Effects of School Characteristics on Grades in Compulsory School

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 587-608

  Lekholm, Alli Klapp ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

compulsory school; grade assignment; grades; national tests; school characteristics; teacher characteristics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857806160     PISSN: 00313831     EISSN: 14701170     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2011.555923     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Bergström, F. and Sandström, M. 2001. Konkurrens bildar skola - en ESO-rapport om friskolornas betydelse för de kommunala skolorna [Competition and the Quality of Municipal Schools] Ds 2001:12. Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Finance
2. Cliffordson, C. 2008. Differential prediction of study success across academic programs in the Swedish context: The validity of grades and tests as selection instruments for higher education. Educational Assessment, 13(1): 56-75.
3. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartlant, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D. and York, R. L. 1966. Equality of educational opportunity, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
4. Darling-Hammond, L. 1999. Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state of policy evidence, Washington, DC: U.S. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
5. Darling-Hammond, L. 2000. How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3): 166-173.
6. Darling-Hammond, L., Ross, P. and Milliken, M. 2006. "High school size, organization, and content: What matters for student success?". In The Brooking Papers on Educational Policy 163-203.
7. Deutsch, M. 1979. Education and distributive justice. American Psychologists, 34(5): 391-401.
8. Figlio, D. N. and Stone, J. A. 1999. "School choice and student performance: Are private schools really better?". In Working paper 1141-97, California: Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Oregon.
9. Glass, G. V., Cahen, L. S., Smith, M. L. and Filby, N. N. 1982. School class size: Research and Policy, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
10. Greenwald, R., Hedges, L. V. and Laine, R. D. 1996. The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3): 361-396.
11. Gustafsson, J.-E. and Myrberg, E. 2002. "Ekonomiska resursers betydelse för pedagogiska resultat [The importance of economical resources on pedagogical results]". Stockholm, Sweden: Liber.
12. Gustafsson, J.-E. and Stahl, P.-A. 2005. STREAMS 3.0 User's Guide, Mölndal, Sweden: Multivariateware.
13. Gustafsson, J.-E. 2006. Lika rättigheter - likvärdig utbildning? En sammanfattning av studien Barns utbildningssituation - bidrag till ett kommunalt barnindex [Equal Opportunities - equal education? A summary of the study of children's educational circumstances: A contribution to a municipal child index.] Stockholm: Save the Children
14. Hanushek, E. A. 1989. The impact of differential expenditures on school performance. Educational Researcher, 18(4): 45-65.
15. Hanushek, E. A. 1997. Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An Update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(2): 141-164.
16. Hanushek, E. A. 1999. Some findings from an independent investigation of the Tennessee STAR experiment and from other investigations of class size effects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2): 143-163.
17. Jöreskog, K. G. 1993. "Testing Structural Equation Models". In Testing Structural Equation Models, Edited by: Bollen, K. A. and Scott Long, J. 294-316. California: Sage Publications.
18. Klapp, Lekholm A. and Cliffordson, C. 2008. Discrepancies between school grades and test scores at individual and school level: effects of gender and family background. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14(2): 181-199.
19. Klapp Lekholm, A. and Cliffordson, C. 2009. Effects of student characteristics on grades in compulsory school. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(1): 1-23.
20. Lee, V. E. and Smith, J. B. 1997. High school size: Which works best, and for whom?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3): 205-227.
21. Lindahl, M. 2005. Studies of causal effects in empirical labor economics. Dissertation, Stockholm, Sweden: SOFI.
22. McEwan, J. P. Occasional paper presented at teachers college, Columbia University, New York, National Centre for the study of privatization in education. June2000. Comparing the effectiveness of public and private schools: A review of evidence and interpretation,
23. Muthén, B., Kaplan, D. and Hollis, M. 1987. On structural equation modelling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrica, 52(3): 431-462.
24. Muthén, L. K. and Muthén, B. O. 2004. Mplus User's Guide, 3, Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
25. National Agency for Education. 2004. Likvärdig bedömning och betygssättning. Skolverkets allmänna råd 2004 [Equal assessment and grading. General advice issued by the National Agency for Education], Stockholm, Sweden: National Agency for Education.
26. National Agency for Education. 2007a. Provbetyg - slutbetyg - likvärdig bedömning? En statistisk analys av sambandet mellan nationella prov och slutbetyg i grundskolans årskurs 9, 1998-2006 [Test grade - leaving certificate - equal assessment? A statistical analysis of the relation between national tests and final grades in compulsory school, year nine 1998-2006]. Stockholm, Sweden: National Agency for Education
27. National Agency for Education. 2007b. National subject tests in compulsory school Retrieved May 2, 2007 fromhttp://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/276
28. National Agency for Education. 2008. Compulsory School Retrieved June 10, 2008 fromhttp://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/354/a/959#paragraphAnchor3
29. National Agency for Education. 2009. "Vad påverkar resultaten i svensk grundskola? [What influence the results in the Swedish compulsory school?]". Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes.
30. Pilcher, J. K. 1994. The value-driven meaning of grades. Educational Assessment, 2(1): 69-88.
31. Ready, D. D. and Lee, V. E. 2006. Optimal Context size in elementary schools: Disentangling the effects of class size and school size. Brookings Papers on Education Policy, 2006/2007,: 99-135.
32. Roscingo, V. J. and Crowley, M. L. 2001. Rurality, institutional disadvantage, and achievement/attainment. Rural Sociology, 66(20): 268-292.
33. Schafer, L. J. and Graham, W. J. 2002. Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2): 147-177.
34. Somers, M.-A., McEwan, P. J. and Willms, D. J. 2001. "How effective are private schools in Latin America?". In Occasional paper, New York: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Columbia University.
35. Stanley, R. L., Comello, M. L.G., Edwards, W. R. and Marquart, S. B. 2008. School adjustment in rural and urban communities: Do students from "Timbuktu" differ from their "City slicker" peers?. Youth Adolescence, 37: 225-238.
36. Swedish National Rural Development Agency. Retrieved March 4, 2008 fromhttp://www.glesbygdsverket.se/site/default.aspx
37. Wikström, C. 2005. Criterion-Referenced Measurement for Educational Evaluation and Selection. Dissertation No 1, Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
38. Wiliam, D. 1996. National curriculum assessments and programmes of study: Validity and impact. British Educational Research Journal, 22(1): 129-142.
39. Williams, S. L. 2001. "City kids and country cousins: Rural and urban youths, deviance, and Labor market ties". In Social awakening, Edited by: Michael, R. T. 379-414. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
40. Åberg-Bengtsson, L. and Erickson, G. 2006. Dimensions of national test performance: A two-level approach. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(5): 469-488.