Transcript SEN and ethnicity

Race, sex, class and educational
attainment at age 16: The case of
white working class pupils
Keynote address to “Raising the achievement of
white working class pupils”, National Exhibition
Centre, Birmingham, 21 September 2009
Dr. Steve Strand
Associate Professor
University of Warwick
[email protected]
024 7652 2197
Aims of this presentation
•
•
•
•
•
What are the attainment gaps at age 16 by gender,
ethnicity and social class, how do they compare?
What are the interactions (if any) between these
factors?
Do gaps change (widen or narrow) as pupils
progress through secondary school?
Can we account for the gaps through control for a
range of pupil, family, school & neighbourhood
contextual factors?
Consider implications for policy.
Introduction
•
•
•
This study was commissioned by DCSF particularly
to look at ethnicity and attainment
Long standing concern in UK around the attainment
of some minority ethnic groups (e.g. Rampton, 1979;
Swann, 1985). Black pupils “as a group are
underachieving in our education system”
Is this still the case? Youth Cohort Study (YCS)
indicates that some historically underachieving
groups have improved markedly. For example
Bangladeshi gap has disappeared, and ‘Black’ and
Pakistani gap has closed significantly.
Historical trends 1991-2006
Youth Cohort Study 1991 - 2006
80
5+ A*-C GCSE grades or equivalent
70
60
50
50
40
38
36
30
34
29
20
23
23
21
10
White
Black
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
0
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2006
Introduction (Cont)
•
However there is still a large gap in the most recent
(2008) national age 16 examination results:
– if we disaggregate the Black group: 48% of White vs.
36% of Black Caribbean pupils achieved 5+ A*-C
GCSE grades including English & mathematics
– not all BME groups underachieve - Chinese, Indian,
Mixed White & Asian and Irish students on average
achieve better results at age 16 than White British
students
GCSE (age 16) 2008
70
% 5+A*-C including English and maths
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Black
Caribbean
White &
Black
Caribbean
Pakistani Black African Bangladeshi
White & White British
Black African
Irish
White and
Asian
Indian
Chinese
48% White British vs. 36% Black Caribbean pupils achieved 5+ A*-C or equivalent
including English & mathematics. Source: DCSF SFR 32-2008.
Limitations of YCS / NPD
•
YCS small sample size means sig. limitations:
– Limited breakdown by ethnicity (e.g. aggregated to ‘Black’)
– Not able to explore interaction of ethnicity, gender & social class
– Very limited contextual data (pupil, family, school and
neighbourhood)
– Cannot explore how gaps change or develop age 11-16.
•
•
National Pupil Database (NPD) since 2002 provides
population data re gender and ethnicity, but very
limited contextual data (FSM and IDACI)
Need a source that combines a rich set of survey
derived contextual factors with NPD & School
Census – LSYPE.
Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE)
• Large scale, DCSF funded
– 15,770 Y9 pupils (aged 14) in 2004
– Over sampled the six major ethnic minorities (Indian, Pakistani,
Bangladeshi, Black Caribbean, Black African & Mixed heritage)
•
•
•
– 647 secondary schools, includes independent sector & PRUs
Detailed in-depth data
– Extended face to face interview with Young Person, 45 min main
parent interview, 10 min second parent interview, links to ASC &
NPD (KS2, KS3, GCSE/GNVQ) .
Longitudinal tracking
– Subsequent interviews at Wave 2 in 2005 & Wave 3 in 2006,
further follow up planned through until age 25 (2015).
Aims
– to better understand the factors influencing attainment and
progress of BME pupils during secondary school.
Gender gap
Girls
Total
Points
Score
0.07
5+ A*-C
incl. Eng
& maths
49%
Boys
-0.15
41%
Gap
0.22
-7%
Gender
• -0.22 SD = 36 points (e.g. converting 6 grade ‘D’
to 6 grade ‘C’) BUT gap is subject specific (e.g.
