Advertisement

Higher Education

, Volume 68, Issue 6, pp 851–874 | Cite as

Unfairness in access to higher education: a 11 year comparison of grade inflation by private and public secondary schools in Portugal

  • Gil NataEmail author
  • Maria João Pereira
  • Tiago Neves
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Fairness in access to HE is unarguably a subject of paramount importance. Wherever a student’s secondary school scores are relevant for access to HE, grade inflation practices may jeopardize fair access. Pressures for high grading are common in the context of educational consumerism and competition between schools and students. However, they are not equally distributed across different types of schools, given that they have distinct relationships with the State and the market, and work with distinct populations. Specifically, the schools that are more subject to market pressures (namely private schools) are, in principle at least, the ones with more incentives to inflate their students’ grades. This paper presents an empirical study based on a large, 11 years database on scores in upper secondary education in Portugal, probing for systematic differences in grade inflation practices by four types of schools: public schools, government-dependent private schools, independent (fee-paying) private schools, and specially funded public schools in disadvantaged areas (TEIP schools). More than 3 million valid cases were analysed. Our results clearly show that independent private schools inflate their students’ scores when compared to the other types of schools. They also show that this discrepancy is higher where scores matter most in competition for HE access. This means that—usually wealthier—students from private independent schools benefit from an unfair advantage in the competition for the scarce places available in public higher education. We conclude discussing possible solutions to deal with such an important issue.

Keywords

Access to HE Grade inflation Public and private secondary schooling Educational consumerism 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Supplementary material

10734_2014_9748_MOESM1_ESM.doc (124 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 123 kb)

