Upload
armand
View
44
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Social Stratification and Attitudes to Education in Contemporary Britain: A Multivariate Analysis of the British Youth Panel. Professor Vernon Gayle, University of Stirling, Scotland Dr Damon Berridge, Lancaster University, England Dr David Stott, Lancaster University, England. In the UK. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Social Stratification and Attitudes to Education in Contemporary Britain:A Multivariate Analysis of the British
Youth Panel
Professor Vernon Gayle, University of Stirling, ScotlandDr Damon Berridge, Lancaster University, England
Dr David Stott, Lancaster University, England
In the UKStriking and persistent relationship between children’s socio-economic backgrounds (measured by parents occupations) and educational outcomes (especially school level qualifications)
This association is robust and net of other factors
Stronger association than gender and ethnicity
Association persists whichever socio-economic classification is modelled
There is a line of argument that suggests that these observed differences in educational attainment are, in part, due to young people from different social backgrounds having different aspirations and attitudes to education
Since the mid 1980s there has been an political assault on schools and teachers to improve standards (mainly examination results and qualifications)
Particular focus on the ‘poor’, under-privaledged’, ‘socially excluded’ or whatever terminology is currently popular…
4
Old Sociology of EducationSome studies that I was taught about when I was an undergraduate (1987-1990)
Willis, P. (1977) Learning to Labour: How working class kids get working class jobsEthnographic study in West Midlands
Corrigan, P. (1979) Schooling the Smash Street KidsStudy of working class boys in Sunderland
Lacey, C. (1970) Hightown Grammar – The school as a social systemStudy of a northern grammar school. A study of the ‘disappointing performance of working class boys in grammar schools since the 1944Education Act’ (p.xi)
Rutter, M. et al. (1979) Fifteen Thousand Hours – Secondary schools and their effects on children15,000 hours the average time spent at school, a study of 12 inner London schools 2,000 pupils tracked though secondary school
Douglas, J.W.B. (1964) The Home and the School: A study of ability and attainment in the primary schoolDouglas, J.W.B. (1970) All our futures
Studies of the 1946 birth cohort
A study that I have recently read
Wedge, P. and Prosser, H. (1973) Born to Fail?Children’s Bureau report on the striking differences in the lives of British children
A more recent example
Devine, F. (2004) Class Practices – How parents help their children get good jobsA qualitative study of middle class parents in Britain and America
The is a popular line of argument that suggests that these observed differences in educational attainment are, in part, due to young people from different social backgrounds having different aspirations and attitudes to education
This has an initial ring of plausibility…
However, John Goldthorpe is a Fellow of the British Academy, I am not… Is that down to my low aspirations?
Educational policy in the UK is in a state of flux (the Departmental website clearly states that the views expressed might not be those of the Government)
(Pre May 2010) Government priority breaking the association between social background and educational attainment
New Government hint that changing aspirations and attitudes might be key to better educational attainment
New Conservative Coalition Government recently appointed a ‘Social Mobility Tsar’, former Labour Government Minister Alan Milburnwho is a ‘working class boy made good’
This is our first attempt to try to explore some contemporary attitudinal data…
BEWARE VERY EARLY STAGES OF WORK IN PROGRESS
[Models take an eternity to fit][and yes of course we would have liked to fit models with age squared and Camsis etc etc.]
