Advertisement

Culture, migration and educational performance: a focus on gender outcomes using Australian PISA tests

  • Alfred Michael Dockery
  • Paul KoshyEmail author
  • Ian W. Li
Article

Abstract

This paper explores how cultural and migrant backgrounds affect boys’ and girls’ high-school academic performance. Scores from the 2015 Programme for International Student Assessment are analysed for Australian children from migrant and non-migrant families, conditional upon a measure of gender equity in secondary education in their country of ancestry. Australia is a particularly pertinent case study as it has the third highest migrant (foreign-born) proportion among OECD countries (27.4% of population). We find that children from migrant backgrounds affording lower schooling access to children of their own gender achieve lower scores on PISA reading, mathematics and science tests. This holds when the sample is restricted to children born in Australia, providing strong evidence that the effect is cultural, with further analysis showing this effect to be more pronounced for boys.

Keywords

Migrants Culture Academic performance PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) Gender 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable role of anonymous referees in prompting a fuller consideration of migrant selection effects in our analyses.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Addabbo, T., Davoli, M., & Murat, M. (2018). Is there an immigrant-gender gap in education? An empirical investigation based on PISA data from Italy, Marco Biagi Department of Economics 0124. Modena: University of Modena and Reggio Emilia.Google Scholar
  2. Alesina, A., Giuliano, P., & Nunn, N. (2013). On the origins of gender roles: Women and the plough. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(2), 469–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aloisi, C., & Tymms, P. (2017). PISA trends, social changes, and education reforms. Educational Research and Evaluation, 23(5–6), 180–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Auld, E., & Morris, P. (2016). PISA, policy and persuasion: Translating complex conditions into education ‘best practice’. Comparative Education, 52(2), 202–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bedard, K., & Dhuey, E. (2006). The persistence of early childhood maturity: International evidence of long-run age effects. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(4), 1437–1472.Google Scholar
  6. Benoliel, P., & Berkovich, I. (2017). A cross-national examination of the effect of the Schwartz cultural dimensions of PISA performance assessments. Social Indicators Research, 139, 825–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cattaneo, M., & Wolter, S. (2015). Better migrants, better PISA results: Findings from a natural experiment. IZA Journal of Migration and Development, 4(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  8. Dronkers, J., & Kornder, N. (2014). Do migrant girls perform better than migrant boys? Deviant gender differences between the reading scores of 15-year-old children of migrants compared to native pupils. Educational Research and Evaluation, 20(1), 44–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dronkers, J., & Kornder, N. (2015). Can gender differences in educational performance of 15-year-old migrant pupils be explained by societal gender equality in origin and destination countries? Compare, 45(4), 610–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Entorf, H., & Minoiu, N. (2005). What a difference immigration policy makes: A comparison of PISA scores in Europe and traditional countries of immigration. German Economic Review, 6(3), 355–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fernández, R. (2011). Does culture matter? In J. A. Benhabib, A. Bisin, & M. O. Jackson (Eds.), The handbook of social economics (Vol. 1, pp. 481–510). Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  12. Fernández, R., & Fogli, A. (2005). Culture: An empirical investigation of beliefs, work, and fertility. NBER working paper no. 11268. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
  13. Fernández, R., Fogli, A., & Olivetti, C. (2004). Mothers and sons: Preference formation and female labor force dynamics. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(4), 1249–1299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Figlio, D., Giuliano, P., Özek, U. & Sapienza, P. (2016). Long-term orientation and educational performance. IZA discussion paper no. 10147. Bonn: IZA.Google Scholar
  15. Fleischmann, F., & Kristen, C. (2014). Gender inequalities in the education of the second generation in western countries. Sociology of Education, 87(3), 143–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fryer, R. G., & Levitt, S. D. (2010). An empirical analysis of the gender gap in mathematics. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(2), 210–240.Google Scholar
  17. Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The Pisa “effect” in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guiso, L., Monte, F., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2008). Culture, gender and math. Science, 320(5880), 1164–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does culture affect economic outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), 23–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lewis, S., & Holloway, J. (2019). Datafying the teaching ‘profession’: Remaking the professional teacher in the image of data. Cambridge Journal of Education, 49(1), 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li, I. W., & Miller, P. W. (2009). Academic performance and graduate outcomes: Does age matter? In E. Balistreri & G. DeNino (Eds.), New research in education: Adult, medical and vocational (pp. 1–26). New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons: International comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council of Learner Academies.Google Scholar
  23. Marks, G. (2008). Accounting for gender gaps in student performance in reading and mathematics: Evidence from 31 countries. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marks, G. (2014). Demographic and socioeconomic inequalities in student achievement over the school career. Australian Journal of Education, 58(3), 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nollenberger, N., Rodríguez-Planas, N., & Sevilla, A. (2016). The math gender gap: The role of culture. American Economic Review, 106(5), 257–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2009). PISA data analysis manual: SAS (2nd ed.). Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2016). PISA 2015 results, excellence and equity in education (Vol. 1). Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  28. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2017a). Foreign-born population (indicator). Paris: OECD.  https://doi.org/10.1787/5a368e1b-en.Google Scholar
  29. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2017b). AboutPISA. Paris: OECD. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/.
  30. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2017c). PISA international data explorer. Paris: OECD. http://piaacdataexplorer.oecd.org/ide/idepisa.
  31. Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Portes, A., & MacLeod, D. (1996). Educational progress of children of immigrants: The roles of class, ethnicity, and school context. Sociology of Education, 69(4), 255–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Portes, A., & Rivas, A. (2011). The adaptation of migrant children. The Future of Children, 21(1), 219–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Portes, A., & Zhou, M. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation theory and its variants. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 530, 74–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rautalin, M., Alasuutari, P., & Vento, E. (2018). Globalisation of education policies: Does PISA have an effect? Journal of Education Policy.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2018.1462890.Google Scholar
  36. Selwyn, N. (2018). Data points: Exploring data-driven reforms of education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 39(5), 733–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., & Underwood, C. (2016). PISA 2015: A first look at Australia’s results. Melbourne: Australian Council of Educational Research.Google Scholar
  38. Tienken, C. H. (2017). Understanding PISA results. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 53(1), 6–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Warner, W. L., & Srole, L. (1945). The social systems of American ethnic groups. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  40. World Bank. (2017). School enrolment, secondary (Gross), Gender Parity Index. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ENR.SECO.FM.ZS.

Copyright information

© The Australian Association for Research in Education, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bankwest Curtin Economics CentreCurtin UniversityBentleyAustralia
  2. 2.National Centre for Student Equity in Higher EducationCurtin UniversityBentleyAustralia
  3. 3.School of Population and Global HealthThe University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations