School size and the influence of socioeconomic status on student achievement: Confronting the threat of size bias in national data sets

Education Policy Analysis Archives

Volumn 12, Issue , 2004, Pages 1-35

  Howley, Craig B ^a,b,c   Howley, Aimee A ^a  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Research Initiative of the ACCLAIM

^c Research Initiative of the ACCLAIM ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 5344270570     PISSN: 10682341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14507/epaa.v12n52.2004     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Abbott, M., Joireman, J., & Stroh, J. (2002). The influence of district size, school size, and socioeconomic status on student achievement in Washington: A replication study using hierarchical linear modeling (Technical Report No. 3). Lynnwood, WA: Washington School Research Center. (Retrieved January 14, 2004 from http://www.spu.edu/orgs/research/ districtschoolsizetechreport3.html)
2. Adams, H. (1907/1943). The education of Henry Adams. New York: Modern Library.
3. Alspaugh, J. (1998, February/March). The relationship of School-to-school transitions and school size to high school dropout rates. The High School Journal, 154-160.
4. Alspaugh, J., & Gao, R. (2003). School size as a factor in elementary school achievement. Unpublished manuscript, University of Missouri, Columbia.
5. American Institutes for Research. (2003). AM statistical software (Version 0.06.01 Beta, released October 27, 2003). Washington, DC: Author. Software available online from: http://am.air.org/about2.asp
6. American Institutes for Research and SRI, Inc. (2003). High time for high school reform: Early findings from the evaluation of the national school district and network grants program. Washington, DC, and Menlo Park, CA: Authors. (Retrieved January 15, 2004 from http://www.gatesfoundation.org/nr/ downloads/ed/smallschools/Small_schools_eval_ExecSumm_2003.pdf)
7. Bickel, R. (manuscript submitted for publication). Multi-level analysis for policy analysts: It's just regression! Huntington, WV: Marshall University.
8. Bickel, R. (1999b). School size, socioeconomic status, and achievement: A Georgia replication of inequity in education. Randolph, VT: Rural Challenge Policy Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 433 985)
9. Bickel, R. (1999b). School size, socioeconomic status, and achievement: A Texas replication of inequity in education. Randolph, VT: Rural Challenge Policy Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 433 986)
10. Bickel, R., & Howley, C. (2000). The influence of scale on student performance: A multilevel extension of the Matthew principle. Education Policy Analysis Archives (Online), 8(22). Retrieved February 11, 2002 from: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v3n18.html.
11. Bickel, R., Howley, C., Williams, T. and Glascock, C. (2001, October 8). High school size, achievement equity, and cost: Robust interaction effects and tentative results. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 9(40). Retrieved October 8, 2001 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v9n40.html.
12. Boyer, E. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. Philadelphia: Harper & Row.
13. Coleman, J., Hoffer, T., & Kilgore, S. (1981). Public and private schools (Contractor Draft Report). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved April 10, 2004 from http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/ pubsinfo.asp?pubid=82230D
14. Cotton, K. (1996). School size, school climate, and student performance (Close-Up No. 20). Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED397476)
15. Cubberley, E. (1922). Rural life and education: A study of the rural-school problem as a phase of the rural-life problem (Revised Edition). NY: Houghton-Mifflin. (Original work published 1915; ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED392559)
16. Curtin, T., Ingels, S., Wu, S., & Heuer, R. (2002). National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988: Base year to fourth follow-up data user's manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
17. Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Ort, S. (2002). Reinventing high school: Outcomes of the Coalition Campus Schools Project. American Educational Research Journal, 39(3), 639-673.
18. Friedkin, N., & Necochea, J. (1988). School system size and performance: A contingency perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(3), 237-249.
19. Gibboney, R. (1994). The stone trumpet: A story of practical school reform, 1960-1990. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
20. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
21. Hennen, J. (1998). The Americanization of West Virginia: Creating a modern industrial state, 1916-1925. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press.