[Double negative – sorry I cannot promise not to do this]
British Household Panel Survey• Major household longitudinal survey• Began in 1991• Based on an annual interview• Approximately 5,000 household and 10,000 adults• Similar in design to the German Socio-Economic Panel
• Has been subsumed and greatly extended – is now a component of the Understanding Society the UK Household Longitudinal Study (40K households)
British Household Panel Survey• British Youth Panel is a component of the BHPS
• Special questionnaire
• Annual interview with young people in the household aged 11-15
• At age 16 they enter the adult survey
Structure of the British Youth Panel (BYP)(Rotating Panel)
Waves4 5 6 7
Age 11 iAge 12 ii iAge 13 iii ii iAge 14 iv iii ii iAge 15 v iv iii iiAdult Survey v iv, v iii,iv,v
Structure of the British Youth Panel (BYP)(Rotating Panel)
Waves4 5 6 7
Age 11 i vi vii viiiAge 12 ii i vi viiAge 13 iii ii i viAge 14 iv iii ii iAge 15 v iv iii iiAdult Survey v iv, v iii,iv,v
Wave Year Age11 12 13 14 15 16
L 2002 179 153 166 160 171 13 842M 2003 111 179 147 163 154 13 767N 2004 129 128 170 147 153 14 741O 2005 133 139 129 164 152 11 728P 2006 118 141 141 127 169 18 714Q 2007 110 119 141 137 121 4 632
780 859 894 898 920 73 4,424
BYP Sample Size by AgeWave L (2002) to Q (2007) (Essex Originals)
Present analyses are restricted to young people in (original) BHPS household in England
– This is because these household have not been over-sampled– The young people are in they same education system and aiming/studying for the same qualifications
Observations = 4,424 from n = 1,564 individuals
Number of waves observed Percentage
CumulativePercentage n
1 8 8 3712 15 23 6543 22 45 9784 25 71 1,1165 30 100 1,305
4,424
BYP Sample Size by Number of WavesWave L (2002) to Q (2007) (Essex Originals)
The next few questions are about how you feel about different aspects of your life.
The faces express various types of feelings. Below each face is a number where ‘1’ is completely happy and ‘7’ is not at all happy. Please tick the box that comes closest to expressing how you feel about each of the following things.
Descriptive StatisticsOutcomes
1. Important to get GCSE exams2. How do you feel about your school3. How much it means to do well at school4. I like most of my teachers5. Teachers are always getting at me6. How do you feel about school work
All Years
Very important 77%Important
21%Not very important orNot at all important 2%
n 4,397
How important do you think it is for you to get you GCSE exams?
All Years
1 Completely happy 32%
2 28%
3 19%
4 Neither happy / unhappy 11%5 4%6 2%7 Completely unhappy 4%
n 4,405
The school you go toPlease tick the box that comes closest to expressing how you feel about each of the following things
BHPS coding scheme
All Years
A great deal 57%Quite a lot
37%A bit, but not very much andVery little 7%
n 4,424
How much does it mean to you to do well at school?
All Years
Strongly agree 15%Agree
53%Disagree 23%Strongly disagree 9%
n 4,400
I like most of my teachers
All Years
Strongly agree 8%Agree
18%Disagree 51%Strongly disagree 24%
n 4,398
Teachers are always getting at me
All Years
1 Completely happy 17%
2 33%
3 29%
4 Neither happy / unhappy 14%5 4%6 1%7 Completely unhappy 2%
n 4,406
Your school workPlease tick the box that comes closest to expressing how you feel about each of the following things
BHPS coding scheme
Xttab one-way tabulation and decomposes counts into between and within components in panel data
Measure of the overall stability – percentages are a normalised between weighted average of the within percentages
Important to get GCSE exams 62%How do you feel about your school 33%
(3 categories) 56%How much it means to do well at school 53%I like most of my teachers 43%Teachers are always getting at me 44%How do you feel about school work 36%
