Dimensiones del resultado académico en la Prueba de Acceso a la Universidad en España

Resumen:El presente estudio analiza las diferencias de los resultados educativos obtenidos en la Prueba de Acceso a la Universidad (PAU) entre comunidades autónomas, así como sus determinantes con el fin de conseguir una mejora en los resultados y en la equidad entre comunidades. El interés siempre presente por intentar mejorar los resultados educativos ha generado numerosas aportaciones sobre sus variables determinantes. Este trabajo presenta una revisión de los principales indicadores considerados y propone una regresión que determina la influencia significativa de variables representativas de ámbitos como la escolarización, el entorno educativo, la financiación educativa y la localización.Abstract:This study analyzes the differences in educational results obtained in the university access exam (PAU) between autonomous communities and their determinants in order to achieve an improvement in the results and the equity between communities. Existing interest to improve educational outcomes has generated numerous contributions on its determinant variables. This paper presents a review of the main indicators considered and proposes a regression that determines the significant influence of variables representing areas such as schooling, the educational environment, educational funding and location. This involves addressing two specific objectives. The first focuses on studying the different variables that could be used to approximate educational outcomes, and the relationships between them. The variables that approximate the educational outcome in this study are the following: the pass rate in PAU (PA), the average score on PAU (N), the average grade of the students approved PAU (NA) and the respective middle notes and middle notes of each community approved in Mathematics II (NM and NAM) in Spanish Language and Literature (NL and NAL) and Physics (NF and NAF) in PAU. The choice of subjects, far from being arbitrary, aims collect competences typically considered in the PISA assessment, which aims to compare learning outcomes between countries and regions. On other hand, the second objective seeks know the significance of the influence of a number of factors associated with academic performance that have been grouped into four dimensions: the socio-economic level of the community, the characteristics of the school, the student profile and the geographical location of the community. For this purpose, the following hypotheses to test are defined: Hypothesis 1: The socio-economic level of the autonomous community does not affect the educational results obtained by students in PAU. Hypothesis 2: The characteristics of schools in the autonomous communities do not influence the educational results obtained by students in PAU. Hypothesis 3: The profile of students does not influence the educational results obtained by students in an autonomous community in PAU. Hypothesis 4: The geographical location of an autonomous community does not affect the educational results obtained by students in PAU. Each of these dimensions is approximated by different contextual variables. In the first dimension, the variables used are public spending per student in non university education (GA) and household income (R) in euros and, finally, the Gini index (GI) as percentage. In the second dimension, the percentage of publicly owned centers that teach high school (TP) and the number of students per teacher (AP) are collected. The dimension referred to students contemplates the percentage of foreign students (Ex) and repeaters (Rep). Finally, the geographical location is characterized by a qualitative variable with value 0 for northern communities and value 1 for the southern communities. Communities that stand out for a higher socioeconomic status measured by the three contextual variables are Navarra and País Vasco. Moreover, Andalucía, Castilla La Mancha and Murcia have opposite distributions characterized by lower socio-economic levels. Some of these communities have been previously identified by having low (Andalucía) and high results (País Vasco). As to the ownership of center, it presents a low dispersion of percentages. Among the communities with lowest percentage of public centers are high results both communities (País Vasco) and low (Asturias). Among the highest percentage include both Andalucía, with low results, such as Canarias with high. The variable that shows the number of students per teacher ranks Islas Baleares, Cataluña, Madrid and La Rioja below the first quartile, while Islas Canarias, Castilla La Mancha, Extremadura, Navarra and País Vasco beyond the third, which also involves a distribution heterogeneous as to result. Finally, among the variables of student profile, the percentage of foreign students has very high dispersion, placing Andalucía, Cataluña, Madrid and Valencia, noted for its high scores, in the top quartile with much higher percentages than the rest. The percentage of repeaters with a much less scattered distribution, ranks Andalucía, Baleares, Castilla y León, Castilla La Mancha and Murcia with levels above the third quartile. The analysis of the results of the PAU test has confirmed the existence of differences by region. In addition, the explanatory power of a number of contextual variables on the heterogeneity of educational outcomes is demonstrated. It is concluded that communities with higher socioeconomic status and those located geographically in the south, reach higher educational outcomes. Other specific characteristics of schools and students and public ownership of the first or the number of foreigners in class also positively influence the pass rate of PAU. As stated the Report 2015 on the state of the education system, it would ensure the approval of the basic conditions under which the constitutional right to education is exercised throughout Spain. The establishment of mechanisms for compensation or leveling is recommended in the framework of the Sectoral Conference on Education, to correct the existing educational deficits under the new financing system of the autonomous communities. While this study shows that these compensation mechanisms should preferably be directed towards equity in socio-economic terms through better distribution of income between communities and within each community. Similarly, is important the involvement of public funding in education through the creation and maintenance of public centers, improving the conditions of teachers, reducing the ratio of students per teacher and projecting development integration of foreign students in the classroom.