Page 160 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 160
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
The impact of school structure on ESL
In this section, we examine the effects of the school characteristic of size,
sector (public or private), location (urban or rural) and tracks provided (ac-
ademic and other lower levels). The sector (public or private) of the school
was examined in Rumberger and Rim’s literature review (2008). Of the 63
analyses treated, no relationship was found between public-private (in some
cases only Catholic schools were considered) school and ESL rates in mid-
dle school, but in high school ESL rates were generally lower in Catholic
schools (in some studies the effect could be attributed to school practices).
As the authors highlight, it is common for students from private schools to
transfer to a public school instead of or before leaving school, thereby ‘in-
flating’ ESL rates in public schools. In another study, the private/public as-
pect of a school was found to be unrelated to ESL rates after controlling for
students’ background and behaviour (Lee & Burkham, 2003). This finding
is also supported by the OECD (2011) which examined the issue of private
and public schools relative to achievement in the PISA study. They conclud-
ed that students in private schools do indeed perform better in the PISA as-
sessment than students in public schools, yet when the socioeconomic con-
text is similar students in public and private schools tend to do equally well.
Moreover, ‘’countries with a larger share of private schools do not perform
better in PISA’’ (p. 1).
In relation to the location of the school, the relationship between the
urbanisation of the municipality within which the school is located and ESL
is not straightforward. For some groups of ESLers (i.e. those without a low-
er secondary diploma), an above-average level of urbanisation (high or very
high) increased the risk for ESL, and in lowly urbanised areas the chances
of ESL dropped, while in other groups of ESLers the effects were not as pro-
nounced (Traag & van der Velden, 2008). Rumberger and Lim (2008) iden-
tified 12 analyses examining this issue, and the results were mixed; in some
studies, being in an urban school increased the risk of ESL, while in others
it decreased the risk or the effects were non-significant.
As for school size, the same authors (Rumberger & Lim, 2008) also
found mixed results in their literature review. Out of 12 analyses, 6 found
no significant effects, while in 3 students were more likely to drop out of
large schools and in 3 other studies ESL was less likely in large schools. The
relationship might not be non-linear – a smaller (but not too small) size
is generally better (Lee & Burkham, 2003). As noted by Lee & Burkham
(2003), school size per se is unlikely to directly affect the risk for ESL; it is
160
The impact of school structure on ESL
In this section, we examine the effects of the school characteristic of size,
sector (public or private), location (urban or rural) and tracks provided (ac-
ademic and other lower levels). The sector (public or private) of the school
was examined in Rumberger and Rim’s literature review (2008). Of the 63
analyses treated, no relationship was found between public-private (in some
cases only Catholic schools were considered) school and ESL rates in mid-
dle school, but in high school ESL rates were generally lower in Catholic
schools (in some studies the effect could be attributed to school practices).
As the authors highlight, it is common for students from private schools to
transfer to a public school instead of or before leaving school, thereby ‘in-
flating’ ESL rates in public schools. In another study, the private/public as-
pect of a school was found to be unrelated to ESL rates after controlling for
students’ background and behaviour (Lee & Burkham, 2003). This finding
is also supported by the OECD (2011) which examined the issue of private
and public schools relative to achievement in the PISA study. They conclud-
ed that students in private schools do indeed perform better in the PISA as-
sessment than students in public schools, yet when the socioeconomic con-
text is similar students in public and private schools tend to do equally well.
Moreover, ‘’countries with a larger share of private schools do not perform
better in PISA’’ (p. 1).
In relation to the location of the school, the relationship between the
urbanisation of the municipality within which the school is located and ESL
is not straightforward. For some groups of ESLers (i.e. those without a low-
er secondary diploma), an above-average level of urbanisation (high or very
high) increased the risk for ESL, and in lowly urbanised areas the chances
of ESL dropped, while in other groups of ESLers the effects were not as pro-
nounced (Traag & van der Velden, 2008). Rumberger and Lim (2008) iden-
tified 12 analyses examining this issue, and the results were mixed; in some
studies, being in an urban school increased the risk of ESL, while in others
it decreased the risk or the effects were non-significant.
As for school size, the same authors (Rumberger & Lim, 2008) also
found mixed results in their literature review. Out of 12 analyses, 6 found
no significant effects, while in 3 students were more likely to drop out of
large schools and in 3 other studies ESL was less likely in large schools. The
relationship might not be non-linear – a smaller (but not too small) size
is generally better (Lee & Burkham, 2003). As noted by Lee & Burkham
(2003), school size per se is unlikely to directly affect the risk for ESL; it is
160