(3 categories) 58%
Explanatory VariablesExplanatory variables implicated in the sociology of education and youth literature (and available in the data set)
•Wave (2002 – 2007)•Age (11 – 16 years)•Gender (males; females)
•Family Registrar Generals Social Class [RGSC](I professional; II managerial & technical; IIIn skilled non-manual; IIIm skilled manual; iv partly
skilled; v unskilled)– semi-dominance approach father or mother
•Highest Qualification (parents)(higher qualifications [e.g. graduates]; A’ levels; O’level and equivalents; no qualifications)
•Parents in a different household (no; yes)•Lone Parent Household [mother] (in addition mother is a lone parent)
•Housing tenure [mother] (own/mortgage; local authority rented; housing association rented; other rented)
Summary of associations
Age – decrease in school happiness; teacher likeability decreases; teacher get a pupils more; happiness with school work declines; Gender (females) – means more to do well; like teachers; don’t feel teachers are getting at them; happier with school work;
RGSC (lower groups) smaller proportions think GCSE important; unhappier with school; means less to do well at school; agreement that teacher get at me; less happy with school work;
Hi Qual (less) similar to RGSC
GSCE Exams
School Do well at school
Like teachers
Teacher get at me
School work
Wave - - - -.06 - -.06Age - .18 - .14 -.11 .11Gender - - -.04 -.08 .15 -.10Family RGSC .14 .05 .06 - -.08 .04Highest Qualifications .15 .07 .13 .07 -.14 .07Parents in a different house .12 - .06 - -.07 -Lone Parent Household .14 - .09 - -.12 -Housing tenure (mother) .08 .11 .08 .06 -.16 .07
Statistical Modelling Methodology• Ordered categorical data (proportional odds)
• (Univariate) Ordinal random effects models – Possible in gllamm or MLwiN
• Could be fitted as a mixed model (e.g in gllamm)– Less satisfactory as responses may not have the same
number of ordered categories– Or levels of the categories may have different
substantive meanings
Statistical Modelling Methodology• New software for bivariate (two outcome) ordered
categorical data
– Natural extension of the bivariate probit (probit probit)to handle ordinal responses
– Estimates two models simultaneously – therefore the model provides two sets of parameter estimates (a mixed approach would only provide a single set)
– This is particularly attractive as an effect may vary across outcomes
Statistical Modelling Methodology• New software for bivariate (two outcome) ordered
categorical data
– Correlated responses better controlled for with a parameter estimating the correlation between the two random effects
Random Effect ModelsGSCE
ExamsSchool Do well
at schoolLike
teachersTeacher
get at meSchool work
Wave - - - - - -Age - - Gender - - - Family RGSC - - - - -Highest Qualifications - - - - -Parents in a different house - - - - - -Lone Parent Household - - - - - -Housing tenure (mother) - - - - - -Random effect (scale)
Not significant - Significant
Bivariate Random Effect Models
GSCE Exams
School Do well at school
Like teachers
Teacher get at me
School, feel about .24Do well at school .76 .28Like teachers .26 .51 .34Teachers get at me -.25 -.46 -.35 -.70School work, feel about .35 .49 .40 .52 -.52
Associations Between Outcome Variables
Bivariate Random Effects ModelWe observe correlations between these outcomes
Methodological motivation is to model them simultaneously in a random effects framework
– Models estimated using quadrature are extremely slow
Bivariate Random Effects ModelJoint model of two correlated outcomes‘feel about your school’ and ‘teachers are always getting at me (Gamma=-.46)
Regrettably the initial results are not particularly impressive!
