59, pp. 99-124.
  36. OECD (2011). When students repeat grades or are transferred out of school: What does it mean for education systems?.. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  37. Rockoff, J., & Lockwood, B. (2010). Stuck in the middle: Impacts of grade configuration in public schools. Journal of Public Economics, 94(11-12), pp. 1051-1061.
  38. Sacerdote, B. (2011). Peer effects in education: How might they work, how big are they and how much do we know thus far?. Handbook of the economics of education, Vol. 3, pp. 249-277.
  39. Schneeweis, N. (2011). Educational institutions and the integration of migrants. Journal of Population Economics, 24(4), pp. 1281-1308.
  40. Schnepf, S.V. (2007). Immigrants’ educational disadvantage: An examination across ten countries and three surveys. Journal of Population Economics, 20(3), pp. 527-545.
  41. Todd, P.E., & Wolpin, K.I. (2003). On the Specification and Estimation of the Production Function for Cognitive Achievement. The Economic Journal, 113(485), pp. F3-F33.
  42. Verbeek, M., & Vella, F. (2005). Estimating dynamic models from repeated cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics, 127(1), pp. 83-102.

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

Suggest Corrections to References