IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fce/doctra/1117.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing students'equality of opportunity in OECD countries : the role of national and school-level policies

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This paper analyses the relationship between equality of opportunities and characteristics of the educational systems, jointly considering country- and school-level features. Because the peer group composition represents a fundamental channel in shaping educational opportunities, we consider all policies, surveyed in the PISA 2006 dataset, that affect the sorting of students to schools. Our empirical analysis shows that the inclusion of sorting policies enhances the capacity of explaining the determinants of the socio-economic gradient with respect to previous studies including only countrylevel features. In particular, it casts doubts on the prominent role attributed to school tracking. However sorting policies do not fully account for the influence of school composition on the socioeconomic gradient; the direct inclusion of peer variables allows to highlight the equalizing impact of mixing students from different backgrounds. Among the other policies, also pre-school enrolment, public expenditure in education and ability tracking display a significant equalizing effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Michele Raitano & Francesco Vona, 2011. "Assessing students'equality of opportunity in OECD countries : the role of national and school-level policies," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2011-17, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    • Handle: RePEc:fce:doctra:1117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ofce.sciences-po.fr/pdf/dtravail/WP2011-17.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Epple, Dennis & Newlon, Elizabeth & Romano, Richard, 2002. "Ability tracking, school competition, and the distribution of educational benefits," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 1-48, January.
    2. Giorgio Brunello & Daniele Checchi, 2007. "Does school tracking affect equality of opportunity? New international evidence [‘Educational opportunities and the role of institutions’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 22(52), pages 782-861.
    3. Laura M. Argys & Daniel I. Rees & Dominic J. Brewer, 1996. "Detracking America's schools: Equity at zero cost?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 623-645.
    4. de Bartolome, Charles A M, 1990. "Equilibrium and Inefficiency in a Community Model with Peer Group Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(1), pages 110-133, February.
    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. Giuseppe Coco & Raffaele Lagravinese & Giuliano Resce, 2020. "Beyond the weights: a multicriteria approach to evaluate inequality in education," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 18(4), pages 469-489, December.
    2. Paolo Liberati & Raffaele Lagravinese & Giuliano Resce, 2017. "How Does Economic Social And Cultural Status Affect The Efficiency Of Educational Attainments? A Comparative Analysis On Pisa Results," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0217, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    3. Catherine Haeck & Pierre Lefebvre, 2020. "The Evolution of Cognitive Skills Inequalities by Socioeconomic Status across Canada," Working Papers 20-04, Research Group on Human Capital, University of Quebec in Montreal's School of Management.
    4. Sulis, Isabella & Giambona, Francesca & Porcu, Mariano, 2020. "Adjusted indicators of quality and equity for monitoring the education systems over time. Insights on EU15 countries from PISA surveys," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    5. Ishizaka, Alessio & Resce, Giuliano, 2021. "Best-Worst PROMETHEE method for evaluating school performance in the OECD's PISA project," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    6. Lagravinese, Raffaele & Liberati, Paolo & Resce, Giuliano, 2020. "The impact of economic, social and cultural conditions on educational attainments," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 112-132.

    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. Marisa Hidalgo-Hidalgo, 2007. "On the optimal allocation of students when peer effect works: Tracking vs Mixing," Working Papers 07.14, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    2. 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.
    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. Marc Piopiunik, 2021. "How Does Reducing the Intensity of Tracking Affect Student Achievement? Evidence from German State Reforms," CESifo Working Paper Series 9214, CESifo.
    5. Zoltan Hermann, 2013. "Are you on the right track? The effect of educational tracks on student achievement in upper-secondary education in Hungary," Budapest Working Papers on the Labour Market 1316, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    6. Ehlers, Tim & Schwager, Robert, 2016. "Academic achievement and tracking: A theory based on grading standards," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 289, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. De Fraja, Gianni & Martínez-Mora, Francisco, 2014. "The desegregating effect of school tracking," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 164-177.
    8. Lefgren, Lars, 2004. "Educational peer effects and the Chicago public schools," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 169-191, September.
    9. Betts, Julian R., 2011. "The Economics of Tracking in Education," 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 7, pages 341-381, Elsevier.
    10. Volker Meier & Gabriela Schütz, 2007. "The Economics of Tracking and Non-Tracking," ifo Working Paper Series 50, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    11. Marisa Hidalgo, 2005. "Peer Group Effects And Optimal Education System," Working Papers. Serie AD 2005-12, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    12. Kang, Changhui, 2007. "Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Quasi-randomization evidence from South Korea," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 458-495, May.
    13. Ron W Zimmer & Eugenia F Toma, 2000. "Peer effects in private and public schools across countries," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 75-92.
    14. Mary A. Burke & Tim R. Sass, 2013. "Classroom Peer Effects and Student Achievement," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 51-82.
    15. Dennis N. Epple & Richard Romano, 2003. "Neighborhood Schools, Choice, and the Distribution of Educational Benefits," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of School Choice, pages 227-286, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Andreas Ammermueller, 2013. "Institutional Features of Schooling Systems and Educational Inequality: Cross-Country Evidence From PIRLS and PISA," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 14(2), pages 190-213, May.
    17. Cummins, Joseph R., 2017. "Heterogeneous treatment effects in the low track: Revisiting the Kenyan primary school experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 40-51.
    18. Epple, Dennis & Figlio, David & Romano, Richard, 2004. "Competition between private and public schools: testing stratification and pricing predictions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1215-1245, July.
    19. Roel van Elk & Marc van der Steeg & Dinand Webbink, 2009. "The effect of early tracking on participation in higher education," CPB Document 182.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    20. Adnett, Nick & Bougheas, Spiros & Davies, Peter, 2002. "Market-based reforms of public schooling: some unpleasant dynamics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 323-330, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    School composition; equality of opportunity; sorting and tracking policies; family background;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • H52 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Education

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fce:doctra:1117. 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: Francesco Saraceno (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ofcspfr.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.