Univarite R.E. Models Bivariate R.E. ModelsFeel about school Teacher get at Feel about school Teacher get at
B s.e. B s.e. B s.e. B s.e.wave13 0.00 0.10 -0.05 0.11 -0.03 0.10 -0.01 0.10wave14 -0.07 0.11 -0.08 0.11 -0.10 0.11 -0.03 0.11wave15 -0.11 0.11 -0.07 0.12 -0.15 0.11 -0.03 0.12wave16 0.00 0.11 -0.10 0.12 -0.03 0.12 -0.08 0.13wave17 -0.15 0.12 0.11 0.13 -0.17 0.13 0.11 0.13age12 0.27 0.10 -0.10 0.11 0.26 0.10 -0.10 0.11age13 0.84 0.10 -0.61 0.11 0.81 0.10 -0.60 0.11age14 1.06 0.11 -0.67 0.11 1.05 0.11 -0.66 0.12age15 1.18 0.11 -0.60 0.12 1.17 0.11 -0.60 0.12age16 1.51 0.26 -0.51 0.28 1.52 0.29 -0.64 0.31female -0.11 0.09 0.41 0.10 -0.09 0.09 0.42 0.10mum not lone parent w/ch 0.05 0.16 -0.04 0.17 0.03 0.15 -0.05 0.16mum LA renter 0.22 0.14 -0.41 0.15 0.17 0.13 -0.36 0.13mum HA renter 0.15 0.19 -0.35 0.20 0.15 0.16 -0.27 0.21mum other renter 0.37 0.17 -0.31 0.18 0.28 0.16 -0.21 0.19parents' quals: A level 0.05 0.16 -0.26 0.17 0.04 0.16 -0.27 0.17parents' quals: O level/other 0.11 0.12 -0.35 0.12 0.06 0.12 -0.37 0.12parents' quals: none 0.35 0.20 -0.13 0.21 0.36 0.18 -0.09 0.20parents manager/technical 0.09 0.16 -0.03 0.17 0.08 0.17 0.01 0.17parents skilled non-manual 0.24 0.18 0.02 0.19 0.29 0.19 0.02 0.18parents skilled manual 0.15 0.19 -0.07 0.20 0.17 0.20 -0.04 0.19parents partly skilled 0.15 0.20 -0.10 0.22 0.16 0.21 -0.09 0.21parents unskilled 0.69 0.31 -0.81 0.33 0.64 0.33 -0.81 0.33parents different household -0.08 0.14 -0.05 0.15 -0.06 0.14 -0.07 0.14
Univarite R.E. Models Bivariate R.E. ModelsFeel about school Teacher get at Feel about school Teacher get at
B s.e. B s.e. B s.e. B s.e.wave13 0.00 0.10 -0.05 0.11 -0.03 0.10 -0.01 0.10wave14 -0.07 0.11 -0.08 0.11 -0.10 0.11 -0.03 0.11wave15 -0.11 0.11 -0.07 0.12 -0.15 0.11 -0.03 0.12wave16 0.00 0.11 -0.10 0.12 -0.03 0.12 -0.08 0.13wave17 -0.15 0.12 0.11 0.13 -0.17 0.13 0.11 0.13age12 0.27 0.10 -0.10 0.11 0.26 0.10 -0.10 0.11age13 0.84 0.10 -0.61 0.11 0.81 0.10 -0.60 0.11age14 1.06 0.11 -0.67 0.11 1.05 0.11 -0.66 0.12age15 1.18 0.11 -0.60 0.12 1.17 0.11 -0.60 0.12age16 1.51 0.26 -0.51 0.28 1.52 0.29 -0.64 0.31female -0.11 0.09 0.41 0.10 -0.09 0.09 0.42 0.10mum not lone parent w/ch 0.05 0.16 -0.04 0.17 0.03 0.15 -0.05 0.16mum LA renter 0.22 0.14 -0.41 0.15 0.17 0.13 -0.36 0.13mum HA renter 0.15 0.19 -0.35 0.20 0.15 0.16 -0.27 0.21mum other renter 0.37 0.17 -0.31 0.18 0.28 0.16 -0.21 0.19parents' quals: A level 0.05 0.16 -0.26 0.17 0.04 0.16 -0.27 0.17parents' quals: O level/other 0.11 0.12 -0.35 0.12 0.06 0.12 -0.37 0.12parents' quals: none 0.35 0.20 -0.13 0.21 0.36 0.18 -0.09 0.20parents manager/technical 0.09 0.16 -0.03 0.17 0.08 0.17 0.01 0.17parents skilled non-manual 0.24 0.18 0.02 0.19 0.29 0.19 0.02 0.18parents skilled manual 0.15 0.19 -0.07 0.20 0.17 0.20 -0.04 0.19parents partly skilled 0.15 0.20 -0.10 0.22 0.16 0.21 -0.09 0.21parents unskilled 0.69 0.31 -0.81 0.33 0.64 0.33 -0.81 0.33parents different household -0.08 0.14 -0.05 0.15 -0.06 0.14 -0.07 0.14
Univarite R.E. Models Bivariate R.E. ModelsFeel about school Teacher get at Feel about school Teacher get at