-0.31 for English but only -0.07 for maths and
science)
Ethnic gaps
Ethnic gaps
Ethnic group
Black Caribbean
Pakistani
Black African
Mixed heritage
White British
Bangladeshi
Any other group
Indian
Gap (lowest vs highest)
Total
Points
Score
-0.29
-0.13
-0.09
-0.09
-0.05
-0.04
0.18
0.32
0.61
5+ A*-C
incl. Eng
& maths
31%
36%
42%
41%
45%
42%
50%
59%
28%
Socio-Economic Classification (SEC) gap
Socio-Economic Classification (SEC) gap
Socio-Economic Class (SEC)
Higher managerial & prof.
Lower managerial & prof.
Intermediate
Small employers & own account
Lower supervisory & tech.
Semi-routine
Routine
Long term unemployed
Gap (top vs. bottom)
0.57
0.26
0.04
0.00
-0.17
5+ A*-C
including
Eng &
maths
74.1%
59.5%
47.4%
46.4%
36.5%
-0.30
-0.47
-0.72
1.29
30.5%
26.2%
16.8%
57.4%
Total
Points
Score
Summary – attainment gaps at age 16
Gap
Total points
score
5+ A%-C incl.
English &
(standardised)
maths
Gender
0.22
7%
Ethnic group
0.61
28%
Socio-economic class
1.29
57%
In inverse rank to the extent of press and media attention!
Ethnicity, sex and class together
•
•
•
At age 14, Black Caribbean pupils achieved less
well than White British for all social class groups and
both boys and girls
At age 16 much more complex, as shown in next
figure. e.g. the ethnic gap varies significantly by
social class and gender
Three main results:
– Effect of class is strongest for White British students
– The lowest attaining groups are both Black Caribbean
boys and White British boys from low SEC
– Black Caribbean students in medium and high SEC homes
(particularly boys) underachieve relative to White British
KS4 points score by ethnicity, class & gender
White British ‘working class’
• Full range of six socio-economic variables:
– Socio-economic class (SEC) of the home
– Maternal education (highest qualification)
– Family poverty (entitlement to FSM)
– Rented accommodation (vs, owner occupier)
– Single parent households
•
•
– Neighbourhood disadvantage (IDACI)
At the disadvantaged end of each of the above
White British are the lowest attaining ethnic group
An aggregate SES measures confirms
pronounced ‘White working class’ effect
Age16 score by aggregate SES
Girls
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Black Caribbean
Black African
White British
-0.6
-0.8
-1.0
Boys
1.4
Mean total points score (normalised)
Mean total points score (normalised)
1.4
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Black Caribbean
Black African
White British
-0.8
-1.0
-1.2
-1.2
2
1
0
-1
-2
Socio Economic Status (SES) normal score (high to low)
2
1
0
-1
-2
Socio Economic Status (SES) normal score (high to low)
Single factor explanations are insufficient
•
Class – why are ethnic minority students from
working class homes so much more resilient than
White British? Why do Black Caribbean (particularly
boys) from high SEC homes underachieve?
•
Ethnicity – why no difference between White British
and Black Caribbean pupils from low SEC homes?
Why do some Black groups achieve much better than
others (e.g., Black African and Black Caribbean)?
•
Gender – why is the gender gap in attainment so
much larger for Black Caribbean and Bangladeshi
pupils than for White British pupils?
Progress during secondary school
• The gender gap is relatively small, but it
increases across secondary school (from -0.07
to -0.22 SD)
• The overall social class and ethnic gaps remain
stable, but there is a substantial interaction:
• White British working class pupils (both boys
and girls) show a relative decline, particularly
from low SEC homes
• Most minority ethnic groups make strong
progress, particularly in the last two years of
secondary school.
High social class - Key Stages 2-4
Low social class - Key Stages 2-4
Accounting for the gaps
• Demographics are ‘package’ variables – what
are the causal mechanisms?
• Many factors had a significant association in full
regression model: maternal education, parental
resources, monitoring, family discord, family structure,
truancy, SEN, school type, %FSM etc
• The largest influences were:
• Pupils’ educational aspirations;
• Parents’ educational aspirations for their child;
• Pupils’ academic self concept;
• Frequency of completing homework.
