MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W77903994 · doi:10.1177/016146811011200408

School Composition and Contextual Effects on Student Outcomes

2010· article· en· W77903994 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueTeachers College Record The Voice of Scholarship in Education · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSchool Choice and Performance
Établissements canadiensUniversity of New Brunswick
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSocioeconomic statusContext (archaeology)Proxy (statistics)Composition (language)Mathematics educationPsychologyLiteracyAcademic achievementDevelopmental psychologyPopulationPedagogyGeographySociologyDemographyMathematicsStatistics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background Findings from several international studies have shown that there is a significant relationship between literacy skills and socioeconomic status (SES). Research has also shown that schools differ considerably in their student outcomes, even after taking account of students’ ability and family background. The context or learning environment of a school or classroom is an important determinant of the rate at which children learn. The literature has traditionally used school composition, particularly the mean SES of the school, as a proxy for context. Focus of Study This study examines the relationships among school composition, several aspects of school and classroom context, and students’ literacy skills in science. Population The study uses data from the 2006 PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) for 57 countries. PISA assesses the knowledge and life skills of 15-year-old youth as they approach the end of their compulsory period of schooling. Research Design Secondary analyses of the data describe the socioeconomic gradient (the relationship between a student outcome and SES) and the school profile (the relationship between average school performance and school composition) using data for the United States as an example. The analyses demonstrate two important relationships between school composition and the socioeconomic gradient and distinguish between two types of segregation, referred to as horizontal and vertical segregation. The analyses discern the extent to which school composition and classroom and school context separately and jointly account for variation in student achievement. Findings The results show that school composition is correlated with several aspects of school and classroom context and that these factors are associated with students’ science literacy. Literacy performance is associated with the extent to which school systems are segregated “horizontally,” based on the distribution among schools of students from differing SES backgrounds, and “vertically,” due mainly to mechanisms that select students into different types of schools. Conclusions An understanding of socioeconomic gradients and school profiles for a school system is critical to discerning whether reform efforts should be directed mainly at improving the performance of particular schools or at striving to alter policies and practices within all schools. Both horizontal and vertical segregation are associated with lower student outcomes; therefore, we require a better understanding of the mechanisms through which students are allocated to schools. When the correlation of school composition with a particular contextual variable is strong, it calls for policies aimed at increasing inclusion or differentially allocating school and classroom resources among schools serving students of differing status.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,028
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,409

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,350
Écart entre enseignants0,330 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle