This article examines two critical questions related to equality of educational opportunity. First, does the academic advantage that was observed in Catholic high schools more than two decades ago continue to hold for contemporary students in Catholic middle schools? Second, how closely do different school sectors adhere to the common school ideal? Answers to these questions are central to efforts to reduce educational inequalities. The study reported here relies on data from sixth- and eighth-grade students in the Chicago School Study, a longitudinal survey of Chicago public schools, and the Chicago Catholic School Study, a survey of all the Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of Chicago. These school systems are the third largest public and largest Catholic school systems in the United States. The results show no consistent sector differences in achievement gains in sixth and eighth grades in reading and mathematics. Moreover, background characteristics vary by school sector, and neither sector eliminates all background effects on achievement. Compared to the Chicago public schools, Chicago Catholic schools reduce the effects of students’ race and socioeconomic status on reading achievement but exacerbate the effects of race on mathematics achievement.
AksoyTevfikLinkCharles R.2000. “A Panel Analysis of Student Mathematics Achievement in the U.S. in the 1990s: Does Increasing the Amount of Time in Learning Activities Affect Mathematics Achievement?” Economics of Education Review19(3):261-77.
2.
AlexanderKarl L.PallasAaron M.1983. “Private Schools and Public Policy: New Evidence on Cognitive Achievement in Public and Private Schools.” Sociology of Education56:170-81.
3.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
4.
BrykAnthony S.LeeValerie E.HollandPeter B.1993. Catholic Schools and the Common Good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
BrykA. S.SebringP. B.AllensworthE.LuppescuS.EastonJ.2010. Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6.
CarbonaroWilliam. 2006. “Public-private Differences in Achievement among Kindergarten Students: Differences in Learning Opportunities and Student Outcomes.” American Journal of Education113:31-65.
7.
CarbonaroWilliamCovayElizabeth. 2010. “School Sector and Student Achievement in the Era of Standards Based Reforms.” Sociology of Education83:160-82.
8.
ColemanJamesCampbellErnestHobsonCarolMcPartlandJamesMoodAlexanderWeinfeldFrederickYorkRobert. 1966. Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
9.
ColemanJames S.HofferThomas. 1987. Public and Private Schools: The Impact of Communities. New York: Basic Books.
10.
ColemanJames S.HofferThomasKilgoreSally B.1982a. “Cognitive Outcomes in Public and Private Schools.” Sociology of Education55:65-76.
11.
ColemanJames S.HofferThomasKilgoreSally B.1982b. High School Achievement: Public, Catholic, and Private Schools Compared. New York: Basic Books.
12.
Consortium on Chicago School Research. 2004. “Public Use Data Set: 2004 Survey of Students and Teachers User’s Manual.” Consortium on Chicago School Research, Chicago, IL. Unpublished manuscript.
13.
CornellDewey G.MayerMatthew J.2010. “Why Do School Order and Safety Matter?” Educational Researcher39(1):7-15.
ErenOzkanHendersonDaniel J.2008. “The Impact of Homework on Student Achievement.” Econometrics Journal11(2):326-48.
16.
FeuerMichael J.HollandPaul W.GreenBert F.BertenthalMeryl W.HemphillCadelle F.1999. Uncommon Measures: Equivalence and Linkage among Educational Tests. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17.
GamoranAdam. 1996. “Student Achievement in Public Magnet, Public Comprehensive, and Private City High Schools.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis18:1-18.
18.
GamoranAdamKellySean. 2003. “Tracking, Instruction, and Unequal Literacy in Secondary School English.” Pp. 109-26 in Stability and Change in American Education, edited by HallinanM.GamoranA.KubitschekW.LovelessT.Clinton Corners, NY: Eliot Werner Publications.
19.
GoldbergerArthur S.CainGlen C.1982. “The Causal Analysis of Cognitive Outcomes in the Coleman, Hoffer and Kilgore Report.” Sociology of Education55:103-22.
20.
GreeleyAndrew M.1982. Catholic High Schools and Minority Students. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
21.
HallinanM. T.1994. “School Differences in Tracking Effects on Achievement.” Social Forces72:799-820.
22.
HermanMelissa R.2009. “The Black-white-other Achievement Gap: Testing Theories of Academic Performance among Multiracial and Monoracial Adolescents.” Sociology of Education82:20-46.
23.
HofferThomas. 1998. “Social Background and Achievement in Public and Catholic High Schools.” Social Psychology of Education2:7-23.
24.
JencksChristopher1985. “How Much Do High School Students Learn?”Sociology of Education58(2):128-35.
25.
KilgoreSally B.1983. “Statistical Evidence, Selectivity Effects and Program Placement: Response to Alexander and Pallas.” Sociology of Education56(4):182-86.
26.
KolenMichael J.BrennanRobert L.2004. Test Equating, Scaling, and Linking: Methods and Practices. New York: Springer.
27.
LubienskiChristopherCraneCorinna C.LubienskiSarah T.2008. “What Do We Know about School Effectiveness? Academic Gains in a Value-added Analysis of Public and Private Schools.” Phi Delta Kappan89(9):689-695.
28.
LubienskiSarah T.LubienskiChristopher. 2006. “What NAEP Can Tell Us about School Achievement?”Education Week25(26):28, 30.
29.
McDermottKathryn A.2000. “Barriers to Large-scale Success of Models for Urban School Reform.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis22(1): 83-9.
30.
MorganStephen L.2001. “Counterfactuals, Causal Effect Heterogeneity, and the Catholic School Effect on Learning.” Sociology of Education74:341-74.
31.
MorganStephen L.WinshipChristopher. 2007. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
32.
MyersDavid E.MilneAnn M.BakerKeithGinsburgAlan. 1987. “Student Discipline and High School Performance.” Sociology of Education60:18-33.
33.
NoellJay. 1982. “Public and Catholic Schools: A Reanalysis of Public and Private Schools.” Sociology of Education 55(2-3):123-32.
34.
PajaresFrankSchunkDale. 2001. “Self-beliefs and School Success: Self-efficacy, Self-concept, and School Achievement.” Pp. 239-65 in International Perspectives on Individual Differences: Self-Perception, Vol. 3, edited by RidingR. J.RaynerS. G.Westport, CT: Ablex.
35.
PintrichP. R.De GrootE. V.1990. “Motivational and Self-regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance.” Journal of Educational Psychology82(1):33-40.
36.
SarasonS. B.1998. “Some Features of a Flawed Educational System.” Daedalus127(4):1-12.
37.
StolzenbergRoss M.RellesDaniel A.1997. “Tools for Intuition about Sample Selection Bias and Its Correction.” American Sociological Review62:494-507.
38.
TeachmanJay D.1987. “Family Background, Educational Resources, and Educational Attainment.” American Sociological Review52:548-57.
39.
TyackDavid B.CubanLarry. 1995. Tinkering toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
WillmsJ. Douglas. 1985. “Catholic School Effects on Academic Achievement: New Evidence from the High School and Beyond Follow-up Study.” Sociology of Education58:98-114.
41.
YounissJamesMcClellanJeffrey. 1999. “Catholic Schools in Perspective: Religious Identity, Achievement and Citizenship.” Phi Delta Kappan81:95.
