International Review of Economics

, Volume 64, Issue 1, pp 1–45 | Cite as

Between-classes sorting within schools and test scores: an empirical analysis of Italian junior secondary schools

Research Article
  • 142 Downloads

Abstract

This paper suggests that some Italian junior secondary schools are likely to practise sorting between classes, and proposes an indicator to measure this practice. The impact of “informal” sorting on the students’ achievement is evaluated through an appropriate Instrumental Variables (IV) approach. The results suggest that this practice harms the students’ results in Reading, as measured through standardised test scores. Heterogeneity of this effect is then explored, considering different school types as well as different student characteristics. Overall, practising sorting within schools helps to replicate existing inequality through unequal educational opportunities.

Keywords

Between-classes sorting Instrumental Variables (IV) Educational evaluation Equality 

JEL Classification

I24 I21 J24 

References

  1. Adnett N, Davies P (2005) Competition between or within schools? Re-assessing school choice. Educ Econ 13(1):109–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agasisti T (2011) How competition affects schools’ performances: does specification matter? Econ Lett 110(3):259–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agasisti T, Vittadini G (2012) Regional economic disparities as determinants of students’ achievement in Italy. Res Appl Econ 4(1):33–53Google Scholar
  4. Ammermueller A, Pischke JS (2009) Peer effects in European primary schools: evidence from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study. J Labor Econ 27(3):315–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Angrist JD, Pischke JS (2009) Mostly harmless econometrics. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. Barbieri G, Rossetti C, Sestito P (2011) The determinants of teacher mobility: evidence using Italian teachers’ transfer application. Econ Educ Rev 30(6):1430–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertoni M, Brunello G, Rocco L (2013) When the cat is near, the mice won’t play: the effect of external examiners in Italian schools. J Pub Econ 104:65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borland MV, Howsen RM, Trawick MW (2006) Intra-school competition and student achievement. Appl Econ 38(14):1641–1647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bratti M, Checchi D, Filippin D (2007) Geographical differences in Italian students’ mathematical competencies: evidence from PISA 2003. Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia 66(3):299–333Google Scholar
  10. Brunello G, Checchi D (1997) Does school tracking affect equality of opportunity? New international evidence. Econ Policy 22(52):781–861Google Scholar
  11. Caldas SJ, Bankston C (1997) Effect of school population socioeconomic status on individual academic achievement. J Educ Res 90(5):269–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Campodifiori E, Figura E, Papini M, Ricci R (2010) Un indicatore di status socio-economico-culturale degli allievi della quinta primaria in Italia (An indicator for students’ socio-economic background). INVALSI Working Paper No. 02/2010, INVALSI, Rome (Italy)Google Scholar
  13. Carrell SE, Sacerdote BI, West JE (2013) From natural variation to optimal policy? The importance of endogenous peer group formation. Econometrica 81(3):855–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Checchi D, Flabbi L (2007) Intergenerational mobility and schooling decisions in Germany and Italy: the impact of secondary school tracks. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2876Google Scholar
  15. Collins CA, Gan L (2013) Does sorting students improve scores? an analysis of class composition. NBER Working Paper No. 18848Google Scholar
  16. Condron DJ (2007) Stratification and educational sorting: explaining ascriptive inequalities in early childhood reading group placement. Soc Probl 54(1):139–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Di Liberto A, Schivardi F, Sulis G. (2013) Managerial practices and students’ performance. FGA Working Paper No. 49 (07/2013)Google Scholar
  18. Duflo E, Dupas P, Kremera M (2011) Peer effects teacher incentives, and the impact of tracking: evidence from a randomized evaluation in Kenya. Am Econ Rev 101(5):1739–1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferrer-Esteban G (2011) Beyond the traditional territorial divide in the Italian education system. Effects of system management factors on performance in lower secondary schools. FGA Working Paper No. 42 (12/2011)Google Scholar
  20. Gaviria A, Raphael S (2011) School-based peer effects and juvenile behaviour. Rev Econ Stat 83(2):257–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gorard S, Cheng SC (2011) Pupil clustering in English secondary schools: one pattern or several? Int J Res Method Educ 34(3):327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hanushek EA (2006) Does Educational Tracking Affect Performance and Inequality? Differences-in-differences evidence across countries. Econ J 116(510):C63–C76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hauser RM (1994) Measuring socioeconomic status in studies of child development. Child Dev 65(6):1541–1545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haveman R, Wolfe B (1995) The determinants of children’s attainments: a review of methods and findings. J Econ Lit 33:1829–1878Google Scholar
  25. INVALSI—Istituto nazionale per la valutazione del sistema educativo di istruzione e di formazione (2013) Rilevazioni nazionali sugli apprendimenti 2012/13 (National standardised test scores 2012/13). INVALSI, RomeGoogle Scholar
  26. Kang C (2007) Academic interactions among classroom peers: a cross-country comparison using TIMSS. Appl Econ 39(12):1531–1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marks GN (2011) Issues in the conceptualisation and measurement of socioeconomic background: do different measures generate different conclusions? Soc Indic Res 104(2):225–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mocetti S (2008) Educational choices and the selection process before and after compulsory schooling. Bank of Italy Temi di Discussione, No. 691 Sept 2008Google Scholar
  29. Mullis IVS, Martin MO, Foy P, Arora A (2012) TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, Chestnut HillGoogle Scholar
  30. Oakes J (1986) Keeping track, part 1: the policy and practice of curriculum inequality. Phi Delta Kappa 68(1):12–17Google Scholar
  31. Oakes J (2005) Keeping track: how schools structure inequality, 2nd edn. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  32. Oakes J (2008) Keeping track: structuring equality and inequality in an era of accountability. Teach Coll Rec 110(3):700–712Google Scholar
  33. Perri LB, McConney A (2010) Does the SES of the school matter? An examination of socioeconomic status and student achievement using PISA 2003. Teach Coll Rec 112(4):1137–1162Google Scholar
  34. Poletto S (1992) La formazione delle classi (The process of composing classes). In: Bartolini D (ed) L’uomo—la scuola (man & school). Nuova Dimensione, PortogruaroGoogle Scholar
  35. Polidano C, Hanel B, Buddelmeyer H (2013) Explaining the socio-economic status school completion gap. Educ Econ 21(3):230–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sacerdote B (2011) Peer effects in education: how might they work, how big are they and how much do we know thus far? Handb Econ Educ 3:249–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schneider T (2003) School class composition and student development in cognitive and non-cognitive domains: longitudinal analyses of primary school students in Germany. In: Windzio M (ed) Integration and inequality in educational institutions. Springer, Dordrecht (The Netherlands), pp 167–190Google Scholar
  38. Schulz W (2005) Measuring the socio-economic background of students and Its effect on achievement on PISA 2000 and PISA 2003. Technical ReportGoogle Scholar
  39. Sirin SR (2005) Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a meta-analytic review of research. Rev Educ Res 75(3):417–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Staiger D, Stock JH (1997) Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica 65(3):557–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thapa A, Cohen J, Guffey S, Higgins-D’Alessandro A (2013) A review of school climate research. Rev Educ Res 83(3):357–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vardardottir A (2013) Peer effects and academic achievement: a regression discontinuity analysis. Econ Educ Rev 36(1):108–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management, Economics and Industrial EngineeringPolitecnico di Milano School of ManagementMilanItaly
  2. 2.INVALSIRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations