A strong relationship between article background and educational outcomes fuels a negative inequality cycle. This paper explores the interplay between student socioeconomic status and educational outcomes, and the mediating role of Opportunity-to-Learn (OTL) in high- and middle-income countries. Using data from PISA 2012, we find that the relationship between OTL and mathematics achievement is mostly positive. The magnitude of this relationship is higher in more affluent societies. Our results raise the possibility that unobserved teacher quality, school leadership, or other features of schools in lower-income countries make OTL less productive than in more developed nations. This lends support to the “complementary process” hypothesis and the notion that success (or riches) begets success. The analysis also shows that OTL mediates the effect of individual socioeconomic and cultural background on educational outcomes. This finding lends support for a policy emphasis on classroom-level practices as one key lever for improving learning and upward mobility for disadvantaged students.
AgasistiT.LongobardiS. (2014). Educational institutions, resources, and students’ resiliency: An empirical study about OECD countries. Economics Bulletin, 34(2), 1055–1067.
2.
AgüeroJ. M.BelecheT. (2013). Test-Mex: Estimating the effects of school year length on student performance in Mexico. Journal of Development Economics, 103, 353–361.
3.
AronsonJ.ZimmermanJ.CarlosL. (1998). Is it just a matter of time. PACE Media/Education Writers Seminar (April 10, 1998). West Ed.
4.
BakerD. P.GoeslingB.LeTendreG. K. (2002). Socioeconomic status, school quality, and national economic development: A cross-national analysis of the “Heyneman-Loxley Effect” on mathematics and science achievement. Comparative Education Review, 46(3), 291–312.
5.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
6.
BennettJ. (2008). Benchmarks for early childhood services in OECD countries (Innocenti Working Paper 2008-02). Florence, Italy: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.
7.
BlauF. D.GrossbergA. J. (1990). Maternal labor supply and children’s cognitive development (Working Paper No. w3536). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
8.
BolT.WitschgeJ.Van de WerfhorstH. G.DronkersJ. (2014). Curricular tracking and central examinations: Counterbalancing the impact of social background on student achievement in 36 countries. Social Forces, 92, 1545–1572.
9.
BurgeB.LenkeitJ.SizmurJ. (2015). PISA in practice: Cognitive activation in maths. Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.
10.
CarlinJ. B.GalatiJ. C.RoystonP. (2008). A new framework for managing and analyzing multiply imputed data in Stata. Stata Journal, 8(1), 49–67.
11.
CarrollJ. (1963). A model of school learning. The Teachers College Record, 64(8), 723–723.
12.
ChettyR.FriedmanJ. N.RockoffJ. E. (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood (Working Paper No. w17699). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
13.
ChiuM. M. (2010). Effects of inequality, family and school on mathematics achievement: Country and student differences. Social Forces, 88(4), 1645–1676.
14.
ChiuM. M.KhooL. (2005). Effects of resources, inequality, and privilege bias on achievement: Country, school, and student level analyses. American Educational Research Journal, 42(4), 575–603.
15.
ChudgarA.LuscheiT. F. (2009). National income, income inequality, and the importance of schools: A hierarchical cross-national comparison. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 626–658.
16.
ClarkP.CrawfordC.SteeleF.VignolesA. (2010). The choice between fixed and random effects models: Some considerations for educational research (Working Paper No. 10/240). University of Bristol, UK: Centre for Market and Public Organisation.
17.
CoganL. S.SchmidtW. H. (2013). The concept of opportunity to learn (OTL) in international comparisons of education. In StaceyK.TurnerR. (Eds.), Assessing mathematical literacy: The PISA Experience (pp. 207–216). New York, NY: Springer.
18.
CondronD. J. (2011). Egalitarianism and educational excellence compatible goals for affluent societies?Educational Researcher, 40(2), 47–55.
19.
EngleP. L.BlackM. M.BehrmanJ. R.De MelloM. C.GertlerP. J.KapiririL., & International Child Development Steering Group. (2007). Strategies to avoid the loss of developmental potential in more than 200 million children in the developing world. The Lancet, 369(9557), 229–242.
20.
