Advertisement

PROSPECTS

, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp 325–343 | Cite as

Educational outcomes and socioeconomic status: A decomposition analysis for middle-income countries

  • Sandra Nieto
  • Raúl Ramos
Open File

Abstract

This article analyzes the factors that explain the gap in educational outcomes between the top and bottom quartile of students in different countries, according to their socioeconomic status. To do so, it uses PISA microdata for 10 middle-income and 2 high-income countries, and applies the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition method. Its results show that students’ individual variables only explain differences in high-income countries; meanwhile, school and teacher quality, and better practices, matter even in different institutional settings. From a policy perspective, this evidence supports actions to improve school and teacher quality in order to reduce cross-country differences and differences between students at the top and bottom of socioeconomic distribution.

Keywords

Educational outcomes Socioeconomic status PISA Decomposition methods Middle-income countries 

References

  1. Ammermueller, A. (2007). PISA: What makes the difference? Explaining the gap in test scores between Finland and Germany. Empirical Economics, 33(2), 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ammermueller, A., Heijke, H., & Woessmann, L. (2005). Schooling quality in Eastern Europe: Educational production during transition. Economics of Education Review, 24, 579–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arum, R. (2000). Schools and communities: Ecological and institutional dimensions. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 395–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baird, K. (2012). Class in the classroom: The relationship between school resources and math performance among low socioeconomic status students in 19 rich countries. Education Economics, 20(5), 484–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnett, R. R., Glass, J. C., Snowdon, R. I., & Stringer, K. S. (2002). Size, performance and effectiveness: Cost-constrained measures of best-practice performance and secondary-school size. Education Economics, 10(3), 291–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bishop, J. H., & Woessmann, L. (2004). Institutional effects in a simple model of educational production. Education Economics, 12, 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blinder, A. S. (1973). Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural variables. Journal of Human Resources, 8, 436–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boarini, R., & Lüdemann, E. (2009). The role of teacher compensation and selected accountability policies for learning outcomes: An empirical analysis for OECD countries. Revue économique de l'OCDE, 2009(1), 211–230.Google Scholar
  9. Burger, R. (2011). School effectiveness in Zambia: The origins of differences between rural and urban outcomes. Development Southern Africa, 28(2), 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chiswick, B. R., & DebBurman, N. (2004). Educational attainment: Analysis by immigrant generation. Economics of Education Review, 23, 361–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coleman, J. S., & Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and private high schools: The impact of communities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  12. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.Google Scholar
  13. Dolton, P., & Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O. D. (2011). If you pay peanuts do you get monkeys? A cross-country analysis of teacher pay and pupil performance. Economic Policy, 26(65), 5–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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, 3, 355–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fay, R. E. (1989). Theoretical application of weighting for variance calculation. In Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research (pp. 212–217). Alexandria: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
  16. Feinstein, L., & Symons, J. (1999). Attainment in secondary education. Oxford Economic Papers, 51, 300–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferreira, F., & Gignoux, J. (2011). The measurement of educational inequality: Achievement and opportunity. Discussion paper. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fertig, M. (2003). Who’s to blame? The determinants of German students’ achievement in the PISA 2000 study. Discussion paper. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.Google Scholar
  19. Frenette, M. (2007). Are youth from lower-income families less likely to attend university? Evidence from academic abilities, parental influence, and financial constraints. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Ministry of Industry.Google Scholar
  20. Fuchs, T., & Woessmann, L. (2007). What accounts for international differences in student performance? A re-examination using PISA data. Empirical Economics, 32(2–3), 433–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hanushek, E. A. (1986). The economics of schooling. Journal of Economic Literature, 24, 1141–1177.Google Scholar
