School Choice and the Distributional Effects of Ability Tracking: Does Separation Increase Equality?

By David N. Figlio, Marianne E. Page. 2002

203 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7716f404d1b8403982f0d142ed30729c03aec2c3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. Jessica L Degol
2. Demetra Kalogrides
3. Thijs Bol
4. F. Galindo-Rueda
5. Henry M. Levin
6. David J. Deming
7. Adam Gamoran
8. H. G. van de Werfhorst

In Gender Studies

1. Judith E. Scott-Clayton
2. Susanna Loeb
3. Ming-Te Wang
4. A. Chmielewski
5. David J. Deming
6. Demetra Kalogrides
7. Adam Gamoran
8. Henry M. Levin

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Thijs Bol
2. H. G. van de Werfhorst
3. A. Chmielewski
4. Jacqueline Witschge
5. J. Dronkers
6. Judith E. Scott-Clayton
7. F. Galindo-Rueda
8. Susanna Loeb

Citations in the corpus

• Achievement Inequality and the Institutional Structure of Educational Systems: A Comparative Perspective (2010, unknown): “Third, the overall effect of tracking on student performance is very small and often negative (Figlio & Page 2002, Hattie 2002, Michaelowa & Bourdon 2006, Thrupp et al. 2002).”
• The Heterogeneous Effect of Selection in Secondary Schools: Understanding the Changing Role of Ability (2004, background): “A paper more closely related to ours is that by Figlio and Page (2000), which deals with the school-level policy of classroom-based ability tracking.”
• Development, Discouragement, or Diversion? New Evidence on the Effects of College Remediation Policy (2015, background): “…low-achieving students learn more when they are placed in heterogeneous classrooms (Peterson 1989; White et al. 1996; Burris, Heubert, and Levin 2006), some studies have found that tracking may be beneficial, or at least not harmful, to students of lower ability (Figlio and Page 2002; Zimmer 2003).”
• Education Policy and Equality of Opportunity (2008, unknown): “Analyses ofability trackingwithindifferent countries includeBauerandRiphahn (2006), Betts and Shkolnik (2000), Dustmann (2004), Epple et al. (2002), Figlio and Page (2002), Galindo-Rueda and Vignoles (2007), Meghir and Palme (2005) and Pekkarinen et al. (2006).”
• Curricular Tracking and Central Examinations: Counterbalancing the Impact of Social Background on Student Achievement in 36 Countries (2014, background): “More generally, students in higher curricular tracks tend to benefit from better educational resources (Figlio and Page 2002).”
• Accelerating Mathematics Achievement Using Heterogeneous Grouping (2006, background): “Other studies have revealed no significant differences in the performance of high achievers when they are grouped in heterogeneous classes that include both average and low achievers (Figlio & Page, 2002; Mosteller, Light, & Sachs, 1996; Slavin, 1990).”
• Ability-Tracking, Instructional Time, and Better Pedagogy: The Effect of Double-Dose Algebra on Student Achievement (2014, unknown): “To date, the research on tracking has been quite mixed and inconclusive (see, for example, Betts and Shkolnik 2000; Figlio and Page 2002; Clark POLICY INTERVENTIONS AND EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES ‡ Ability-Tracking, Instructional Time, and Better Pedagogy: The Effect of Double-Dose Algebra on Student…”
• Accountability, Rigor, and Detracking: Achievement Effects of Embracing a Challenging Curriculum as a Universal Good for All Students (2008, unknown): “…learning of higher achievers decreases in detracked, heterogeneous classes (Brewer, Rees, & Argys, 1995; Epstein & MacIver, 1992; Kulik, 1992), while other studies report no significant differences (Burris, Heubert, & Levin, 2006; Figlio & Page, 2002; Mosteller, Light, & Sachs, 1996; Slavin, 1990).”
• Tracking and Inequality: New Directions for Research and Practice (2009, methodology): “Figlio and Page (2002) similarly called into question the negative effects of tracking on secondary school math achievement on the basis of two-stage least squares regression models.2 While it is premature to conclude that tracking is not harmful to low achievers, these studies, combined with the…”
• Do Differences in School Quality Matter More Than We Thought? New Evidence on Educational Opportunity in the Twenty-first Century (2015, background): “Extensive tracking is more common in schools with racially or economically diverse populations (Figlio and Page 2002; Kelly 2009; Lucas and Berends 2002).”
• School Climate: a Review of the Construct, Measurement, and Impact on Student Outcomes (2015, background): “…that ability tracking is detrimental to lowability students, particularly in the early years of schooling (e.g., Hanushek and Wößmann 2006), has no discernible effects on low ability students (e.g., Betts and Shkolnik 2000), or is beneficial for low achieving students (e.g., Figlio and Page 2002).”