IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/21885.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

School Achievement of Pupils From the Lower Strata in Public, Private Government-Dependent and Private Government-Independent Schools: A cross-national test of the Coleman-Hoffer thesis

Author

Listed:
  • Corten, Rense
  • Dronkers, J.

Abstract

We consider the question whether pupils from the lower social strata perform better in private government-dependent schools than in public or private-independent schools, using the PISA 2000 data on European high schools. In the eighty’s, Coleman and Hoffer (1987) found in the USA that the performance of these pupils was better at religious schools than at comparable public schools. Dronkers and Robert (2003) found in PISA-data for 19 comparable countries that private government-dependent schools are more effective then comparable public schools, also after controlled for characteristics of pupils and parents and the social composition of the school. The main explanation appeared to be a better school climate in private government-dependent schools. Private independent schools were less effective than comparable public schools, but only after controlling for the social composition of the school. As a follow-up we now investigate, again with the PISA-data of these 19 countries, whether this positive effect of private government-dependent schools differs between pupils from different strata. We use various indicators to measure social strata: social, cultural and economic. We expect that the thesis of Coleman & Hoffer does hold for private government-dependent schools, because in these 19 countries they are mostly religious schools, which have more opportunities to form functional communities and create social capital. But for private independent schools, which due to their commercial foundation are less often functional communities, this relation is not expected to hold. However, the results show that public and private schools have mostly the same effects for the same kind of pupils and thus mostly not favor one kind of pupils above another kind of pupils. But private government-dependent schools are slightly more effective for pupils with less cultural capital. However, private independent schools are also more effective for pupils from large families or low status families.