B s.e. B s.e. B s.e. B s.e.wave13 0.00 0.10 -0.05 0.11 -0.03 0.10 -0.01 0.10wave14 -0.07 0.11 -0.08 0.11 -0.10 0.11 -0.03 0.11wave15 -0.11 0.11 -0.07 0.12 -0.15 0.11 -0.03 0.12wave16 0.00 0.11 -0.10 0.12 -0.03 0.12 -0.08 0.13wave17 -0.15 0.12 0.11 0.13 -0.17 0.13 0.11 0.13age12 0.27 0.10 -0.10 0.11 0.26 0.10 -0.10 0.11age13 0.84 0.10 -0.61 0.11 0.81 0.10 -0.60 0.11age14 1.06 0.11 -0.67 0.11 1.05 0.11 -0.66 0.12age15 1.18 0.11 -0.60 0.12 1.17 0.11 -0.60 0.12age16 1.51 0.26 -0.51 0.28 1.52 0.29 -0.64 0.31female -0.11 0.09 0.41 0.10 -0.09 0.09 0.42 0.10mum not lone parent w/ch 0.05 0.16 -0.04 0.17 0.03 0.15 -0.05 0.16mum LA renter 0.22 0.14 -0.41 0.15 0.17 0.13 -0.36 0.13mum HA renter 0.15 0.19 -0.35 0.20 0.15 0.16 -0.27 0.21mum other renter 0.37 0.17 -0.31 0.18 0.28 0.16 -0.21 0.19parents' quals: A level 0.05 0.16 -0.26 0.17 0.04 0.16 -0.27 0.17parents' quals: O level/other 0.11 0.12 -0.35 0.12 0.06 0.12 -0.37 0.12parents' quals: none 0.35 0.20 -0.13 0.21 0.36 0.18 -0.09 0.20parents manager/technical 0.09 0.16 -0.03 0.17 0.08 0.17 0.01 0.17parents skilled non-manual 0.24 0.18 0.02 0.19 0.29 0.19 0.02 0.18parents skilled manual 0.15 0.19 -0.07 0.20 0.17 0.20 -0.04 0.19parents partly skilled 0.15 0.20 -0.10 0.22 0.16 0.21 -0.09 0.21parents unskilled 0.69 0.31 -0.81 0.33 0.64 0.33 -0.81 0.33parents different household -0.08 0.14 -0.05 0.15 -0.06 0.14 -0.07 0.14
Substantive Conclusions• Less switching of attitudes than we anticipated
• Overall Satisfaction with the school experience+ Importance of GCSEs+ Happy with school+ Doing well means a lot+ Mostly teacher are liked - Over a ¼ agree teachers are get at them+ Happy with school work
Substantive ConclusionsLimited evidence…
• Ageing effect, as pupil moves through school – become more less satisfied
• Gender – females are more pro-school• Family socio-economic effect for GCSE importance• Family education effect for doing well
Moving towards an evaluation of
The is a popular line of argument that suggests that these observed differences in educational attainment are, in part, due to young people from different social backgrounds having different aspirations and attitudes to education
Quite a long way to go…
More sociological thought about the potential relationships between attitudes and education
Next Steps• Yesterday estimates for measures of bullying and
truancy emerged
• Start to model data on educational outcomes
• Incorporate ‘parental’ attitudinal data on education
• Think more about the precise interpretation of models
Next Steps• Think more about this approach
– Improve the specification of model (especially alternative measures)
– Try to speed up model estimation
• Longer term aim – compare and contrast this type of approach with ‘latent class’ style analyses
p V Gamma
Wave .69 .03 -.02
Age (respondent) .23 .04 -.01
Gender .12 .03 -.04
Family Registrar Generals Social Class (RGSC) <.01 .08 .14Highest Qualification (parents) <.01 .07 .15
Parents in a different household <.01 .05 .12
Lone Parent Household (mother) <.01 .06 .14
Housing tenure (mother) <.01 .05 .08
How important do you think it is for you to get you GCSE exams?
