2010
DOI: 10.3102/0013189x10362578
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Student Eligibility for a Free Lunch as an SES Measure in Education Research

Abstract: The use of eligibility for a free lunch as a measure of a student's socioeconomic status continues to be a fixture of quantitative education research. Despite its popularity, it is unclear that education researchers are familiar with what student eligibility for a free lunch does (and does not) represent. The authors examine the National School Lunch Program, which is responsible for certifying students as eligible for a free lunch, and conclude that free lunch eligibility is a poor measure of socioeconomic st… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
191
1
4

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 229 publications
(198 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
191
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…A second limitation of the CCD data is that reported FLE counts are an imperfect proxy for true student eligibility counts (Harwell & LeBeau, 2010). Some eligible students do not enroll in the free lunch program, and some ineligible students do enroll.…”
Section: Common Core Of Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A second limitation of the CCD data is that reported FLE counts are an imperfect proxy for true student eligibility counts (Harwell & LeBeau, 2010). Some eligible students do not enroll in the free lunch program, and some ineligible students do enroll.…”
Section: Common Core Of Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second threat originates from the reliable identification of students included in the at-risk categories. Although authors such as Harwell and LeBeau (2010) have challenged the use of FRL status of students as a proxy measure of socioeconomic stats, reliable identification of the students in the four at-risk categories could pose a greater threat. For instance, in one urban district Pogash (2008) reported a 37 percent participation rate among high school students that were eligible for FRL.…”
Section: Limitations Of the Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…County data were then ranked in order by FRL percentage and organized into thirds, consisting of low, medium, and high categories. It should be acknowledged that using free and reduced lunch percentages as an indicator of socioeconomic status is widely used in school-based studies despite numerous limitations (Harwell & LeBeau, 2010).…”
Section: Teacher Demographicsmentioning
confidence: 99%