1. Organisational predictors of (track and subject) choices and success in high school: an exploration of the ‘effect’ of middle school characteristics ICSEI 2009 Vancouver Jan Van Damme & Heidi Pustjens University of Leuven (Belgium)

2. TOPIC choice of students of a ‘track’ and a specific study program within a track in high school (grade 9-12) success at the end of high school (grade 12) linked to the middle school (grade 7-8) ? and if so, which characteristics of the middle school are relevant ?

3. Research literature on school characteristics and curriculum choice a.Effects of organisational and process characteristics a.o.Garet & Delany (1988) Jones, Vanfossen & Ensminger (1995) (numbers of programs,…) Smyth & Hannan (2006) (school provision, interactions between students & teachers, homogeneous versus heterogeneous grouping…)

4. Research literature on school characteristics and curriculum choice (continued) b. Effects of school composition -Kilgore (1991): high SES schools: more competition, impeding transition to more advanced programs -Jones, Vanfossen & Ensminger (1995): schools reproduce the existing social stratification (high SES schools: more academically- oriented programs) -Marsh (1991,…): indeed… ‘reflected glory’ effect although: also the ‘big-fish-little-pond’-effect: high ability schools: lower academic self-concept, impeding enrollment in academically advanced courses (not confirmed by e.g. Ayalon & Yogev, 1997)

5. Research literature on school characteristics and successful curriculum choices School sector (catholic vs. public schools) (Gamoran, 1992; Lee & Bryk, 1988) Selective schools vs. non-selective schools (Kreft, 1993) Effects of structural characteristics and composition characteristics on drop-out (Bryk & Thum, 1989; Luyten et al., 2003; Rumberger & Thomas, 2000…).

6. Research questions 1)Are there differences between middle schools –as for the transition to different tracks and programs in the 9th grade ? –as for the educational level attained in the 12th grade ? 2)If so, how to explain these differences ? -Student characteristics ointake differences odifferences related to the pathways through the middle school -(middle) school characteristics ocomposition oprocess characteristics oorganisational characteristics

7. Dataset Longitudinal study through secondary schools (LOSO) –9th grade: 4671 students from 47 middle schools –12th grade: 4783 students from 84 middle schools and 173 high schools

8. Structure of educational system in Flanders –Middle school:grade 7 and 8 partially differentiated –High school: grade 9 to 12 totally differentiated (ASO,KSO, TSO, BSO; academic, artistic, technical, vocational)

9. Outcome measures To rank order the tracks and the different programs within the tracks, the average intelligence of the students when entering secondary education was used –9th grade –12th grade

10. Student characteristics Intake –Gender –Home language –SES –Delay in primary education –Language achievement at start middle school –Mathematics achievement at start middle school Pathways through middle school –Subjects chosen within middle school (academic vs. prevocational) –Passed middle school successfully or not –Delay in middle school –Language achievement at end middle school –Mathematics achievement at end middle school

11. School characteristics (middle schools) Structural characteristics –Program provision (4 types: academic, multitrack, technical- vocational,…) –Sector (public/catholic) Composition characteristics –Mean SES –Mean language achievement end 8th grade –Mean mathematics achievement end 8th grade –% students whose home language is Dutch –% students progressing normally through middle school

12. School characteristics (middle schools) (continued) Process characteristics –Achievement orientation –Percentage of students entering higher education –Involvement of teachers in school decision-making –Supportive and helpful teachers –Positive relationship with students –Focus on discipline –Student grouping (homogeneous, heterogeneous) –Number of parent-teacher meetings per class –Strong hierarchy of programs and subjects within the school –Focus on student retention at the own school when counseling related to the choice of subjects –Degree of that kind of counseling –Cutoff value to succeed an academic program (low, average, high achievement criterion)

13. Method Multilevel analysis Students within schools For second dependent variable (final curriculum level attained in high school): a middle/high school cross- classification 1st step: what part of the variance at school level ? 2nd step: explanatory variables –Student characteristics –School characteristics 3d step: random slopes between schools cross-level interaction effects

14. Results: I. Curriculum level at the start of high school a) Null model 42.8 % situated at the (middle) school level b) student characteristics -All variables significant -They explain a big part -Girls slightly lower level -Language minorities slightly higher level -Program in middle school is very important

15. Results: I. Curriculum level at the start of high school (continued) RESULTS of the null model and the model including student characteristics (N students=4671, N schools=47)

16. Results: I. Curriculum level at the start of high school (continued) c) school characteristics Significant school characteristics (separate) –Positive relationship with students –Cutoff low achievement criterion –Focus on student retention at school (-) –Focus on discipline (-) –ASO middle school (mostly process characteristics)

17. Results: I. Curriculum level at the start of high school (continued)

18. Figure 1. The relationship between normal and successful progressing through middle school in a theoretical versus a non-theoretical module and curriculum level at the de start of high school for schools setting low achievement standards for successful completion of a theoretical module in middle school versus other schools

19. II. Finally attained curriculum level in high school: influenced by the middle school ? a. Null model –48.0 % at student level –10.1 % linked to the middle school –41,9 % linked to the high school b. Student characteristics –Explain almost all variance linked to the middle school –Student characteristics partially influenced by the middle school

20. II. Finally attained curriculum level in high school: influenced by the middle school ? (continued) Proportion of variance at middle school level explained by student characteristics

21. Conclusions 1.As for the curriculum level at the start of high school: positive effect of schools with positive relationship with their students (characterised by openness, mutual trust and encouragement) negative effect of focus on discipline positive effect of less demanding schools (in terms of the achievement level which is required to succeed in an academically oriented program): students of less demanding middle schools reach higher

22. Conclusions (continued) 2.As for the curriculum level attained at the end of high school: only indirect effects of middle school (through achievement level and curriculum level at the start of high school) still a positive effect of the curriculum level at the start of high school. So, reaching high at the start does not have negative effects within high school. Perhaps, that can be considered as an indication that ‘inclusive teaching’ (i.e., a high proportion of students enrolled in a track above that predicted on the basis of prior achievement, see Kilgore, 1991) can have positive effects.

23. THANKS FOR BEING ATTENTIVE More info: jan.vandamme@ped.kuleuven.be