p V Gamma
Wave .28 .04 -.02
Age (respondent) <.01 .09 .18
Gender .59 .03 -.02
Family Registrar Generals Social Class (RGSC) <.01 .05 .05Highest Qualification (parents) .02 .05 .07
Parents in a different household .07 .05 .02
Lone Parent Household (mother) .08 .05 .05
Housing tenure (mother) <.01 .08 .11
The school you go toPlease tick the box that comes closest to expressing how you feel about each of the following things
p V Gamma
Wave .02 .05 -.02
Age (respondent) .87 .02 .00
Gender <.01 .04 -.04
Family Registrar Generals Social Class (RGSC) <.01 .08 .06
Highest Qualification (parents) <.01 .08 .13
Parents in a different household <.01 .05 .06
Lone Parent Household (mother) <.01 .05 .09
Housing tenure (mother) <.01 .07 .08
How much does it mean to you to do well at school?
p V Gamma
Wave <.01 .05 -.06
Age (respondent) <.01 .10 .14
Gender <.01 .05 -.08
Family Registrar Generals Social Class (RGSC) .06 .04 .03
Highest Qualification (parents) <.01 .04 .07
Parents in a different household .39 .03 -.01
Lone Parent Household (mother) .12 .04 -.02
Housing tenure (mother) <.01 .06 .06
I like most of my teachers
p V Gamma
Wave .15 .04 .01
Age (respondent) <.01 .07 -.11
Gender <.01 .09 .15
Family Registrar Generals Social Class (RGSC) <.01 .07 -.08
Highest Qualification (parents) <.01 .07 -.14
Parents in a different household <.03 .04 -.07
Lone Parent Household (mother) <.01 .06 -.12
Housing tenure (mother) <.01 .08 -.16
Teachers are always getting at me
p V Gamma
Wave <.01 .05 -.06
Age (respondent) <.01 .07 .11
Gender <.01 .07 -.10
Family Registrar Generals Social Class (RGSC) <.01 .05 .04Highest Qualification (parents) <.01 .07 .07
Parents in a different household .08 .05 .07
Lone Parent Household (mother) .19 .05 .08
Housing tenure (mother) <.01 .07 .07
Your school workPlease tick the box that comes closest to expressing how you feel about each of the following things
Bivariate Random Effects ModelJoint model of two correlated outcomes‘important to get GCSEs’ and ‘feel about your school’ (Gamma=.24)
The attraction of this type of model is that it is our first attempt to try to move towards a ‘multivariate’ (i.e. multiple outcome) model of attitudes
– represent the ordinality of outcome measures
Significant Variables GSCE Exams Feel about school Joint ModelGSCE Exams / Feel about school
s.e. s.e. s.e.Family RGSCi. Professional - -
ii. Manager/technical 0.53 0.26 0.50 0.27iiin Skilled non-manual 0.57 0.28 0.59 0.29iiim Skilled manual 1.14 0.29 1.11 0.30iv Partly skilled 0.81 0.31 0.81 0.32v Unskilled 1.32 0.44 1.34 0.46
Age1112 0.22 0.09 0.28 0.1013 0.69 0.09 0.84 0.1014 0.85 0.09 1.06 0.1115 0.92 0.09 1.18 0.1116 0.96 0.22 1.47 0.29
Obs = 4200Cases = 1505
Scale = 1.59 Obs = 4211Cases = 1507
Scale = 1.22 Obs = 8411Cases = 1507
Scale =1.57Scale = 1.22
Cor = .49
Ordinal Random Effects Model including - Wave; Age; Gender; Family RGSC; Highest Qualifications; Parents in a different house; Lone Parent Household; Housing tenure.