We use nationally representative data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K) to identify variables measured in the fall of 1998 (when the sample’s students were in kindergarten) that predict special education placement by the spring of 2004 (when those not retained were finishing fifth grade). Placement’s strongest kindergarten predictor is a student’s own level of academic achievement. Also important is the student’s frequency of classroom task engagement. There is a “frog-pond” contextual effect -- attending an elementary school with high levels of overall student academic ability and behavior increases a student’s likelihood of special education placement. This is the case even after statistically controlling for a wide range of individual-, family-, and school-level characteristics. Social class background displayed a weak or statistically non-significant relation with special education placement. However, girls are placed less frequently than boys. African American, Hispanic, and Asian students are placed less frequently than non-Hispanic whites. The under- or equal-placement rates for racial/ethnic minorities are partially explained by their concentration in high-minority schools.

We sought to quantify the effectiveness of special education services as naturally delivered in U.S. schools. Specifically, we examined whether children receiving special education services displayed (a) greater reading or mathematics skills, (b) more frequent learning-related behaviors, or (c) less frequent externalizing or internalizing problem behaviors than closely matched peers not receiving such services. To do so, we used propensity score matching techniques to analyze data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal—Study Kindergarten Cohort, 1998–1999, a large scale, nationally representative sample of U.S. schoolchildren. Collectively, results indicate that receipt of special education services has either a negative or statistically non-significant impact on children’s learning or behavior. However, special education services do yield a small, positive effect on children’s learning-related behaviors.

No abstract

Which children are most at risk of experiencing a Matthew effect in reading? We investigated this question using population-based methodology. First, we identified children entering kindergarten on socio-demographic factors (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status) well known to index the relative risks and resources available to them as beginning readers. Second, we fitted growth curve models to the kindergarten—3rd grade reading scores of these children as they participated in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Kindergarten Class (ECLS-K) study. Third, we compared the children’s relative reading achievement (as measured in standard deviation units from the sample’s overall mean across the study’s time points) of those children most and least at risk for learning disabilities. We found that those population subgroups most at risk for learning disabilities fall further behind typical readers over time. By contrast, those least at risk for learning disabilities do not move further ahead. We conclude that a one-sided Matthew effect exists and, moreover, it exists for those children at greatest risk for learning disabilities.

Do genetically identical children experience the same classroom differently? Are nonshared classroom experiences associated with differences in achievement? We designed a telephone diary measure which we administered every school day for 2 weeks to 122 10-year-olds in 61 monozygotic (MZ) twin pairs. Each pair shared genes, a classroom, peers and a teacher. We found that MZ twins did experience their classrooms differently (rMZ < 0.65 for all measures of classroom experience). Furthermore, MZ differences in peer problems were significantly associated with MZ differences in Mathematics achievement (ES = 8%); differences in positivity about school were significantly associated with differences in Mathematics (ES = 15%) and Science (ES = 8%) achievement; and differences in ‘flow’ in Science lessons were associated with differences in Science achievement (ES = 12%). In a multiple regression analysis, MZ differences in positivity about school significantly predicted MZ differences in Mathematics achievement (R2= 0.16,p< .01) and MZ differences in ‘flow’ in Science significantly predicted MZ differences in Science achievement (R2= 0.10,p< .05). These results indicate that MZ twins experience the classroom differently and that differences in their experience are associated with differences in their achievement.