  22. Hanushek, E. A. (2003). The failure of input based schooling policies. Economic Journal, 113, 64–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanushek, E. A., & Luque, J. A. (2003). Efficiency and equity in schools around the world. Economics of Education Review, 22, 481–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., Markman, J. M., & Rivkin, S. G. (2003). Does peer ability affect student achievement? Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18, 527–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2011a). How much do educational outcomes matter in OECD countries? Economic Policy, 26(67), 427–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2011b). The economics of international differences in educational achievement. In E. A. Hanushek, S. Machin, & L. Woessmann (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education, vol. 3 (pp. 89–200). Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  27. Haveman, R., & Wolfe, B. (1995). The determinants of children’s attainment: A review of methods and findings. Journal of Economics Literature, 33(4), 1829–1878.Google Scholar
  28. Heyneman, S. P., & Loxley, W. A. (1983). The distribution of primary school quality within high- and low-income countries. Comparative Education Review, 27(1), 108–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krueger, A. B. (2003). Economics considerations and class size. Economic Journal, 113, 34–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee, J.-S. (2012). The effects of the teacher-student relationship and academic press on student engagement and academic performance. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 330–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marks, G. N. (2008). Accounting for the gender gaps in student performance in reading and mathematics: Evidence from 31 countries. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meunier, M. (2011). Immigration and student achievement: Evidence from Switzerland. Economics of Education Review, 30(1), 16–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mislevy, R. J., & Sheehan, K. M. (1987). Marginal estimation procedures. In A. E. Beaton (Ed.), The NAEP 1983–84 technical report, National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 293–360). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  34. Mislevy, R. J., & Sheehan, K. M. (1989). Information matrices in latent-variable models. Journal of Educational Statistics, 14, 335–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nieto, S., & Ramos, R. (2013). Decomposition of differences in PISA results in middle-income countries. Background paper for the 2013 Education for All Global Monitoring Report. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  36. Noell, J. (1982). Public and Catholic schools: A re-analysis of public and private schools. Sociology of Education, 55, 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ñopo, H. (2008). An extension of the Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition to a continuum of comparison groups. Economics Letters, 100, 292–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oaxaca, R. (1973). Male–female wage differentials in urban labor markets. International Economic Review, 14(3), 139–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. OECD [Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development] (2009). Technical report 2006. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  40. OECD (2010). PISA 2009 results: Overcoming social background—Equity in learning opportunities and outcomes, vol. 2. doi: 10.1787/9789264091504-en.
  41. Opdenakker, M. C., & Van Damme, J. (2006). Differences between secondary schools: A study about school context, group composition, school practice, and school effects with special attention to public and Catholic schools and types of schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(1), 87–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ramos, R., Duque, J. C., & Nieto, S. (2012). Decomposing the rural-urban differential in student achievement in Colombia using PISA microdata. Discussion paper. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.Google Scholar
  43. Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sander, W. (1996). Catholic grade schools and academic achievement. Journal of Human Resources, 31(3), 540–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Somers, M. A., McEwan, P. J., & Willms, J. D. (2004). How effective are private schools in Latin America? Comparative Education Review, 48(1), 48–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith, J., & Naylor, R. A. (2005). Schooling effects on subsequent university performance: Evidence for the UK university population. Economics of Education Review, 24, 549–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stevans, L. K., & Sessions, D. N. (2000). Private/public school choice and student performance revisited. Education Economics, 8(2), 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ulrick, S. W. (2012). The Oaxaca decomposition generalized to a continuous group variable. Economics Letters, 115, 35–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vandernberghe, V., & Robin, S. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of private education across countries: A comparison of methods. Labor Economics, 11(4), 487–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Woessmann, L. (2010). Families, schools, and primary-school learning: Evidence for Argentina and Colombia in an international perspective. Applied Economics, 42(21), 2645–2665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Woessmann, L. (2011). Cross-country evidence on teacher performance pay. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 404–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhang, L., & Lee, K. A. (2011). Decomposing achievement gaps among OECD countries. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(3), 463–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© UNESCO IBE 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.AQR-IREAUniversity of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations