Family and Parent Correlates of Educational Achievement: Migrant Children in China

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Family and Parent Correlates of Educational

Achievement: Migrant Children in China

Jing Guo

Myron B. Thompson School of Social Work, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

Analyzing data drawn from the Beijing Migrant Children Compulsory Education Survey (BMC-

CES), this study examines the impact of child, family and parent factors on migrant Chinese

children’s performance in math. The central questions address the differences between the

performance of migrant and non-migrant children in Beijing, the family and parent correlates of

education achievement, such as household income and parent education, the impact of social capi-

tal based on family relations, norms and interactions, such as educational expectation and parental

involvement, and how the results compare to findings in the US literature. The results show some

similarities and differences between the family-related factors that impact achievement in the US

and China.

Keywords academic achievement; China; education; migrant children; social capital

doi:10.1111/j.1753-1411.2011.00054.x

Introduction

A considerable body of US educational literature has identified a host of factors that help

to explain the academic performance of disadvantaged children including resources such

as family poverty and the level of parents’ education (Bradley & Corwyn, 2003; Dandy &

Nettelbeck, 2002; Davis-Kean, 2005; Eccles, 1993; Goyette & Xie, 1999; Haveman &

Wolfe, 1995; Klebanov, Brooks-Gunn, & Duncan, 1994; Patrikakou, 1997; Smith,

Brook-Gunn, & Klebanoe, 1997; Stevenson & Baker, 1987; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992).

In addition to these considerations of human and financial capital, social capital – as

manifest in factors such as parental expectations, interpersonal relations among children

and their parents, and parental involvement in their children’s schooling – is also identi-

fied as having an impact on academic outcomes (Coleman, 1988, 1990). In contrast, there

is little research on education in China on the factors that influence children’s school per-

formance, particularly for disadvantaged social groups, such as children of migrant fami-

lies, who are entering urban schools in increasing numbers.

Migrant children are viewed as an at-risk, disadvantaged group for potential school

failure given their lack of residence status and lower socioeconomic status. A large

Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Jing Guo, Myron B. Thompson School of Social

Work, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1800 East West Road Henke 135, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA. Email:

[email protected]

Asian Social Work and Policy Review 5 (2011) 123–137

� 2011 The Author

Asian Social Work and Policy Review � 2011 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 123

population of migrants emerged in the early 1980s with the rapid advancement of China’s

socioeconomic development. Accessing high-quality education in urban public schools

for migrant children is a critical challenge for the Chinese urban public education and

social service system. One concern for urban public schools is the potential poor aca-

demic performance of migrant children which may lead to a decrease in the overall qual-

ity of the school. This study utilizes data drawn from the Beijing Migrant Children

Compulsory Education Survey (BMCCES) to examine whether there is an achievement

gap between migrant children and non-migrant children in urban public schools. The

study then applies a social capital and educational expectancy framework based on

the US literature to Chinese migrant children in urban public schools and analyzes the

impact of family and parent factors on the children’s performance in math. The study

also addresses whether the family and parent correlates of school achievement are differ-

ent among migrants and non-migrants.

Contextual background: migrant children in the Chinese education system

Migrant children in China

Research on the impact of internal migration on family structure and children’s wellbeing

has become increasingly important as this demographic trend intensifies (Deshingkar &

Grimm, 2005). Currently, China is witnessing the largest internal migration in its history,

with soaring rates that are closely related to China’s rapid economic development. The

rate of growth, combined with the household registration system initially formulated in

the mid-1950s, makes internal migration in China a unique phenomenon. The system

initiated in the 1950s was intended to provide population statistics and to regulate the

population migration (Chan, 1994; Cheng & Selden, 1994; Liu, Li, & Zhang, 2003).

Under this system, population migration was strictly managed and controlled from the

mid-1950s to the early 1980s (Solinger, 1999). Restrictive employment policies and

relevant social policies did not allow people to move to places other than their registered

residence. Therefore, people generally remained in the same localities where they were

born and registered.

With economic development in urban areas and revisions in the household registra-

tion system since China’s economic reform in the early 1980s, the population of inter-

nal migrants has sharply increased. Migrant families are mostly from economically

less-developed provinces. The most popular destinations of migrant families are large

cities and well-developed coastal provinces, such as Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and

Guangdong (Zhang & Zhao, 2003). Since the 1990s, the pattern of migration has

gradually shifted from that of individual adult migration to family migration (Duan &

Liang, 2004; Zhou, 2003), leading to the rise of the migrant child population. Accord-

ing to data from the 5th Chinese National Census in 2000, the migrant population

totaled more than 100 million people in China. Of those, 14 million are children below

the age of 14, who account for 13.7% of the total migrant population. Two-thirds of

the total migrant child population are of school age – 6–14 years old (Zhang & Zhao,

2003).

Jing Guo Migrant Children in China

� 2011 The Author

124 Asian Social Work and Policy Review � 2011 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Migrant children as an at-risk group for educational achievement

Educating migrant children is a new challenge for the Chinese educational system. Under

a decentralized system of financing, local governments are the primary resource for com-

pulsory education (i.e., 6-year primary and 3-year middle-school education) for registered

local children. Given this system, migrant children have trouble accessing quality com-

pulsory education when they move to a new locality without residence status because the

host city governments allocate no financial resources for unregistered children. For

migrant children who move to cities with parents, there are two possible school choices:

urban public schools with surcharges called jiedu fei (the temporary study fees) and pri-

vate migrant schools (dagong zidi xuexiao) (Chen, 2004). Since the mid-1990s, a series of

educational regulations and administrative policies have been developed regarding

migrant child education. For instance, the State Education Committee and the Public

Security Department jointly issued the 1998 Measure, which outlines two significant

guidelines for migrant child education. One is that the governments of destination cities

are primarily responsible for the education of migrant children. The other is that the pub-

lic schools in those cities are primarily responsible for accommodating the education of

migrant children. As a result, there is an increased number of migrant children in public

schools in cities.

In addition to school access, the quality of the children’s education and their aca-

demic performance are important concerns. However, there is little information about

migrant children’s school performance when they move into new areas and attend

schools as migrants without local household registration. A few studies suggest that

many migrant children are more likely to have low self-esteem, low study aspirations,

and poor study habits than are their classmates (Wu, 2003; Zhang & Fei, 2004). Various

characteristics of the migrant family’s home life – such as poor housing, low income, and

limited parental involvement – contribute to children’s academic performance (Zhang &

Fei, 2004). However, rigorous research is needed to further explore the relationship

between family and parent factors and school achievement, as well as the effects of

parental expectation and parental involvement on children’s educational outcomes. To

fill the research gap and expand the knowledge regarding school achievement of disad-

vantaged migrant children, this study analyzes the education scenario of Chinese migrant

children in light of US research findings which suggest children’s family and parent

situations are correlated with their performance in school. In particular, it addresses

factors including family income, parental education, parental involvement, and parental

expectation.

Influencing factors on educational performance: the US research literature

To our knowledge, little systematic empirical research exists in the Chinese literature

addressing the family and parent factors that influence children’s school performance,

mathematics performance in particular. One national study found a set of family fac-

tors beneficial for elementary school students’ math competency development, which

included democratic or strict family atmosphere, satisfaction of parents with children’s


� 2011 The Author


schoolwork, parents paying more attention to forming sound learning habits, and moti-

vation and thinking-skill development (Li & Wu, 2006). Meanwhile, results showed that

factors like an over-burden of schoolwork, too many extracurricular activities, being a

female, watching too much TV, and parents paying more attention to achievement

scores were negatively associated with students’ math competency. However, the study

did not provide information and analysis on family socioeconomic status and its rela-

tionship to parenting styles and the home environment, which are indeed critical for

identifying at-risk groups. Borrowing a social capital and educational expectancy

framework based on the US literature, the present study attempts to test the applicabil-

ity of the framework and analyze the impact of family and parent factors on the

children’s performance in math in a sample of Chinese migrant children in urban public

schools.

When examining the influence of parent and family factors on educational outcomes,

Coleman (1988, 1990) differentiated the concept of social capital from other dimensions

of capital, namely human and financial capital. Human capital encompasses the acquired

knowledge, intelligence, personal abilities and talents of a particular person, which are

usually related to the parents’ level of education (Coleman, 1990). The notion of financial

capital refers to the physical and material resources available to the family, typically mea-

sured as the family’s total household income (Coleman, 1988). Social capital refers to the

relationships between and among individuals in the family, community, and ⁄or relevantinstitutions (Coleman, 1990). In a similar vein, Putnam (1995) defined social capital as

referring to ‘‘features of social organizations such as networks, norms and social trust

that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.’’ Among the important

networks he included informal family relations. The operationalization of social capital

in the home includes the relationship between parents and children, the presence of par-

ents, their normative expectations, and the amount of time parents spend with children.

A substantial body of US literature reveals that family human capital and financial

capital influence children’s school performance (Eamon, 2002; Lindjord, 2001; Smith

et al., 1997). Findings show that family income and poverty status are powerful corre-

lates of the cognitive development and behavior of children, even after accounting for

other differences such as family structure and maternal education levels (Brooks-Gunn &

Duncan, 1997). Children from low-income families very often earn lower grades and test

scores in school than those from high-income families (Duncan, Yeung, Brooks-Gunn, &

Smith, 1998). The home environment affects the outcomes of children because poverty

decreases the likelihood that children will be exposed to developmental materials and

experiences inside and outside the home (Bradley, Corwyn, McAdoo, & Coll, 2001). The

negative impact of poverty on child development is also related to the financial difficulties

and the stress they cause for parents. These emotional challenges can affect their parent-

ing practices and their ability to support their children’s learning (Bradley & Corwyn,

2003).

Regarding human capital at home, parental education especially is among the stron-

gest predictors of child educational attainment (Haveman & Wolfe, 1995; Klebanov

et al., 1994; Smith et al., 1997). Parental educational attainment, especially the mother’s


� 2011 The Author


education level, is positively correlated with a child’s school performance (Davis-Kean,

2005; Stevenson & Baker, 1987). The literature also suggests that parents’ education

influences the beliefs and behaviors of the parent, which in turn influence the child’s

school performance (Eccles, 1993).

Considering social capital at home, there is a strong correlation between what a par-

ent expects and what a child achieves, as well as what the child perceives those expecta-

tions to be (Patrikakou, 1996). Educational research that focuses on Asian-American

children shows that parents’ high expectations concerning academic performance are

positively associated with their children’s achievement (Dandy & Nettelbeck, 2002;

Goyette & Xie, 1999; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992). Asian-American families place greater

value on education than do other ethnic groups, including the Anglo-American majority

(Chen & Stevenson, 1995). Asian parents emphasize the connection between academic

effort and success both at school and in the workplace. They teach their children that

education is critical to upward social mobility (Chen & Stevenson, 1995; Sue & Okazaki,

1990). Indirect assistance includes parental encouragement, expectations, and attitudes

towards particular subjects and school in general. For example, indirect assistance from

parents has been shown to have an important impact on children’s attitudes towards and

performance in math (Cao, Bishop, & Forgasz, 2007; Ma, 2001). And parents’ overall

attitude toward education shapes their children’s ambitions and attitudes toward school-

ing, both of which are mediating factors in later educational attainment and achievement

(Wang, Wildman, & Calhoun, 1996). The effects of parental expectations on their child’s

school performance are mediated through parent–child interactions. Beliefs that chil-

dren have regarding their future have consistently been found to affect their subsequent

educational achievement.

Besides parental expectation, parental involvement consistently shows a significant

impact on children’s attitudes about learning as well their actual performance, even after

controlling for other child characteristics and family background (Barnard, 2004; Cao

et al., 2007; Eccles & Harold, 1996; Fan & Chen, 2001). Parents may influence their

child’s academic achievement both directly and indirectly through a variety of behaviors.

Direct assistance includes helping children with homework, helping children choose their

courses, and volunteering at school. Parental involvement has a consistently positive

impact on children’s school performance throughout elementary, middle and secondary

school (Fan & Chen, 2001). Furthermore, the more intensively parents are involved in

their child’s learning, the more beneficial are the effects on their child’s achievement.

However, Fan and Chen (2001) also found that parental supervision in the home was

not significantly associated with academic achievement, while parental aspiration and

expectation was.

Research questions

By applying the social capital and educational expectancy theories to the education

scenario of Chinese migrant children, this present study addresses the following research

questions:


� 2011 The Author


1 Do migrant children have poorer school performance in math than non-migrant

children?

2 What are the effects of family and parent correlates to child school achievement?

3 Do parental expectation and involvement mediate the effect of family and parent

correlates on child school achievement?

4 Do the effects of family and parent correlates, as well as potential mediating factors,

on child school achievement differ between the migrant group and the non-migrant

group?

Data and measures

Data

Data for this study are drawn from the 2005 Beijing Migrant Children Compulsory

Education Survey (BMCCES), which covers a wide array of information on demo-

graphics, family background, school experiences, educational expectations, parental

involvement and other factors. The BMCCES is a cross-sectional, multi-method random

sample survey. In one municipal district in Beijing, China, the research group selectively

sampled nine of 125 public primary schools. One class was then randomly sampled from

each of the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades in every sampled school. Surveys were admin-

istered to students and their parents in the sampled classes. In total, 27 classes were

sampled.

The BMCCES research group conducted a pencil-and-paper survey of both children

and parents. The child survey was administered in the classroom and supervised by a

research assistant from the research group. The research assistant was introduced by a

teacher who was in charge of the sampled class. Students completed the survey in one reg-

ular 45-minute class period and the surveys were collected at the end of the class. Mean-

while, the research group distributed a parallel parent survey to children. Children were

asked to take the parent survey home and request that their parents participate. Students

were required to return the surveys the following day. The response rates for the child

and parent surveys were 98% and 90%, respectively.

School records were used to collect math grades. By using the unique case ID number

assigned to each child, child survey data, parent survey data and school record data were

merged to form the full dataset for the study. The total study sample included 983 chil-

dren and 983 parents. The study uses descriptive statistics to explore family financial,

human capital, and social capital among children in the sample, and then utilizes a series

of regression models to test the contribution of those factors to a child’s school perfor-

mance in math.

Measures

Dependent variable

The dependent variable is the children’s math grade, which is to measure the children’s

school performance by using school records of math grades. The grade was coded as

1 = D, 2 = C, 3 = B and 4 = A.


� 2011 The Author


Independent variables

• Migrant status: Children with non-Beijing household registration were defined as

migrants, and those with Beijing household registration were defined as non-

migrants.

• Family socio-economic status was measured by the following parental self-reported

variables. low_income was coded 1 if the parent’s reported monthly household

income was 2000 RMB or less, and 0 otherwise.

• Parental educational attainments were measured by the father’s education and

mother’s education separately. father_highschool and mother_highschool were coded

1 if the parent had a high-school education or higher; otherwise it was coded 0.

• Parent aspiration ⁄ expectation: Two variables were used to measure parental beliefs

concerning their child’s future performance. Aspiration referred to desired levels of

future educational attainment, while expectation referred to realistic beliefs about

their child’s future educational attainment. Parents were asked ‘‘What is the highest

level of education you would like your child to achieve?’’ and ‘‘Realistically speak-

ing, what is the highest level of education that you think your child will achieve?’’

parent_aspiration and parent_expectation were coded as 1 = elementary school,

2 = middle school, 3 = high school, 4 = college & university and 5 = graduate

school.

• Parental involvement: Three questions in the parent survey focused on parental

involvement in their child’s education. Parents were asked how often they contacted

their child’s teachers, helped their child with homework at home, and talked with

their child about school. Three variables – contact, tutor and communicate – were

used to measure parental involvement. These variables were coded as 1 = never,

2 = a few times, 3 = sometimes and 4 = often. In parallel to the parent survey

questions, children were asked two questions about their parents and homework:

‘‘How often does your father tutor your homework at home?’’ and ‘‘How often does

your mother tutor your homework at home?’’ Two variables, father_tutor and

mother_tutor, based on the children’s responses, were included in the study. These

variables were coded as 1 = never, 2 = a few times, 3 = sometimes and 4 = often.

In addition, parents were asked whether they knew where their child was after school

and the names of their child’s best friends. Accordingly, two dichotomous variables

were created, know_where and know_friend, based upon parents’ responses (1 = yes,

I know; and 0 = no, I don’t know) to measure parental monitoring.

• Child beliefs: In parallel to questions in the parental survey, children were asked

about their educational aspirations and expectations. The items child_aspiration

and child_expectation were coded in the same way as parental aspiration ⁄ expecta-tion.

• Control variables: Gender was coded 0 if the child was a male and 1 if the child was

a female. Choosing 4th grade as a reference group, two dummy variables were cre-

ated as 5th grade and 6th grade. school_ mobility was coded 1 if the child had

attended more than one school since entering primary school and 0 if the child had


� 2011 The Author


attended only the current school. one_child was coded 0 if there was only one child in

the family and 1 if there was more than one child in the family.

• School indicator: In an effort to control for the influence of unmeasured school fac-

tors, a cluster of school dummy variables were created. Given that there were nine

schools in the sample, eight dummy variables were coded. The dummy variable

school_1 was coded 1 if the child was from the school with ID number 1 and 0 other-

wise. With the same logic, school_2, school_3, school_4, school_5, school_6, school_7,

and school_8 were coded as dummy variables.

Analysis and results

Descriptive statistics

In the study sample of 983 children, there were 472 children in registered Beijing house-

holds and 507 children who held non-Beijing household registration, accounting for

48.2% and 51.8% of the sample, respectively. Little disparity in math grades appears

between the migrant group and the non-migrant group among the sample, with means

3.45 (SD = 0.73) and 3.43 (SD = 0.75), respectively. Table 1 shows descriptive statistics

of child and family characteristics by migrant status.

Thirty-eight percent of migrant children were the only child in their home, compared

to 91% of non-migrant children. Nearly half of the migrant children were from families

Table 1 Descriptive statistics

Migrant Non-migrant

Number % Number %

Female 218 43 242 51

Only child 169 38 352 91

Low-income family 211 47 90 22

Father has a high-school degree 141 31 277 65

Mother has a high-school degree 89 20 277 65

Attended more than one school 253 50 91 19

Know where child is after school 357 81 402 97

Know child’s friend 268 61 375 91

Migrant Non-migrant

Mean SD Mean SD

Parent aspiration 4.51 0.66 4.65 0.56

Parent expectation 3.85 0.91 4.15 0.83

Child aspiration 4.70 0.65 4.79 0.57

Child expectation 3.90 0.99 4.29 0.85

Contact teacher 2.37 0.72 2.58 0.73

Tutor homework 2.87 0.82 3.17 0.74

Communication with child 3.37 0.69 3.54 0.63


� 2011 The Author


with monthly household incomes of less than 2000 RMB, while less than one-fourth of

non-migrant children were from low-income families. Half of the migrant children had

attended more than one school, while less than 20% of the non-migrant children had

attended other schools. Regarding parental education, 31% of migrant fathers and 65%

of non-migrant fathers had high school or higher education. For the mother’s education

attainment, only 20% of the migrant mothers had a high school or higher degree educa-

tion, in contrast to 65% of non-migrant mothers.

Overall, parents had high aspirations and expectations for their child’s education

attainment in the future. As shown in Table 1, however, migrant parents have lower real-

istic expectation than non-migrant parents, with means of 3.85 (SD = 0.91) and 4.15

(SD = 0.83), respectively. A similar pattern appears in child expectations, with means

for migrant children of 3.90 (SD = 0.99) and for non-migrant children of 4.29

(SD = 0.85). Results also show a higher level of parental involvement among non-

migrant parents than among migrants. Regarding the two parental control variables,

81% of migrant parents knew where their child was after school, and 61% of them knew

their child’s best friends’ names, while more than 90% of non-migrant parents answered

affirmatively to these questions.

Regression results

Regression results for all children sampled

In order to assess the relative contributions of the child, family, parent and school factors

to children’s school performance, a hierarchical series of regressions was conducted. The

first model included the control variables of grade and gender; the second model added

family characteristics such as migrant status, household income, family size and parental

education; the third model added variables measuring parental beliefs and involvement;

the fourth model added children’s beliefs; and the fifth model controlled for school

factors.

Table 2 represents the results of a series of regression analyses of contributing factors

on math grades among all children. One unanticipated finding showed that there was no

significant difference in math achievement between migrant and non-migrant children,

though low household income was a significant indicator for math achievement. Just as

in the US research literature, low income was negatively associated with children’s per-

formance. Children from families with monthly household income less than 2000 RMB

on average scored lower on math than those from families with more than 2000 RMB

monthly household income. In contrast to the US research literature, parental educa-

tional attainments were not strong indicators for children’s math achievement. Neither

the father’s education nor mother’s education was significantly related to the child’s

performance.

When a set of variables measuring parental beliefs and parental involvement were

added into the regression model, parental educational expectation emerged as one of the

strong indicators of a child’s math achievement (b = 0.208, P < 0.001). The higher the

educational expectations parents held for their child, the higher their child’s math

achievement. The results of the final regression model, which controlled for school


� 2011 The Author


factors, showed two positive indicators of the child’s math achievement, that is, parental

educational expectations (b = 0.175, P < 0.001) and children’s educational aspirations

(b = 0.09, P < 0.05). A higher education aspiration had significantly positive effects on

a child’s math achievement.

Among the set of variables measuring parental involvement and parental monitoring,

one variable know_where, i.e., knowing where their child was after school, showed a sig-

nificant negative association with math achievement (b = )0.117, P < 0.05). In contrast

to the US research literature, none of the parental involvement variables showed a signifi-

cant positive association with a child’s math achievement in this study.

Regression results of migrant children sample

In order to answer the question of whether there are different patterns of family corre-

lates to school achievement among migrant and non-migrant children, a series of regres-

sions were conducted among the migrant children sample. Table 3 shows the results of

hierarchical regression analyses considering math achievement among only the migrant

Table 2 Regression of math achievement among all children (standardized b coefficient)

Variable name

Regression model

1 2 3 4 5

Migrant 0.002 0.092 0.064 0.065 0.005

Female )0.034 )0.035 )0.054 )0.061 )0.061Fifth grade )0.185*** )0.192*** )0.224*** )0.231*** )0.212***Sixth grade )0.167*** )0.179*** )0.209*** )0.213*** )0.195***One child — )0.051 )0.070 )0.069 )0.093Low income — )0.139*** )0.121*** )0.109* )0.113**Father education — 0.089 0.055 0.057 0.055

Mother education — )0.004 )0.051 )0.057 )0.076School mobility — 0.005 )0.002 0.001 0.013

Parent aspiration — — 0.018 0.009 0.029

Parent expectation — — 0.208*** 0.184*** 0.175***

Contact teacher — — )0.042 )0.040 )0.032Tutor homework — — )0.084 )0.080 )0.077Father tutor homework — — )0.004 )0.014 0.006

Mother tutor homework — — )0.058 )0.070 )0.057Communicate with child — — )0.003 0.002 0.013

Know where child is after school — — )0.104* )0.114** )0.117**Know child’s friend — — 0.067 0.054 0.036

Child aspiration — — — 0.080 0.090*

Child expectation — — — 0.076 0.040

School factor — — — — —

R2 0.031 0.063 0.132 0.146 0.215

R2 change 0.031*** 0.032*** 0.069*** 0.014** 0.069***

P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001 (n = 983).


� 2011 The Author


children. Similar results were found in the migrant child sample. Low household income

had a negative association with a child’s math achievement (b = )0.121, P < 0.05).

Children from families with lower monthly household incomes attained lower math

grades than those from families with higher monthly household incomes. Again, in con-

trast to the US research, parental educational attainments, both paternal and maternal,

showed no significant relationship to math achievement.

Parental expectations had a significantly positive impact on math achievement among

migrant children (b = 0.143, P < 0.05). While parental involvement behaviors did not

show significant effects, the two measurements of parent monitoring, know_where and

know_ friend, were strong indicators (b = )0.138, P < 0.05 and b = 0.135, P < 0.05,

respectively). However, knowing where their children were after school had negative

effects, while knowing the names of their children’s best friends showed positive effects

on migrant children’s math achievement.

Just as in the sample of all children, migrant children’s educational aspirations had a

strong positive influence (b = 0.153, P < 0.01). However, after adding the child’s

beliefs into the regression model, the effect of parental educational expectations became

Table 3 Regression of math achievement among migrant children (standardized b coefficient)

Variable name

Regression model

1 2 3 4 5

Female )0.034 )0.029 )0.021 )0.013 )0.042Fifth grade )0.162* )0.166* )0.185** )0.186** )0.166*Sixth grade )0.024 )0.032 )0.046 )0.039 )0.025Low income — )0.121* )0.140* )0.139* )0.150*One child — )0.045 )0.060 )0.056 )0.078Father education — 0.046 0.013 0.021 0.006

Mother education — )0.039 )0.036 )0.037 )0.062School mobility — 0.063 0.044 0.05 0.086

Parent aspiration — — )0.063 )0.074 )0.034Parent expectation — — 0.143* 0.121 0.091

Contact teacher — — )0.093 )0.091 )0.116Tutor homework — — )0.05 )0.051 )0.029Father tutor homework — — 0.058 0.058 0.087

Mother tutor homework — — )0.092 )0.11 )0.103Communicate with child — — )0.044 )0.04 )0.021Know where child is after school — — )0.138* )0.145* )0.147*Know child’s friend — — 0.135* 0.120 0.092

Child aspiration — — — 0.153** 0.164**

Child expectation — — — 0.024 0.004

School factor — — — — —

R2 0.024 0.045 0.114 0.138 0.197

R2 change 0.024 0.021 0.069** 0.024* 0.060**

*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001 (n = 507).


� 2011 The Author


insignificant among migrant children. This is different from the sample including both

migrant and non-migrant children.

Summary of findings

The findings indicate that, when controlling for child and family characteristics, migrant

and non-migrant children show similar math performance. With regards to family socio-

economic status, low household income was the only significant indicator for math

achievement. Children from families with the lowest monthly household incomes scored

lower on math than those from families with higher monthly household incomes. Paren-

tal education, which was identified as a strong indicating factor in the US research litera-

ture, did not show any significant impact on children’s math achievement. After factoring

in parental beliefs and parental involvement, the effect of household income decreased,

an indication that the effects of household income were indirectly affected by parental

education expectation.

