IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eaa/eerese/v10y2010i3_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Una Valoracion Del Grado De Segregación Socioeconómica Existente En El Sistema Educativo Español. Un Analisis Por Comunidades Autonómas A Partir De Pisa 2006

Author

Listed:
  • MANCEBÓN TORRUBIA, María Jesús
  • PÉREZ XIMÉNEZ-DE-EMBÚN, Domingo

Abstract

En este artículo se analiza el grado de segregación socioeconómica existente en el sistema educativo español. Para ello se hace uso de los datos suministrados por la tercera evaluación del proyecto PISA llevado a cabo por la OCDE. Se estudia la segregación debida a diferencias entre las características del alumnado que asiste a la enseñanza pública y privada, diferenciando los centros concertados y los no concertados (segregación intersectorial). Asimismo se cuantifica la segregación interna existente en cada uno de los tres sectores educativos (segregación intrasectorial). Los resultados obtenidos apuntan a un grado importante de segregación por motivos socioeconómicos en todas las comunidades autónomas con muestra representativa en PISA 2006. Los alumnos más selectos se concentran mayoritariamente en los centros privados, si bien su reparto entre las diferentes escuelas es bastante heterogéneo, especialmente en la enseñanza privada no concertada. En el sector público, los estudiantes presentan un perfil socioeconómico mucho más homogéneo entre los diversos centros, agrupándose en todos ellos los alumnos pertenecientes a los hogares de menos recursos económicos y culturales y los inmigrantes. This study analyses the degree of socioeconomic segregation in the Spanish educational system. For this purpose, data available from PISA 2006 have been exploited. We identify three different sectors according to ownership and public/private funding: pure private schools, publicly-subsidised private schools and public schools. We examine both inter and intra-sectoral segregation finding empirical evidence that students are not homogenously distributed neither between sectors nor within each sector. Our results point out that more select socioeconomic students are concentrated in private and publicly-subsidised private schools and also account for a very low proportion of immigrants with regard to public schools. Additionally, the comparison of the behaviour between those regions with significant sample sizes in PISA 2006 allows concluding a great homogeneity but some particular segregation patterns in some of these regions.

Suggested Citation

  • MANCEBÓN TORRUBIA, María Jesús & PÉREZ XIMÉNEZ-DE-EMBÚN, Domingo, 2010. "Una Valoracion Del Grado De Segregación Socioeconómica Existente En El Sistema Educativo Español. Un Analisis Por Comunidades Autonómas A Partir De Pisa 2006," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 10(3).
    • Handle: RePEc:eaa:eerese:v:10:y2010:i:3_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usc.es/economet/reviews/eers1038.pdf
    Download Restriction: No.
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D. N. Figlio & J. A. Stone, "undated". "School Choice and Student Performance: Are Private Schools Really Better?," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1141-97, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    2. Eric A. Hanushek & Ludger Wössmann, 2006. "Does Educational Tracking Affect Performance and Inequality? Differences- in-Differences Evidence Across Countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(510), pages 63-76, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Li, Mingliang, 2009. "Is there "white flight" into private schools? New evidence from High School and Beyond," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 382-392, June.
    5. Dee, Thomas S. & Fu, Helen, 2004. "Do charter schools skim students or drain resources?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 259-271, June.
    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. Krüger, N., 2011. "The Segmentation of the Argentine Education System: Evidence from PISA 2009," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 11(3).

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. Antonio Di Paolo, 2012. "Parental Education And Family Characteristics: Educational Opportunities Across Cohorts In Italy And Spain," Revista de Economia Aplicada, Universidad de Zaragoza, Departamento de Estructura Economica y Economia Publica, vol. 20(1), pages 119-146, Spring.
    5. John Jerrim, 2014. "The link between family background and later lifetime income: how does the UK compare to other countries?," DoQSS Working Papers 14-02, Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London.
    6. Dronkers, J. & van der Velden, R.K.W. & Dunne, A., 2011. "The effects of educational systems, school-composition, track-level, parental background and immigrants' origin on the achievement of 15-years old native and immigrant students : a reanalysis of PISA ," ROA Research Memorandum 006, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    7. Gottschling, J. & Hahn, E. & Beam, C.R. & Spinath, F.M. & Carroll, S. & Turkheimer, E., 2019. "Socioeconomic status amplifies genetic effects in middle childhood in a large German twin sample," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 20-27.
    8. Gabriela Schütz & Heinrich W. Ursprung & Ludger Wößmann, 2008. "Education Policy and Equality of Opportunity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 279-308, May.
    9. Marchionni, Mariana & Vazquez, Emmanuel & Pinto, Florencia, 2012. "Desigualdad educativa en la Argentina. Análisis en base a los datos PISA 2009 [Education Inequality in Argentina. An analysis based on PISA 2009 data]," MPRA Paper 56420, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Mancebón-Torrubia, María Jesús & Ximénez-de-Embún, Domingo Pérez, 2009. "Spanish publicly-subsidised private schools and equality of school choice," MPRA Paper 21164, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Maciej Jakubowski, 2015. "Latent variables and propensity score matching: a simulation study with application to data from the Programme for International Student Assessment in Poland," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1287-1325, May.
    12. M J Mancebón & M A Muñiz, 2008. "Private versus public high schools in Spain: disentangling managerial and programme efficiencies," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(7), pages 892-901, July.
    13. Jaap Dronkers & Rolf van der Velden & Allison Dunne, 2012. "Why are migrant students better off in certain types of educational systems or schools than in others? On the effects of educational systems, school composition, track level, parental background, and ," RF Berlin - CReAM Discussion Paper Series 1215, Rockwool Foundation Berlin (RF Berlin) - Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM).
    14. Elke Lüdemann, 2011. "Schooling and the Formation of Cognitive and Non-cognitive Outcomes," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 39.
    15. Marchionni, Mariana & Pinto, Florencia & Vazquez, Emmanuel, 2013. "Determinantes de la desigualdad en el desempeño educativo en la Argentina [Determinants of the inequality in PISA test scores in Argentina]," MPRA Paper 56421, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Lefebvre, Pierre & Merrigan, Philip & Verstraete, Matthieu, 2011. "Public subsidies to private schools do make a difference for achievement in mathematics: Longitudinal evidence from Canada," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 79-98, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    19. van Elk, Roel & van der Steeg, Marc & Webbink, Dinand, 2011. "Does the timing of tracking affect higher education completion?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 1009-1021, October.
    20. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Zohal Hessami, 2012. "Public education spending in a globalized world:," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(5), pages 677-707, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    socioeconomic segregation; private versus public and publicly subsidised private schools; autonomous communities; PISA; equity. segregación socioeconómica; escuelas públicas; privadas y concertadas; rendimiento escolar; comunidades autónomas; PISA; equidad.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I29 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Other
    • R19 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Other

    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:eaa:eerese:v:10:y2010:i:3_8. 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: M. Carmen Guisan (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.usc.es/economet/eaa.htm .

    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.