References

  1. Allen, J. (2005). Grades as valid measures of academic achievement of classroom learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 78(5), 218–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeida, L., Marinho-Araujo, C. M., Amaral, A., & Dias, D. (2012). Democratização do acesso e do sucesso no ensino superior: Uma reflexão a partir das realidades de Portugal e do Brasil. Avaliação: Revista da Avaliação da Educação Superior, 17(03), 899–920.Google Scholar
  3. Amaral, A., & Magalhães, A. (2009). Between institutional competition and the search for equality of opportunities: Access of mature students. Higher Education Policy, 22(4), 505–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avram, S., & Dronkers, J. (2012). Social class dimensions in the selection of private schools a cross-national analysis using PISA. In H. Ullrich & S. Strunck (Eds.), Private Schulen in Deutschland (pp. 201–223). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, S. (2003). Class strategies and the education market: The middle classes and social advantage. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ball, S. J. (2009). Privatising education, privatising education policy, privatising educational research: Network governance and the ‘competition state’. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barroso, J. (2003). Organização e regulação dos ensinos básico e secundário, em Portugal: Sentidos de uma evolução. Educação e Sociedade, 24(82), 63–92.Google Scholar
  8. Blalock, M. (1972). Social statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  9. Brennan, J., & Naidoo, R. (2008). Higher education and the achievement (and/or prevention) of equity and social justice. Higher Education, 56(3), 287–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brighouse, H. (2008). Grade inflation and grade variation:What’s all the fuss about? In L. H. Hunt (Ed.), Grade inflation: Academic standards in higher education (pp. 73–92). New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brinbaum, Y., & Guégnard, C. (2013). Choices and enrollments in French secondary and higher education: Repercussions for second-generation immigrants. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 481–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brunori, P., Peragine, V., & Serlenga, L. (2012). Fairness in education: The Italian university before and after the reform. Economics of Education Review, 31(5), 764–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buisson-Fenet, H., & Draelants, H. (2013). School-linking processes: Describing and explaining their role in the social closure of French elite education. Higher Education, 66, 39–57.Google Scholar
  14. Causa, O., & Johansson, A. (2010). Intergenerational social mobility in OECD countries. OECD Economic Studies, 2010, 1–44.Google Scholar
  15. Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cowger, C. D. (1984). Statistical significance tests: Scientific ritualism or scientific method? Social Service Review, 58(3), 358–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dale, R., & Robertson, S. (2009). Globalisation and Europeanisation in education. Oxford: ERIC.Google Scholar
  18. Duru, M. (1986). Notation et orientation: Quelle cohérence, quelles conséquences? Revue française de pédagogie, 77, 23–37.Google Scholar
  19. Duru-Bellat, M., & Mingat, A. (1988). Le déroulement de la scolarité au collège: le contexte «fait des différences». Revue Française de Sociologie, 29(4), 649–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fonseca, M. P., & Encarnação, S. (2012). O sistema de ensino superior em Portugal em mapas e números. Lisboa: Agência de Avaliação e Acreditação do Ensino Superior.Google Scholar
  21. Frempong, G., Ma, X., & Mensah, J. (2012). Access to postsecondary education: Can schools compensate for socioeconomic disadvantage? Higher Education, 63(1), 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grácio, S. (1998). Ensino privado em Portugal: Contributo para uma discussão. Sociologia - Problemas e Práticas, 27, 129–153.Google Scholar
  23. Heitor, M., & Horta, H. (2012). Science and technology in portugal: From late awakening to the challenge of knowledge-integrated communities. In G. Neave & A. Amaral (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal: 1974–2009 (pp. 179–226). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Horta, H. (2010). The role of the State in the internationalization of universities in catching-up countries: An analysis of the Portuguese higher education system. Higher Education Policy, 23, 63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hunt, L. H. (2008). Grade inflation: Academic standards in higher education. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  26. Justino, D. (2005). No silêncio somos todos iguais. Lisboa: Gradiva.Google Scholar
  27. Konečný, T., Basl, J., Mysliveček, J., & Simonová, N. (2012). Alternative models of entrance exams and access to higher education: The case of the Czech Republic. Higher Education, 63(2), 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leathwood, C. (2004). A critique of institutional inequalities in higher education (or an alternative to hypocrisy for higher educational policy). Theory and Research in Education, 2(1), 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu, A. (2011). Unraveling the myth of meritocracy within the context of US higher education. Higher Education, 62(4), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Magalhães, A., Amaral, A., & Tavares, O. (2009). Equity, access and institutional competition. Tertiary Education and Management, 15(1), 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marginson, S. (2011). Equity, status and freedom: A note on higher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(1), 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martins, P. (2009). Individual teacher incentives, student achievement and grade inflation, IZA discussion paper. Bonn: Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit.Google Scholar
  33. McCloskey, D. N., & Zilliak, S. T. (1996). The standard error of regressions. Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 97–114.Google Scholar
  34. McCowan, T. (2007). Expansion without equity: An analysis of current policy on access to higher education in Brazil. Higher Education, 53(5), 579–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McDonald, P., Pini, B., & Mayes, R. (2012). Organizational rhetoric in the prospectuses of elite private schools: Unpacking strategies of persuasion. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 33(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. MEC. (2012). Relatório TEIP 2010/2011. Lisbon: Ministério da Educação e da Ciência.Google Scholar
  37. Mora, J.-G. (1997). Equity in Spanish higher education. Higher Education, 33, 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mountford-Zimdars, A., & Sabbagh, D. (2013). Fair access to higher education: A comparative perspective. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 359–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. OECD (2008). OECD Reviews of tertiary education: tertiary education for the knowledge society, 1. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. OECD. (2012). Education at a glance 2012: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Portela, M., Areal, N., Sá, C., Alexandre, F., Cerejeira, J., Carvalho, A., et al. (2008). Evaluating student allocation in the Portuguese public higher education system. Higher Education, 56(2), 185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rahona López, M. (2009). Equality of opportunities in Spanish higher education. Higher Education, 58(3), 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rubin, A. (1985). Significance testing with population data. Social Service Review, 59(3), 518–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sadler, D. R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stone, P. (2013). Access to higher education by the luck of the draw. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 577–599.Google Scholar
  46. Suchaut, B. (2008). “La loterie des notes au bac: Un réexamen de l’arbitraire de la notation des élèves.” Les Documents de Travail de l’IREDU—Institut de Recherche sur l’Education Sociologie et Economie de l’Education. Dijon.Google Scholar
  47. Sultana, R. G. (2011). Lifelong guidance, citizen rights and the state: Reclaiming the social contract. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 39(2), 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tavares, O., & Cardoso, S. (2013). Enrolment choices in Portuguese higher education: do students behave as rational consumers? Higher Education, 66, 297–309.Google Scholar
  49. Thompson, B. (2006). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight-based approach. New York: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  50. Torres, C. A. (2009). Education and neoliberal globalization. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Walsh, P. (2010). Does competition among schools encourage grade inflation? Journal of School Choice, 4(2), 149–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wikström, C. (2005). Grade stability in a criterion-referenced grading system: The Swedish example. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12(2), 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wikström, C., & Wikström, M. (2005). Grade inflation and school competition: An empirical analysis based on the Swedish upper secondary schools. Economics of Education Review, 24(3), 309–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2011). The spirit level. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
  55. Willingham, W. W., Pollack, J. M., & Lewis, C. (2002). Test scores: Accounting for observed differences. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39(1), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Woodruff, D. J., & Ziomek, R. L. (2004a). “Differential grading standards among high schools.” ACT Reseach Report Series, 2004–2.Google Scholar
  57. Woodruff, D. J., & Ziomek, R. L. (2004b). “High school grade inflation from 1991 to 2003.” ACT Reseach Report Series, 2004-4.Google Scholar
  58. Zilliak, S. T., & McCloskey, D. N. (2004). Size matters: The standard error of regressions in the American Economic Review. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 527–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CIIE, Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas, Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da EducaçãoUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Universidade PortucalensePortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options