MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405201080 · doi:10.1177/00207152241299093

Child poverty and academic skills at the national level: A longitudinal analysis of four waves of PISA

2024· article· en· W4405201080 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dennis J. Condron, Joseph J. Merry, Talia Samard, Emma Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertySocioeconomic statusPsychologyPolitical scienceAcademic achievementPoliticsDemographic economicsEconomic growthSociologyMathematics educationDevelopmental psychologyEconomicsDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much research has examined school-related sources of cross-national variation in academic skills, but we know far less about the role that broader socioeconomic conditions play. In this study, we examine how nations’ child poverty rates associate with their overall scores on international assessments of academic skills over time. We first establish theoretically why and how child poverty might undermine overall academic skills at the national level. We then use pooled time-series data on 40 nations that participated in four recent waves of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to analyze the impact of changes in child poverty rates on changes in nations’ overall academic skills ( N = 160 nation-years). Two-way fixed-effects models find support for two hypotheses and, to a lesser extent, a third: As child poverty increases within nations over time, (1) mean academic skills decrease, (2) the percentage of low-skilled students increases, and (3) the percentage of high-skilled students decreases (for math only). We conclude by discussing the theoretical and political implications of the findings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207