Do Peer Groups Matter? Peer Group versus Schooling Effects on Academic Attainment

Robertson, D. H.; Symons, James

doi:10.1111/1468-0335.t01-1-00270

Cited by 94 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We revisit this issue when we discuss quantile regression results. 25 Insignificant contextual peer impacts are in contrast with studies reporting their (positive) effects on a student's academic outcome (Vandenberghe [60], McEwan [49], Robertson and Symons [54]). In view of our study, their estimates appear to be subject to an upward bias as they fail to completely remove unobservable components shared by peers.…”

Section: Association Between Mean Score Of Peers and Own Average Outcomementioning

confidence: 97%

Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Quasi-randomization evidence from South Korea

Kang

2007

Journal of Urban Economics

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Association Between Mean Score Of Peers and Own Average Outcomementioning

confidence: 97%

Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Quasi-randomization evidence from South Korea

Kang

2007

Journal of Urban Economics

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Crucially though, there is evidence that parents tend to consider the 'best' schools to be those with a high mean pupil ability and socioeconomic status (Ladd, 2002;Willms 752 REBECCA ALLEN and Echols, 1992). This strategy appears rational, not least because the ability of peers influences individual pupil attainment (Feinstein and Symons, 1999;Robertson and Symons, 2003;Zimmer and Toma, 2000), and suggests that those who successfully elect not to attend their neighbourhood school will be attempting to access a superior peer group. The question of whether school choice policies in England have increased stratification between schools is an empirical question; but the gradual introduction of the policies on a national basis and the lack of historical pupil-level data have made it difficult to use simple longitudinal or cross-sectional comparisons to measure a causal relationship between policy implementation and school stratification.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Allocating Pupils to Their Nearest Secondary School: The Consequences for Social and Ability Stratification

Allen

2007

Urban Studies

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the proposition that secondary school choice in England has produced a stratified education system, compared with a counterfactual world where pupils are allocated into schools based strictly on proximity via a simulation that exploits the availability of pupil postcodes in the National Pupil Database. The study finds current levels of sorting in the English secondary school system-defined as pupils who do not attend their proximity allocation school-to be around 50 per cent, but estimates that only one-in-five pupils are potentially active in sorting between non-faith comprehensive schools. School segregation is almost always lower in the proximity counterfactual than in the actual data, confirming that where pupils are sorting themselves into a non-proximity school, it does tend to increase social and ability segregation. The difference between school and residential segregation is greatest in urban areas and LEAs with many pupils in grammar and voluntary-aided schools.

show abstract

“…Although several individual-level studies of class size exist in the UK, including those of Davie et al (1972), Robertson and Symons (1996), Dearden et al (1997), Dolton and Vignoles (1998), and Feinstein and Symons (1999), none of these has found a significant relationship between class size and student outcomes. The present paper uses the same data as the aforementioned studies: the extraordinarily rich National Child Development Study (NCDS).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Class Size in the Early Years: Is Smaller Really Better?

Iacovou

2002

Education Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Other things being equal, theory would suggest that students in smaller classes at school should do better in terms of attainment; convincing experimental evidence for this also exists in the US. However, a relationship between small classes and better outcomes has not generally been evident in individual-level studies, possibly because of endogeneity arising from low-attaining or otherwise 'difficult' students being put into smaller classes than their higher-achieving counterparts. The present paper uses data from the National Child Development Study to estimate the effects of class size. Ordinary least-squares estimates indicate that small classes are not related to attainment; however, instrumental variables estimates, with class size instrumented by the interaction between school size and school type, show a significant and sizeable association between smaller classes and higher attainment in reading in the early years of school. This effect is common to different groups of students, and for some groups (girls, and those from larger families), this association is also found to persist through to age 11.

show abstract

Do Peer Groups Matter? Peer Group versus Schooling Effects on Academic Attainment

Cited by 94 publications

References 14 publications

Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Quasi-randomization evidence from South Korea

Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Quasi-randomization evidence from South Korea

Allocating Pupils to Their Nearest Secondary School: The Consequences for Social and Ability Stratification

Class Size in the Early Years: Is Smaller Really Better?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About