ACER eNews


Disadvantage in Australian schools The 2009 OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Australian report: Challenges for Australian Education publishes PISA results broken down and analysed by school sector for the first time. The raw results show that students in government schools are outperformed by those in Catholic schools, and students in Catholic schools are, in turn, outperformed by those in independent schools. These results will not surprise anyone – scans of scores from other tests show similar results. The relative performance of the three school sectors is not the issue, but there are three questions that form the centre of the debate: How much of these differences are based on what the students bring to school with them? How much does the home influence student achievement? How much does a school – or a school sector – influence the achievement of its students? The latest results from PISA suggest a student’s socioeconomic background and the socioeconomic background of a school make a big difference to student achievement. While the primary focus of PISA is assessment in reading, mathematical and scientific literacy, a great deal of background information is also collected from students and schools. The background information gathered from students is used to develop the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS), which is used by the OECD and in PISA analyses as a proxy for socioeconomic status. In Australia, a random sample of approximately 50 15-year-old students is taken in each school, so the group average of the student socioeconomic status provides a good estimate of the socioeconomic background of the students’ peer group. Based on the relationship in Australia between socioeconomic background as defined above and performance, Australia has in the previous two cycles of PISA been described as high quality/high equity. However, in the latest cycle of PISA the level of equity was similar to that over the OECD on average, which places Australia as high quality but only average equity. The impact of socioeconomic background on performance however is a little stronger in Australia than on average across the OECD. In terms of score points, scores on reading literacy are 46 points higher for each extra unit on the ESCS index, whereas for the OECD this increase is only 38 score points. Furthermore, PISA data show that peer groups of students in government, Catholic and independent schools are quite different. The socioeconomic background of around 16 per cent of students in Catholic schools, 10 per cent of students in independent schools, and 35 per cent of students in government schools is from the lowest quartile. At the other end of the scale, almost 30 per cent of students in Catholic schools, almost 50 per cent of students in independent schools, and 16 per cent of students in government schools are drawn from the highest socioeconomic quartile. The 2009 PISA report examined average achievement for each socioeconomic quartile and found that there was a difference in scores between students in the highest and lowest socioeconomic quartile that equated to almost three full years of schooling. If there are such large differences in the socioeconomic profile of government, Catholic and independent sectors, then surely this goes a long way in explaining the performance differences between sectors. The Australian PISA report examines the achievement scores recognising the effects not only of the student’s own socioeconomic background but also that of the school they attend. After these adjustments, the scores that result are those which might be obtained, for example, by students from similar socioeconomic backgrounds attending different types of schools. After the adjustment there was no significant difference found in the average scores of students in government, Catholic and independent schools. In other words, students in the independent or Catholic school sectors can bring with them an advantage from their socioeconomic background that is not as strongly characteristic of students in the government school sector. The OECD notes that “private schools may realise their advantage not only from the socioeconomic advantage that students bring with them, but even more so because their combined socioeconomic intake allows them to create a learning environment that is more conducive to learning”. The advantage gained from this combined socioeconomic intake can be both direct (in terms of more support of learning from home; more exposure to a variety of texts; higher levels of aspirations) and indirect (enabling schools which charge fees the opportunity to offer a range of more personalised supports to students; attract more talented and motivated teachers; and develop a general school climate that is oriented towards higher performance). While socioeconomic background should not be a deterministic factor in student performance, it is an important one. « Back to eNews
Copyright © Australian Council for Educational Research 2013 All rights reserved. Except under the conditions described in the Copyright Act 1968 of Australia and subsequent amendments, no part of this electronic publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without written permission. Please address any requests to reproduce information to communications@acer.edu.au Subscribe Unsubscribe Australian Council for Educational Research Private Bag 55, Camberwell, Victoria Australia 3124 Tel: + 61 3 9277 5555 Fax: + 61 3 9277 5500 Web: www.acer.edu.au

The 2009 OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Australian report: Challenges for Australian Education publishes PISA results broken down and analysed by school sector for the first time. The raw results show that students in government schools are outperformed by those in Catholic schools, and students in Catholic schools are, in turn, outperformed by those in independent schools.

These results will not surprise anyone – scans of scores from other tests show similar results. The relative performance of the three school sectors is not the issue, but there are three questions that form the centre of the debate: How much of these differences are based on what the students bring to school with them? How much does the home influence student achievement? How much does a school – or a school sector – influence the achievement of its students? The latest results from PISA suggest a student’s socioeconomic background and the socioeconomic background of a school make a big difference to student achievement.

While the primary focus of PISA is assessment in reading, mathematical and scientific literacy, a great deal of background information is also collected from students and schools. The background information gathered from students is used to develop the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS), which is used by the OECD and in PISA analyses as a proxy for socioeconomic status. In Australia, a random sample of approximately 50 15-year-old students is taken in each school, so the group average of the student socioeconomic status provides a good estimate of the socioeconomic background of the students’ peer group.

Based on the relationship in Australia between socioeconomic background as defined above and performance, Australia has in the previous two cycles of PISA been described as high quality/high equity. However, in the latest cycle of PISA the level of equity was similar to that over the OECD on average, which places Australia as high quality but only average equity.

The impact of socioeconomic background on performance however is a little stronger in Australia than on average across the OECD. In terms of score points, scores on reading literacy are 46 points higher for each extra unit on the ESCS index, whereas for the OECD this increase is only 38 score points.

Furthermore, PISA data show that peer groups of students in government, Catholic and independent schools are quite different. The socioeconomic background of around 16 per cent of students in Catholic schools, 10 per cent of students in independent schools, and 35 per cent of students in government schools is from the lowest quartile. At the other end of the scale, almost 30 per cent of students in Catholic schools, almost 50 per cent of students in independent schools, and 16 per cent of students in government schools are drawn from the highest socioeconomic quartile. The 2009 PISA report examined average achievement for each socioeconomic quartile and found that there was a difference in scores between students in the highest and lowest socioeconomic quartile that equated to almost three full years of schooling.

If there are such large differences in the socioeconomic profile of government, Catholic and independent sectors, then surely this goes a long way in explaining the performance differences between sectors. The Australian PISA report examines the achievement scores recognising the effects not only of the student’s own socioeconomic background but also that of the school they attend. After these adjustments, the scores that result are those which might be obtained, for example, by students from similar socioeconomic backgrounds attending different types of schools.

After the adjustment there was no significant difference found in the average scores of students in government, Catholic and independent schools. In other words, students in the independent or Catholic school sectors can bring with them an advantage from their socioeconomic background that is not as strongly characteristic of students in the government school sector.

The OECD notes that “private schools may realise their advantage not only from the socioeconomic advantage that students bring with them, but even more so because their combined socioeconomic intake allows them to create a learning environment that is more conducive to learning”. The advantage gained from this combined socioeconomic intake can be both direct (in terms of more support of learning from home; more exposure to a variety of texts; higher levels of aspirations) and indirect (enabling schools which charge fees the opportunity to offer a range of more personalised supports to students; attract more talented and motivated teachers; and develop a general school climate that is oriented towards higher performance). While socioeconomic background should not be a deterministic factor in student performance, it is an important one.

Disadvantage in Australian schools