FACTORS PREDICTING SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT OF IMMIGRANT AND NON-IMMIGRANT STUDENTS: A MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS

Article

Abstract

This study, employing hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), sought to investigate the student-level and school-level factors associated with the science achievement of immigrant and non-immigrant students among a national sample of 22,646 students from 896 schools in Canada. While student background characteristics such as home language, family wealth, and socioeconomic status were significant predictors of science achievement for non-immigrant students, these factors were not significantly associated with immigrant student science achievement. Student attitudes, engagement, and motivation in science and information and communication technology familiarity were significant predictors of science achievement for both immigrant and non-immigrant students. Whereas teacher shortage was associated with science achievement for immigrant students, school size was associated with science achievement for non-immigrant students. Implications of the findings are discussed.

Key words

hierarchical linear modeling immigrant students non-immigrant students PISA science achievement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

10763_2012_9369_MOESM1_ESM.docx (23 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 20 kb)

References

  1. Areepattamannil, S. (2012). Effects of inquiry-based science instruction on science achievement and interest in science: Evidence from Qatar. The Journal of Educational Research, 105, 134–146. Google Scholar
  2. Bacharach, V. R., Baumeister, A. A. & Furr, R. M. (2003). Racial and gender science achievement gaps in secondary education. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164, 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker, D. & Scantlebury, K. (Eds.). (1995). Science “coeducation”: Viewpoints from gender, race and ethnic perspectives. Manhattan: National Association of Research in Science Teaching.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, V. & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72, 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berry, B. (2004). Recruiting and retaining highly qualified teachers for hard to staff schools. NASSP Bulletin, 88, 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bong, M. & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradshaw, J., Sturman, L., Vappula, H., Ager, R. & Wheater, R. (2007). Achievement of 15-year-olds in Wales: PISA 2006 national report. Slough: NFER.Google Scholar
  8. Britner, S. L. (2008). Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical, and earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 955–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Britner, S. L. & Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 271–285.Google Scholar
  10. Britner, S. L. & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 485–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burkam, D. T., Lee, V. E. & Smerdon, B. A. (1997). Gender and science learning early in high school: Subject matter and laboratory experiences. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 297–331.Google Scholar
  12. Bussière, P. & Gluszynski, T. (2004). The impact of computer use on reading achievement of 15-year-olds. Ottawa: Human Resources and Skills Development Canada.Google Scholar
  13. Bussière, P., Knighton, T. & Pennock, D. (2007). Measuring up: Canadian results of the OECD PISA study. The performance of Canada’s youth in science, reading, and mathematics. 2006 first results for Canadians aged 15. Ottawa: Human Resources and Social Development Canada.Google Scholar
  14. Chiu, M. (2008). Achievements and self-concepts in a comparison of math and science: Exploring the internal/external frame of reference model across 28 countries. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14, 235–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chiu, M., Pong, S. L., Mori, I. & Chow, B. (2012). Immigrant students’ emotional and cognitive engagement at school: A multilevel analysis of students in 41 countries. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9763-x.
  16. Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W. & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand, and standards: How we can ensure a competent, caring, and qualified teacher for every child. New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
  18. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 166–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1047–1085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1.
  21. Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B. & Thoreson, A. (2001). Does teacher certification matter? Evaluating the evidence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 57–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Darling-Hammond, L. & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for education: The right way to meet the ‘highly qualified teacher’ challenge. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n33/.
  23. Enders, C. K. & Tofighi, D. (2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12, 121–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eurydice (2004). Integrating immigrant children into schools in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice.Google Scholar
  25. Foskett, N. & Hemsley-Brown, J. (2001). Choosing futures: Young people’s decision-making in education, training and careers markets. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fowler, W. J. (1995). School size and student outcomes. Advances in Educational Productivity, 5, 3–26.Google Scholar
  27. Fuligni, A. J. (1997). The academic achievement of adolescents from immigrant families: The roles of family background, attitudes, and behaviour. Child Development, 68, 351–363.Google Scholar
  28. Fuligni, A. J. (1998). The adjustment of children from immigrant families. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fuligni, A. J. & Fuligni, A. S. (2007). Immigrant families and the educational development of their children. In J. E. Lansford, K. Deater-Deckard, & M. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Immigrant families in contemporary society (pp. 231–249). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  30. Haller, E. J., Monk, D. H. & Tien, L. T. (1993). Small schools and higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 9, 66–73.Google Scholar
  31. Hassan, G. (2008). Attitudes toward science among Australian tertiary and secondary school students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 26, 129–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heck, R. H. (2007). Examining the relationship between teacher quality as an organizational property of schools and students’ achievement and growth rates. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 399–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hidi, S., Ainley, M., Berndorff, B. & Del Favero, L. (2006). The role of interest and self-efficacy in science-related expository writing. In S. Hidi & P. Boscolo (Eds.), Motivation and interest in writing (pp. 201–216). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  34. Hofstein, A., Kipnis, M. & Kind, P. (2008). Learning in and from science laboratories: Enhancing students’ metacognition and argumentation skills. In C. L. Petroselli (Ed.), Science education issues and developments (pp. 59–94). New York: Nova Science.Google Scholar
  35. House, J. D. (2000). Relationships between instructional activities and science achievement of adolescent students in Hong Kong: Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). International Journal of Instructional Media, 27, 275–288.Google Scholar
  36. House, J. D. (2008). Science beliefs, instructional strategies, and life sciences achievement in Japan: Results from the TIMSS 1999 assessment. International Journal of Instructional Media, 35, 103–113.Google Scholar
  37. House, J. D. (2009). Classroom instructional strategies and science career interest for adolescent students in Korea: Results from the TIMSS 2003 assessment. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 36, 13–19.Google Scholar
  38. Ireson, J. & Hallam, S. (2009). Academic self-concepts in adolescence: Relations with achievement and ability grouping in schools. Learning and Instruction, 19, 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Johnson, E. G. & Allen, N. L. (1992). The NAEP 1990 technical report. Washington, DC: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  40. Joppke, C. & Morawska, E. (2003). Toward assimilation and citizenship: Immigrants in liberal nation-states. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  41. Judge, S. (2005). The impact of computer technology on academic achievement of young African American children. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20, 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kenyon, L., Schwarz, C. & Hug, B. (2008). The benefits of scientific modeling. Science and Children, 46, 40–44.Google Scholar
  43. Kreft, I. & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  44. Lavonen, J. & Laaksonen, S. (2009). Context of teaching and learning school science in Finland: Reflections on PISA 2006 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 922–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lawson, A. E., Banks, D. L. & Logvin, M. (2007). Self-efficacy, reasoning ability, and achievement in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 706–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lee, V. E., Ready, D. D. & Welner, K. G. (2002). Educational equity and school structure: School size, school overcrowding, and alternative organizational structures. Los Angeles: UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education, & Access (IDEA).Google Scholar
  47. Lytton, H. & Pyryt, M. C. (1998). Predictors of achievement in basic skills: A Canadian effective schools study. Canadian Journal of Education, 23, 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ma, X. (2003). Measuring up: Academic performance of Canadian immigrant children in reading, mathematics, and science. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 4, 541–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Marjoribanks, K. (2003). Birth order, family environments, academic and affective outcomes. Psychological Reports, 92, 1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Martin, A. J., Liem, G. A. D, Mok, M. M. C. & Xu, J. (2012). Problem solving and immigrant student mathematics and science achievement: Multi-nation findings from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0029152.
  51. McLoyd, V. C. (1998). Socioeconomic disadvantage and child development. American Psychologist, 53, 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McNeill, K. L. & Pimentel, D. S. (2009). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94, 203–229.Google Scholar
  53. Miller, L. S. (1995). An American imperative: Accelerating minority educational achievement. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Neber, H. & Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). Self-regulated science learning with highly gifted students: The role of cognitive, motivational, epistemological, and environmental variables. High Ability Studies, 13, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. OECD (2004). Are students ready for a technology rich world? What PISA studies tell us. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  56. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
  57. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2004). PISA 2006 learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
  58. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2006). Where immigrant students succeed—A comparative review of performance and engagement from PISA 2003. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
  59. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2007). PISA 2006 science competencies for tomorrow’s world. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
  60. Osborne, J., Simon, S. & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ozkal, K., Tekkaya, C., Cakiroglu, J. & Sungur, S. (2009). A conceptual model of relationships among constructivist learning environment perceptions, epistemological beliefs, and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Papanastasiou, E. C., Zembylas, M. & Vrasidas, C. (2003). Can computer use hurt science achievement? The USA results from PISA. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 325–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Portes, A. & Rumbaut, R. (1996). Immigrant American: A portrait. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  64. Portes, A. & Rumbaut, R. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  65. Raudenbush, S. W. & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  66. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F. & Congdon, R. (2004). HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software.Google Scholar
  67. Ravitz, J., Mergendoller, J. & Rush, W. (2002, April). What’s school got to do with it? Cautionary tales about correlations between student computer use and academic achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  68. Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A. & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94, 247–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rowan, B., Correnti, R. & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale, survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the “Prospects” study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104, 1525–1567.Google Scholar
  71. Rumburger, R. W. & Larson, K. A. (1998). Student mobility and the increased risk of high school dropout. American Journal of Education, 107, 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W. & Earls, F. ( 1997 ). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 227, 918–923.Google Scholar
  74. Schnepf, S. V. (2006). How different are immigrants? A cross-country and cross-survey analysis of educational achievement. In C. Parsons & T. Smeeding (Eds.), Immigration and the transformation of Europe (pp. 200–234). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Schoon, I. (2001). Teenage job aspirations and career attainment in adulthood: A 17-year follow-up study of teenagers who aspired to become scientists, health professionals, or engineers. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 25, 124–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Schoon, I. & Parsons, S. (2002). Teenage aspirations for future careers and occupational outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 60, 262–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Schoon, I., Ross, A. & Martin, P. (2007) Science related careers: Aspirations and outcomes in two British cohort studies. Equal Opportunities International, 26, 129–143.Google Scholar
  78. Schreiber, J. B. (2002). Institutional and student factors and their influence on advanced mathematics achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95, 274–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sinclair, S., Hardin, C. D. & Lowery, B. S. (2006). Implicit self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 529–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Statistics Canada (2007). Immigration in Canada: A portrait of the foreign-born population, 2006 census. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  81. Statistics Canada (2010). Projections of the diversity of the Canadian population: 2006 to 2031. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  82. Stewart, E. B. (2007). Individual and school structural effects on African American high school students’ academic achievement. The High School Journal, 91, 16–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Stewart, E. B. (2008). School structural characteristics, student effort, peer associations, and parental involvement: The influence of school- and individual-level factors on academic achievement. Education and Urban Society, 40, 179–204.Google Scholar
  84. Tanner, C. K. (2000). The influence of school architecture on academic achievement. Journal of Educational Administration, 38, 309–330.Google Scholar
  85. Thomson, S. & De Bortoli, L. (2007). Exploring scientific literacy: How Australia measures up. Camberwell: ACER.Google Scholar
  86. Tuerk, P. W. (2005). Research in the high-stakes era: Achievement, resources, and no child left behind. Psychological Science, 16, 419–425.Google Scholar
  87. Warren, J. (1996). Educational inequality among White and Mexican-origin adolescents in the American Southwest: 1990. Sociology of Education, 69, 142–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wayne, A. J. & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73, 89–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. White, M. J. & Glick, J. E. (2000). Generation, social capital and the routes out of high school. Sociological Forum, 15, 671–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Willms, J. D. (2003). Ten hypotheses about socioeconomic gradients and community differences in children’s developmental outcomes. Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada.Google Scholar
  91. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J. & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92, 941–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. World Bank (2011). Migration and remittances factbook 2011. Retrieved from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/334934-1199807908806/Top10.pdf.
  93. Wu, M. (2005). The role of plausible values in large-scale surveys. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31, 114–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wu, M. L. & Adams, R. J. (April, 2002). Plausible values: Why they are important. Paper presented at the 11th International Objective Measurement Workshop, New Orleans.Google Scholar
  95. Wu, Y. & Tsai, C. (2005). Development of elementary school students’ cognitive structures and information processing strategies under long-term constructivist-oriented science instruction. Science Education, 89, 822–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Xie, Y. & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science career processes and outcomes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Yoon, C. (2009). Self-regulated learning and instructional factors in the scientific inquiry of scientifically gifted Korean middle school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 203–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of EducationNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations