IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umaror/2020009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is there an opportunity-performance trade-off in secondary education?

Author

Listed:
  • Bles, Per

    (RS: GSBE Theme Learning and Work, ROA / Education and occupational career)

  • van der Velden, Rolf

    (RS: GSBE Theme Learning and Work, ROA / Education and occupational career)

  • Ariës, Roel J.

    (RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research, ROA / Education and occupational career)

Abstract

Schools in secondary education face a dilemma. On the one hand, they would like to offer all students opportunities to develop their talent, and on the other hand they want to safeguard a minimum performance level. In tracked systems, this dilemma becomes more consequential as misallocation of students could lead to either denying access to a more optimal track or to lower performance of students that are placed too high. Based on data from the Netherlands Cohort Study on Education (NCO) from 2010 to 2017, we find that only for 55% of schools there is a trade-off between opportunity and performance. These schools show a relative preference for either opportunity or performance. However, in the other schools, opportunity and performance are optimised at the same time; this dimension is related to the quality of the school. While controlling for the school’s potential student population, we show which school characteristics are associated with the relative preference and quality dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Bles, Per & van der Velden, Rolf & Ariës, Roel J., 2020. "Is there an opportunity-performance trade-off in secondary education?," ROA Research Memorandum 009, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:umaror:2020009
    DOI: 10.26481/umaror.2020009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/50138363/ROA_RM_2020_9.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26481/umaror.2020009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mühlenweg, Andrea Maria, 2007. "Educational Effects of Early or Later Secondary School Tracking in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-079, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Allen, Jim & Bijlsma, Ineke & Borghans, Lex & Poulissen, Davey, 2016. "Schoolkeuzemotieven van ouders en leerlingen in het voortgezet onderwijs," ROA Report 005, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    3. Borghans, By Lex & Diris, Ron & Smits, Wendy & de Vries, Jannes, 2020. "Should we sort it out later? The effect of tracking age on long-run outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    4. R. A. Korthals & J. Dronkers, 2016. "Selection on performance and tracking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(30), pages 2836-2851, June.
    5. Nienke Ruijs & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2019. "School Choice in Amsterdam: Which Schools are Chosen When School Choice is Free?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 14(1), pages 1-30, Winter.
    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. Jacobs, Madelon & van der Velden, Rolf & van Vugt, Lynn, 2021. "Does lowering the bar help? Results from a natural experiment in high-stakes testing in Dutch primary education," Research Memorandum 011, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).

    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. Basteck, Christian & Klaus, Bettina & Kübler, Dorothea, 2021. "How lotteries in school choice help to level the playing field," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 198-237.
    2. Trajkovski, Samantha & Zabel, Jeffrey & Schwartz, Amy Ellen, 2021. "Do school buses make school choice work?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    3. Stans, Renske A., 2022. "Short-run shock, long-run consequences? The impact of grandparental death on educational outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Bach, Maximilian & Fischer, Mira, 2020. "Understanding the Response to High-Stakes Incentives in Primary Education," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 261, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    5. Greaves, Ellen & Turon, Hélène, 2024. "School Choice and Neighborhood Sorting: Equilibrium Consequences of Geographic School Admissions," IZA Discussion Papers 16805, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Thomas van Huizen & Madelon Jacobs & Matthijs Oosterveen, 2024. "Teacher bias or measurement error?," Papers 2401.04200, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    7. Thomas van Huizen, 2021. "Teacher bias or measurement error bias? Evidence from track recommendations," Working Papers 2113, Utrecht School of Economics.
    8. Argaw, Bethlehem A. & Puhani, Patrick A., 2018. "Does class size matter for school tracking outcomes after elementary school? Quasi-experimental evidence using administrative panel data from Germany," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 48-57.
    9. Mari, Gabriele & Keizer, Renske & van Gaalen, Ruben, 2022. "The Timing of Parental Unemployment, Insurance, and Children's Education," SocArXiv 7rm6g, Center for Open Science.
    10. Rodríguez-Álvarez, Carmelo & Romero-Medina, Antonio, 2024. "School choice with transferable student characteristics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 103-124.
    11. Maria Zumbuehl & Nihal Chehber & Rik Dillingh, 2022. "Can skill differences explain the gap in the track recommendation by socio-economic status?," CPB Discussion Paper 439, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    12. Oosterbeek, Hessel & Sóvágó, Sándor & van der Klaauw, Bas, 2021. "Preference heterogeneity and school segregation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    13. Mari, Gabriele, 2023. "Less for more? Cuts to child benefits, family adjustments, and long-run child outcomes in larger families," SocArXiv e3n82, Center for Open Science.
    14. Eva Feron & Trudie Schils & Bas ter Weel, 2016. "Does the Teacher Beat the Test? The Value of the Teacher’s Assessment in Predicting Student Ability," De Economist, Springer, vol. 164(4), pages 391-418, December.
    15. Art Shala & Xhevat Sopi, 2022. "Communication channels consumption across awareness building, information search and school choice - perspectives from the VET sector in Kosovo," Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research, Pro Global Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 109-118, June.
    16. Lee, Kangoh, 2012. "Early selection and moral hazard," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 139-142.
    17. Almudena Moreno Mínguez, 2017. "The Role of Family Policy in Explaining the International Variation in Child Subjective Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 1173-1194, December.
    18. Kangoh Lee, 2015. "Higher education expansion, tracking, and student effort," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 1-22, January.
    19. Elisabeth Grewenig, 2021. "School Track Decisions and Teacher Recommendations: Evidence from German State Reforms," ifo Working Paper Series 353, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance; Financial Aid

    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:unm:umaror:2020009. 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: Andrea Willems or Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/romaanl.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.