Parents’ educational expectation was positively associated with a child’s math

achievement. The higher the education expectations parents held for their child, the

higher the child’s math achievement. One of the parental monitoring variables, knowing

where their child was after school, was negatively associated with math achievement.

However, there was a different pattern of parental expectations and child aspirations

in relation to children’s math achievement among migrant children. Parental expectation

was positively associated with math achievement. However, after controlling for chil-

dren’s beliefs, the results showed that a child’s educational aspiration had a powerful

influence on math achievement and the effects of parental expectations became insignifi-

cant among migrant children.

Discussion

From the point of view of US educational research, migrant children clearly possess

many educational ‘‘risk’’ factors, such as high rates of family poverty. Thus, some

Chinese scholars have suggested that these children’s school performance may suffer.

However, the findings of the sample in this study showed that there is no significant dif-

ference in math grades between migrant and non-migrant children. The findings suggest

a disagreement with the view that enrolling migrant children would harm the quality of a

school and the achievement of its children, at least not for math grades. Meanwhile, since

the sample came from migrant children who are enrolled in public schools, findings from

this study cannot be generalized to the migrant population who are in non-public school

settings.

Furthermore, this study examined the influence of family socioeconomic status and

parental behaviors on children’s school performance in China. As in the US research lit-

erature, there are strong correlations between family financial capital and children’s

school performance. Children from low-income families perform poorer on math grades

than children from high-income families. The findings also showed a consistent pattern

regarding the positive impact of parental expectations in China and the US. The stronger


� 2011 The Author


effect of child aspiration among migrant children suggested different structures of corre-

lates of educational achievement among migrant children and non-migrant children. For

migrant children, self-belief appeared as the most significant factor.

However, factors such as parental educational attainment and parental involvement

did not show the same impact on children’s performance in China as in the US. It is pos-

sible that US findings reflect the fact that a much higher proportion of parents there go

on to higher education. These findings should be seen as suggestive of an educational

framework that awaits further verifications through more detailed analysis. More

advanced statistical techniques, such as structural equation modeling, may be used to

examine the process of how those factors relate to children’s school performance.

In addition, to understand the impact of parental involvement on children’s school

performance, different cultural contexts might enter into the equation for future research.

For instance, in China parents tend to view schools and teachers as having great author-

ity in education. Parents believe teachers play the key role in educating children. Contact

between parents and teachers often happens only when the child encounters difficulties

and troubles. Future research might examine the meaning of parental involvement for

Chinese parents and its impact on the Chinese education system. Our findings indicate to

a certain extent that the social capital and education expectancy framework largely

drawn from US literature may be used to explore the family and parent correlates to

school achievements in other developing countries, while further research on concepts

like parental involvement is warranted.

References

Barnard, W. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment. Children

and Youth Services Review, 26(1), 39–62.

Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2003). Age and ethnic variations in family process mediators of

SES. In M. H. Bronstein & R. H. Bradley (Eds.), Socioeconomic status, parenting, and child

development (pp. 161–88). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bradley, R. H., Corwyn, R. F., McAdoo, H. P., & Coll, G. C. (2001). The home environments of

children in the United States part I: Variations by age, ethnicity, and poverty status. Child

Development, 72, 1844–67.

Brooks-Gunn, J., & Duncan, G. J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. Future of Children, 7,

55–71.

Cao, Z., Bishop, A., & Forgasz, H. (2007). Perceived parental influence on mathematics learning:

A comparison among students in China and Australia. Educational Studies in Mathematics,

64(1), 85–106.

Chan, K.-W. (1994). Cities with invisible walls. New York: Oxford University Press.

Chen, J. (2004). Beijingshi Liudong Ertong Jiaoyu Wenti Chuntan [Migrant child education in Beij-

ing municipal]. Journal of Haidian Zoudu College, Special I, 108–13.

Chen, C., & Stevenson, H. W. (1995). Motivation and mathematics achievement: A comparative

study of Asian-American, Caucasian-American, and East Asian high school students. Child

Development, 66, 1215–34.

Cheng, T.-J., & Selden, M. (1994). The origins and social consequences of China’s hukou system.

The China Quarterly, 139, 644–68.


� 2011 The Author


Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of

Sociology, 94 (Suppl.), 95–120.

Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Dandy, J., & Nettelbeck, T. (2002). Research Note: A cross-cultural study of parents’ academic

standards and educational aspirations for their children. Educational Psychology, 22(5),

621–7.