Suggested Citation

  • Corten, Rense & Dronkers, J., 2005. "School Achievement of Pupils From the Lower Strata in Public, Private Government-Dependent and Private Government-Independent Schools: A cross-national test of the Coleman-Hoffer thesis," MPRA Paper 21885, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:21885
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/21885/1/MPRA_paper_21885.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ganzeboom, H.B.G. & de Graaf, P.M. & Treiman, D.J. & de Leeuw, J., 1992. "A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status," WORC Paper 92.01.001/1, Tilburg University, Work and Organization Research Centre.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dronkers, Jaap & Avram, S, 2009. "A cross-national analysis of the relations between school choice and effectiveness differences between private-dependent and public schools," MPRA Paper 23911, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. M-J Mancebón & J Calero & Á Choi & D P Ximénez-de-Embún, 2012. "The efficiency of public and publicly subsidized high schools in Spain: Evidence from PISA-2006," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 63(11), pages 1516-1533, November.
    3. Mladen Stamenković & Ivan Anić & Marijana Petrović & Nataša Bojković, 2016. "An ELECTRE approach for evaluating secondary education profiles: evidence from PISA survey in Serbia," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 337-358, October.
    4. Hanushek, Eric A. & Woessmann, Ludger, 2011. "The Economics of International Differences in Educational Achievement," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 2, pages 89-200, Elsevier.
    5. Josep-Oriol Escardíbul & Nehal Helmy, 2014. "School Autonomy Impact on the Quality of Education: The case of Tunisia and Jordan," Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación volume 9, in: Adela García Aracil & Isabel Neira Gómez (ed.), Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación 9, edition 1, volume 9, chapter 26, pages 501-514, Asociación de Economía de la Educación.
    6. Josep-Oriol Escardíbul & Nehal Helmy, 2015. "Decentralisation and school autonomy impact on the quality of education: the case of two MENA countries," Working Papers 2015/33, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    7. Jorge Calero & Josep-Oriol Escardíbul, 2007. "Evaluación de servicios educativos: el rendimiento en los centros públicos y privados medido en PISA-2003," Hacienda Pública Española, IEF, vol. 183(4), pages 33-66, december.
    8. Dronkers, J. & Robert, Peter, 2005. "School choice in the light of the effectiveness differences of various types of public and private school in 19 OECD countries," MPRA Paper 21888, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Dimitri Van Maele & Mieke Van Houtte, 2011. "The Quality of School Life: Teacher-Student Trust Relationships and the Organizational School Context," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 100(1), pages 85-100, January.
    10. Raphaela Schlicht & Isabelle Stadelmann-Steffen & Markus Freitag, 2010. "Educational Inequality in the EU," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 29-59, March.
    11. Dronkers, J & Avram, S, 2008. "Choice and Effectiveness of Private and Public Schools in six countries. A reanalysis of three PISA data sets," MPRA Paper 21578, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2009.
    12. Luis Beccaria & Pablo Alfredo Gluzmann, 2013. "Medición de los Ingresos y la Pobreza Oficial en América Latina y el Caribe," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0148, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    13. Jorge Calero & Josep-Oriol Escardíbul, 2007. "Evaluación de servicios educativos: el rendimiento en los centros públicos y privados medido en PISA-2003," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 183(4), pages 33-66, december.
    14. Arnaud Lefranc, 2010. "Unequal Opportunities and Ethnic Origin: The Labor Market Outcomes of Second-Generation Immigrants in France," Post-Print hal-01648185, HAL.
    15. Sebastian Galiani & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2013. "School Management in Developing Countries," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0147, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Clara H. Mulder & Michael Wagner, 2001. "The Connections between Family Formation and First-time Home Ownership in the Context of West Germany and the Netherlands," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 137-164, June.
    2. Ralph Hippe & Maciej Jakubowski & Luisa De Sousa Lobo Borges de Araujo, 2018. "Regional inequalities in PISA: the case of Italy and Spain," JRC Research Reports JRC109057, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    3. Ian Smith, 2012. "Reinterpreting the economics of extramarital affairs," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 319-343, September.
    4. Silke L. Schneider, 2022. "The classification of education in surveys: a generalized framework for ex-post harmonization," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1829-1866, June.
    5. Fenella Fleischmann & Jaap Dronkers, 2010. "Unemployment among immigrants in European labour markets: an analysis of origin and destination effects," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 24(2), pages 337-354, June.
    6. Chiswick, Barry R. & Wang, Zhiling, 2019. "Social Contacts, Dutch Language Proficiency and Immigrant Economic Performance in the Netherlands," GLO Discussion Paper Series 419, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    7. Michele Raitano & Francesco Vona, 2013. "Peer heterogeneity, school tracking and students' performances: evidence from PISA 2006," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(32), pages 4516-4532, November.
    8. Parker, Philip D. & Jerrim, John & Schoon, Ingrid & Marsh, Herbert W., 2016. "A multination study of socioeconomic inequality in expectations for progression to higher education: the role of between-school tracking and ability stratification," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 53(1), pages 6-32.
    9. Antonio Paolo & Aysit Tansel, 2019. "English skills, labour market status and earnings of Turkish women," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 46(4), pages 669-690, November.
    10. Waitkus, Nora & Minkus, Lara, 2021. "Investigating the gender wealth gap across occupational classes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108206, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. repec:iab:iabfme:201204(de is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Rocco Caferra & Alessandro Cascavilla & Andrea Morone, 2022. "Family affairs or Government's duty? The tax morality of a mobile society," Working Papers 2022/09, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    13. Jaap Dronkers & Nils Kornder, 2013. "Can gender differences in the educational performance of 15-year old migrant pupils be explained by the gender equality in the countries of origin and destination?," RF Berlin - CReAM Discussion Paper Series 1307, Rockwool Foundation Berlin (RF Berlin) - Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM).
    14. Michele Raitano & Francesco Vona, 2010. "Peer Heterogeneity, Parental Background and Tracking: Evidence from PISA 2006," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2010-23, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    15. Stephen P. Jenkins & John Micklewright & Sylke V. Schnepf, 2006. "Social segregation in secondary schools: How does England compare with other countries?," Working Papers 27, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    16. Camarero Garcia, Sebastian, 2022. "Inequality of Educational Opportunities and the Role of Learning Intensity," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Gil Viry & Heiko Rüger & Thomas Skora, 2014. "Migration and Long-Distance Commuting Histories and Their Links to Career Achievement in Germany: A Sequence Analysis," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 19(1), pages 78-94, February.
    18. Michele Raitano & Francesco Vona, 2015. "Measuring the link between intergenerational occupational mobility and earnings: evidence from eight European countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 13(1), pages 83-102, March.
    19. Feijten Peteke & Maarten van Ham, 2007. "Residential mobility and migration of the separated," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 17(21), pages 623-654.
    20. Malgorzata Mikucka, 2016. "How to Measure Employment Status and Occupation in Analyses of Survey Data? (Jak mierzyc status zatrudnienia i pozycjê zawodowa w analizach danych sondazowych?)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 14(60), pages 40-60.
    21. David De La Croix & Matthias Doepke, 2009. "To Segregate or to Integrate: Education Politics and Democracy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(2), pages 597-628.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    school choice; private schools; public schools; class differential effect of schools; cross-national comparison; PISA data;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:21885. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.