Educational aspirations
Educational aspirations, ASC & motivation
• Key findings
– Little social class effect for Asian & Black African
groups, educational aspirations uniformly high
– White British working class pupils (both boys & girls)
very low educational aspirations <70% aspire to
continue in FTE after age 16
•
– Gender gap particularly large between Black
Caribbean boys and girls
Similar pattern of results for Academic SelfConcept (ASC) and for frequency of completing
homework (indicator of effort and motivation)
Ethnic gaps - Summary
•
•
In low SEC homes all minority ethnic groups make strong
progress during KS4, and have caught up (Black Caribbean)
or exceeded (all other groups) the attainment of White British
pupils by age 16. Key resilience factors are high
educational aspirations (both pupils & parents), strong
academic self concept and motivation (homework).
In high SEC homes ethnic differentials remain strong, with
Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils outperforming
White British (when social disadvantage is included in
models). Again aspirations, ASC and homework can account
for this. However Black Caribbean & Black African boys
underachieve relative to their high aspirations, high ASC
and comparable homework to White British peers.
The origin of the social class gaps
•
How do differences in educational aspirations, ASC
and motivation at age 14 arise?
– Curriculum – must be seen as relevant and engaging by White
British & Black Caribbean working class pupils in particular
– School quality – FSM gap increase over time, do White British
working class and Black Caribbean pupils share the disadvantage
of attending ‘low quality’ schools? research is mixed (Strand, 2009)
– Early HLE and parenting – can account for SES gaps on starting
school (e.g., Hart & Risley, 1995; EPPE study; MCS). Key focus on
early years provision and parenting (e.g. PSA and PEIP initiatives)
– Teacher expectations – particularly in relation to the underachievement of Black Caribbean boys from high SEC homes
(Strand, 2007)
– Economic capital - independent schools, tutors, school choice
References
Strand, S. (2007). Minority ethnic pupils in the
Longitudinal Study of Young People in England.
DfES Research Report RR-002. London:
Department for Children, Families and Schools.
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles
/DCSF-RR002.pdf
Strand, S. (2008). Minority ethnic pupils in the
Longitudinal Study of Young People in England:
Extension report on performance in public
examinations at age 16. DCSF Research Report
RR-029. London: Department for Children,
Schools and Families.
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles
/DCSF-RR029.pdf
Contact Details
Steve Strand, Associate Professor,
Warwick Institute of Education
[email protected]
Tel (Direct Line): 024 7652 2197
APPENDIX 1: Ethnic group*gender*class
1. Managerial &
Professional
Ethnic group
Girls
Boys
2 intermediate & Lower 3 routine, semi-routine
supervisory
& LT Unemployed
All
Girls
Boys
All
Girls
Boys
All
White British
69.1% 60.5% 64.9% 47.4% 38.7% 42.9% 28.3% 22.7% 25.3%
Mixed heritage
58.0% 62.2% 60.0% 35.2% 40.7% 38.4% 23.8% 19.2% 21.4%
Indian
80.7% 75.3% 77.6% 60.8% 59.4% 60.0% 50.1% 34.5% 42.8%
Pakistani
66.4% 46.0% 56.4% 41.4% 31.1% 35.9% 32.1% 27.5% 29.7%
Bangladeshi
64.8% 49.6% 56.3% 28.0% 39.0% 34.1% 45.8% 29.1% 38.2%
Black Caribbean
38.5% 38.4% 38.5% 43.2% 28.8% 35.3% 28.1% 17.4% 22.8%
Black African
67.0% 41.0% 56.4% 50.3% 42.5% 46.7% 28.7% 24.7% 26.4%
Any other group
81.3% 65.8% 73.9% 53.1% 42.9% 46.4% 46.0% 26.8% 36.7%
TOTAL
68.8% 60.3% 64.6% 47.3% 39.3% 43.1% 30.3% 23.3% 26.6%