Davis-Kean, P. E. (2005). The influence of parent education and family income on child

achievement: The indirect role of parental expectations and the home environment. Journal of

Family Psychology, 19(2), 294–304.

Deshingkar, P., & Grimm, S. (2005). Internal migration and development: A global perspective

(IOM migration research series No. 19). Geneva: International Organization for Migration.

Duan, C., & Liang, H. (2004). Woguo liudong renkou zhuangkuang [Migrant population in

China]. Population Research, 28(1), 53–9.

Duncan, G. J., Yeung, W. J., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Smith, J. R. (1998). How much does

childhood poverty affect the life chances of children? American Sociological Review, 63(3), 406–

23.

Eamon, M. K. (2002). Effects of poverty on mathematics and reading achievement of young

adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 22(1), 49–74.

Eccles, J. S. (1993). School and family effects on the ontogeny of children’s interests, self-percep-

tions, and activity choice. In J. Jacobs (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 40 pp.

145–208). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1996). Family involvement in children’s and adolescents’ schooling.

In A. Booth & J. F. Dunn (Eds.), Family-school links: How do they affect educational outcomes?

(pp. 3–34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-

analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1–22.

Goyette, K., & Xie, Y. (1999). Educational expectations of Asian American youths: Determinants

and ethnic differences. Sociology of Education, 72(1), 22–36.

Haveman, R., & Wolfe, B. (1995). The determinants of children’s attainments: A review of methods

and findings. Journal of Economic Literature, 33, 1829–78.

Klebanov, P. K., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Duncan, G. J. (1994). Does neighborhood and family

poverty affect mothers’ parenting, mental health, and social support? Journal of Marriage and

the Family, 56, 441–55.

Li, L., & Wu, H. (2006). Analysis of influential factors to development in mathmatical competen-

cies of pupils. Chinese Journal of School Health, 2006(27), 591–3.

Lindjord, D. (2001). Families of economically disadvantaged backgrounds and children’s school

performance: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Early Education and Family Review,

9(2), 4–5.

Liu, S., Li, X., & Zhang, M. (2003). Scenario analysis on urbanization and rural-to-urban migration

in China. Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Ma, X. (2001). Participation in advanced mathematics: Do expectation and influence of students,

peers, teachers and parents matter? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 132–46.

Patrikakou, E. (1997). A model of parental attitudes and the academic achievement of adolescents.

Journal of Research and Development in Education, 31(1), 7–26.

Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1),

65–78.


� 2011 The Author


Smith, J. R., Brook-Gunn, J., & Klebanoe, P. K. (1997). The consequences of living in poverty for

young children’s cognitive and verbal ability and early school achievement. In G. J. Duncan &

J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), Consequences of growing up poor (pp. 132–89). New York: Russell Sage.

Solinger, D. J. (1999). Contesting citizenship in urban China: Peasant migrants, the state, and the

logic of the market. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.

Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1987). The family-school relation and the child’s school

performance. Child Development, 58(5), 1348–57.

Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are failing and what we

can learn from Japanese and Chinese Education. New York: Summit Books.

Sue, S., & Okazaki, S. (1990). Asian-American Educational Achievement: A phenomenon in search

of an explanation. American Psychologist, 45, 913–20.

Wang, J., Wildman, L., & Calhoun, G. (1996). The relationships between parental influence and

student achievement in seventh grade mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 96(8),

395–9.

Wu, H. (2003). Guanyu gongban xuexiao zhong liudong ertong shaonian jiuxue zhuangkuang de

diaocha [An investigation of education situation among migrant children in public schools].

Teaching and Administration, 8(15), 32–6.

Zhang, G., & Fei, L. (2004). Gongban xiaoxuezhong liudong renkou zinv xianzhuang diaocha ji

jiaoyu duice [Children of migrant population in public schools: Investigation and recommenda-

tion]. Teaching and Administration, 2(15), 32–4.

Zhang, L., & Zhao, S. (Eds.) (2003). Survey report on the temporary migrant children in 9 cities of

China. Beijing: Office of the Women and Children Work Committee of the State Council & the

China National Children’s Center.

Zhou, H. (2003). Liudong renkou de jiatinghua jiqi yingxiang yinsu [Trend of family migration and

its causes]. Paper presented at the Diwuci renkou pucha quanguo taolunhui [The national

conference regarding the 5th national census], Beijing.


� 2011 The Author


Documents

Family and Parent Correlates of Educational Achievement: Migrant Children in China