FreemanR. B.ViarengoM. (2014). School and family effects on educational outcomes across countries. Economic Policy, 29(79), 395–446.
21.
FreemanR. B.MachinS.ViarengoM. (2010). Variation in educational outcomes and policies across countries and of schools within countries (NBER Working Paper No. w16293). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
22.
GoodmanL. A. (1960). On the exact variance of products. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 55(292), 708–713.
23.
Grantham-McGregorS.CheungY. B.CuetoS.GlewweP.RichterL.StruppB., & International Child Development Steering Group. (2007). Developmental potential in the first 5 years for children in developing countries. The Lancet, 369(9555), 60–70.
24.
GuitonG.OakesJ. (1995). Opportunity to learn and conceptions of educational equality. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17, 323–336.
25.
HanushekE. A.WoessmannL. (2008). The role of cognitive skills in economic development. Journal of Economic Literature, 46(3), 607–668.
26.
HermanJ. L.KleinD. C.AbediJ. (2000). Assessing students’ opportunity to learn: Teacher and student perspectives. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(4), 16–24.
27.
HeynemanS. P.LoxleyW. A. (1982). Influences on academic achievement across high and low income countries: A re-analysis of IEA data. Sociology of Education, 55(9), 13–21.
28.
HeynemanS. P.LoxleyW. A. (1983). The effect of primary-school quality on academic achievement across twenty-nine high-and low-income countries. American Journal of Sociology, 88(6), 1162–1194.
29.
HopkinsD. J.KingG. (2010). Improving Anchoring Vignettes: Designing Surveys to Correct for Interpersonal Incomparability. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 201–222.
30.
KaneT. J.StaigerD. O. (2008). Estimating teacher impacts on student achievement: An experimental evaluation (NBER Working Paper 14607). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
31.
LavyV. (2010). Do differences in school’s instruction time explain international achievement gaps in math, science, and reading? Evidence from developed and developing countries. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
32.
McDonnellL. M. (1995). Opportunity to learn as a research concept and a policy instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 305–322.
33.
MonttG. (2011). Cross-national differences in educational achievement inequality. Sociology of Education, 84(1), 49–68.
34.
OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 results: Excellence through equity: Giving every student the chance to succeed (Volume II). PISA, OECD Publishing.
35.
OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014). PISA, OECD Publishing.
36.
OpdenakkerM.-C.van DammeJ. (2000). Effects of Schools, Teaching Staff and Classes on Achievement and Well-Being in Secondary Education: Similarities and Differences Between School Outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(2), 165–196.
37.
RockoffJ. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.
38.
RoystonP. (2009). Multiple imputation of missing values: Further update of ice, with an emphasis on categorical variables. Stata Journal, 9(3), 466–477.
39.
RubinD. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
40.
SchmidtW. H.BurroughsN. A.ZoidoP.HouangR. T. (2015). The role of schooling in perpetuating educational inequality an international perspective. Educational Researcher, 44(7), 371–386.
41.
SchmidtW. H.CoganL. S.HouangR. T.McKnightC. (2009). Equality of educational opportunity: A myth or reality in US schooling. Michigan State University, East Lansing: Education Policy Center.
42.
SchmidtW. H.McKnightC. C. (1995). Surveying educational opportunity in mathematics and science: An international perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 337–353.
43.
SchmidtW. H.McKnightC.ValverdeG. A.HouangR. T.WileyD. E. (Eds.). (1997). Many visions, many aims, volume I: A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in school mathematics. The Netherlands: Springer.
44.
SchmidtW. H.ZoidoP.CoganL. (2014). Schooling matters: Opportunities to learn in PISA 2012 (OECD Education Working Papers, No. 95), OECD.
45.
ShonkoffJ. P.PhillipsD. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
46.
SobelM. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290–312.
47.
Van LandeghemG.De FraineB.Van DammeJ. (2005). The Consequence of Ignoring a Level of Nesting in Multilevel Analysis: A Comment. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 423–434.
48.
VegasE.PetrowJ. (2008). Raising student learning in Latin America: The challenge for the 21st century. Washington, DC: World Bank.
49.
WangJ. (1998). Opportunity to learn: The impacts and policy implications. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(3), 137–156.
50.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