22. Howley, C. (1995). The Matthew principle: A West Virginia replication? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3(18). Retrieved February 13, 2002, from http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v3n18.html.
23. Howley, C. (1996a). Compounding disadvantage: The effects of school and district size on student achievement in West Virginia. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 12(1), 25-32.
24. Howley, C. (1996b). Sizing up schooling: A West Virginia analysis and critique. Dissertation Abstracts International(A), 57(3), 940. (University Microfilms No. AAT 9622575)
25. Howley, C. (1999a). The Matthew Project: State report for Montana. Randolph, VT: Rural Challenge Policy Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 433 173)
26. Howley, C. (1999b). The Matthew Project: State report for Ohio. Randolph, VT: Rural Challenge Policy Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 433 175)
27. Howley, C., & Bickel, R. (1999). The Mathew Project: National report. Randolph, VT: The Rural School and Community Trust. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 433 174)
28. Howley, C. (2001). Research on smaller schools: What education leaders need to know to make better decisions. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
29. Howley, C. (2002). Small schools. In A. Molnar (Ed.), School reform proposals: The research evidence (pp. 49-77). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
30. Huang, G., & Howley, C. (1993). Mitigating disadvantage: Effects of small-scale schooling on student achievement in Alaska. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 9(3), 137-149.
31. Jencks, C. (1985). How much do high school students learn? Sociology of Education, 58(2), 128-135.
32. Johnson, F. (1989). Assigning type of locale codes to the 1987-88 CCD public school universe. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED312113)
33. Johnson, J. (2003). Nebraska's smaller school systems counter the harmful effects of poverty on student achievement. Washington, DC: Rural School and Community Trust. (Retrieved January 14, 2004 from http://ruraledu.org/docs/ nebraska/Nebraska_Matthew12-03.pdf)
34. Johnson, J., Howley, C., & Howley, A. (2002). Size, excellence, and equity: A report on Arkansas schools and districts. Athens, OH: Educational Studies Department, Ohio University.
35. Kennedy, J. (1915). Rural life and the rural school. New York: American Book Company. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED392561)
36. Klonsky, M. (1995). Small schools: the numbers tell a story, a review of the research and current experiences. Chicago: The Small Schools Workshop. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED386517)
37. Lee, V. E., & Loeb, S. (2000). School size in Chicago elementary schools: Effects on teachers' attitudes and students' achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 3-31.
38. Lee, V., & Smith, J. (1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociology of Education, 68(4), 241-270.
39. Lee, V., & Smith, J. (1997). High school size: Which works best, and for whom? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 205-227.
40. Mathews, D. (1996). Is there a public for public schools? Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation Press.
41. Meier, D. (2003). In schools we trust: Creating communities of learning in an era of testing and standardization. Boston: Beacon Press.
42. Miley and Associates. (2003). School district organization in South Carolina: Evaluating performance and fiscal efficiency (Prepared for The Education Oversight Committee). Columbia, SC: Author. Retrieved March 23, 2003 from http://www.state.sc.us/eoc/PDF/MileyReportFinalDraft010903A.doc
43. Monk, D., & Haller, E. (1993). Predictors of high school academic course offerings: The role of school size. American Educational Research Journal, 30(1), 3-21.
44. Raywid, M. (1999). Current literature on small schools (ERIC Digest). Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED425049)
45. Raywid, M., & Schmerler, G. (2003). Not so easy going: The policy environments of small urban schools and schools-within-schools. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
46. Simon, H. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations. The American Economic Review, 69(4), 493-513.
47. Spencer, B., Frankel, M. Ingels, S., Rasinski, K., & Tourangeau, R. (1990). National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988: Base year sample design report (Technical Report). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. (Retrieved January 17, 2004 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs90/90463. pdf)
48. Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
49. Stemnock, S. (1974). Summary of research on size of schools and school districts. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED140458).
50. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.