Social differences in curriculum access and student achievement are a feature of schooling in Australia. These differences are usually documented at the senior secondary level where the curriculum is most differentiated, but the present study found large social, gender and school differences in levels of study at a more junior year-level. Using detailed information from the certificate records of 5491 Year 10 students, this study found that in English and mathematics the level of study students access is strongly related to socioeconomic background, gender and school attended. Differences between schools, measured using multilevel modelling techniques, are related to the type of school, enrolment size, and social composition. The study also found strong effects of curriculum location in the middle years of school on school completion, access to academic courses in senior school, and final year achievement. The results show significant between-school effects suggesting that schools can make a difference.
AbrahamJ. (1995). Divide and school: Gender and class dynamics in comprehensive education. London: Falmer Press.
2.
AinleyJ.GraetzB.LongM.BattenM. (1995). Socioeconomic status and school education. Melbourne: ACER.
3.
AinleyJ.RobinsonL.Harvey-BeavisA.ElsworthG.FlemingM. (1994). Subject choice in Years 11 and12. Canberra: AGPS.
4.
BrykA.S.RaudenbushS.W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
ColemanJ.S.HofferT.KilgoreS.B. (1982) High school achievement: Public, Catholic and private schools compared. New York: Basic Books.
6.
EntwisleD.R.AlexanderK.L.Steffel-OlsonL. (1994). The gender gap in math: Possible origins in neighbourhood effects. American Sociological Review, 59(6), 822–838.
7.
GaretM.S.DeLanyB. (1988). Students, courses and stratification. Sociology of Education, 61, 61–77.
8.
LambS.P. (1994) Private schools and student attitudes: An Australian perspective. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28(1), 43–54.
9.
LambS.P. (1997). Gender differences in mathematics participation: An Australian perspective. Educational Studies, 23, 105–125.
10.
LinkeR.D. (1988). Regional analysis of socioeconomic trends in educational participation. Canberra: Australian National University.
11.
OakesJ. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press.
12.
RasbashJ.GoldsteinH. (1994). Efficient analysis of mixed hierarchical and cross-classified random structures using a miltilevel model. Journal of Educational and Behavioural Statistics, 19(4), 337–350.
13.
TeeseR. V. (1989). Australian private schools, specialisation and curriculum conservation. British Journal of Educational Studies, 37(3), 235–252.
14.
TeeseR.V. (1991). A social geography of educational outcomes in Melbourne. In CoulbyD.JonesC. (Ed.), World yearbook of educationLondon: Kogan Page.
15.
TeeseR.McLeanG.PoleselJ. (1993). Equity outcomes: A report to the Schools Council's taskforce on a broadbanded equity program for schools. Canberra: AGPS.
16.
ThomasS.SammonsP.MortimoreP.SmeesR. (1997). Differential secondary school effectiveness: Comparing the performance of different pupil groups. British Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 451–468.
17.
WilliamsT.CarpenterP.G. (1990). Private schooling and public achievement. Australian Journal of Education, 34, 1–24.
18.
WillmsJ.D. (1987). Patterns of academic achievement in public and private schools. In HaertelE.JamesT.LevinH. (Eds.), Comparing public and private schools, Volume 2: School achievement (pp. 113–141). New York: Falmer Press.
