Academic Performance, Effects of Socio-Economic Status on

Brandon L Carlisle and Carolyn B Murray, University of

California Riverside, Riverside, CA, USAÓ2015 Elsevier Ltd.
All rights reserved.
Abstract

The purpose of this article is to review the relationship between socioeconomic status and academic
achievement. Thecomplexity of this relationship will be examined by discussing factors such as
socioeconomic segregation, school funding,teacher expectations, and academic climate. The effect that
socioeconomic status can have on academic achievement is ofglobal importance to educators,
researchers, and policymakers, as they continue to address disparities in academicachievement and
educational attainment. Efforts to ensure that all students receive an equitable educational experience
arealso discussed, with particular emphasis placed on the importance of effective schools.

Introduction

Accounting for differences in academic achievement amongindividuals and social groups has received
considerable globalattention from educators, researchers, and policymakers.Efforts to understand and
account for these differences haveinvolved an examination of individual studentcharacteristicsand the
characteristics of their school environment (e.g.,Coleman et al., 1966;Marjoribanks, 2003;Palardy,
2013).Socioeconomic status (SES) has been identified as one of themost commonly used contextual
variables within research onacademic achievement (Sirin, 2005). Research on SES andacademic
achievement has revealed a consistent relationship(Milne and Plourde, 2006); specifically, it is often the
case thathigh SES is associated with greater academic achievement.Furthermore, the educational
literature has provided evidencethat SES is one of the strongest predictors of academicachievement and
educational attainment (Reardon, 2011).White (1982) outlined the most frequent applications ofSES
found in the educational literature. First, SES may be usedas a covariate within quasiexperimental
studies; in some cases,SES may not be of interest, although it relates to variables ofprimary interest,
therefore researchers may choose to statisti-cally control or adjust significant SES differences within a
givensample. Second, SES can be used to improve the precision ofexperimental studies by controlling for
it in analyses ofcovariance. Third, researchers can assess potential interactioneffects, such as examining
the possibility that a particularteaching method may be effective among high SES students butnot
among low SES students. Fourth, SES can be utilized toprovide additional demographic information,
which canfacilitate efforts to determine external validity and accuratelygeneralize empirical findings.
Finally, SES can be used asa predictor variable when testing causal models of academicachievement and
educational attainment.While most researchers are in agreement regarding theimportance of SES,
White (1982) points out that SES has beendefined and subsequently measured in a variety of ways
acrossan abundance of empirical studies. Common indicators ofsocioeconomic status include income,
occupation, andeducation (Sirin, 2005;White, 1982). Chapin (1928) definedSES as “the position
anindividual or family occupies withreference to the prevailing average of
standards”(p.99.Consistentwith Chapin’sdefinition, Mueller and Parcel (1981)much later described SES
as an individual’s or family’s positionn a societal hierarchy that dictates the degree to which
theindividual or family has access to wealth and power. Althoughthe relationship between SES and
academic achievement hasbeen studied for many decades, the social sciences arecontinuing to address
complex research questions pertaining tostudent level factors, school level factors, and the nature of
therelationship within countries of developing or developedstatus. The purpose of this article is to
review the relationshipbetween SES and academic achievement and to discuss the implications of this
relationship on educational attainment.

Country Income
The relationship between SES and academic achievement hasbeen studied at a cross-national level as
equitable educationpersists as an international concern. Researchers have progres-sively shown a strong
interest in international comparativestudies (Wiseman and Baker, 2005). For example, Heynemanand
Loxley (1982, 1983) conducted a comparative study ofhigh-income and low-income countries in order to
furtherexamine the nature of the relationship between SES andacademic achievement. In high-income
countries, they foundevidence of a stronger association between individual studentSES and academic
achievement and a relatively weaker asso-ciation between school-level factors (e.g., school and
teacherquality) and academic achievement. However, their analysesalso indicated that within low-
income countries, school-levelfactors shared a relatively stronger association with
academicachievement than did individual student SES.In the literature, these contrasting results are
often referredto as the Heyneman–Loxley Effect (HL Effect; Baker et al., 2002).The nature of the HL
effect challenged the perception thatweaker associations exist between school-level factors
andachievement and stronger associations exist betweenindividual student SES and achievement (Baker
et al., 2002).Heyneman and Loxley (1983) concluded that the quality ofschools and its teachers
significantly influence the academicoutcomes of students and within poorer countries, this effectseems
to be more pronounced.Several studies have been dedicated to replicating the HLeffect but the results
have not always been consistent. ForInternational Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd
edition, Volume 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.23054-7 43International Encyclopedia
of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition, 2015, 43–48Author's personal copyexample, Riddell
(1989) critiqued the HL effect by addressingan important methodological concern; specifically,
analysesthat revealed the effect relied on ordinary least squares regres-sion, which did not take into
account the hierarchical structureof the data (i.e., students nested within classrooms, classroomsnested
within schools). Years later, Riddell (1997) reviewed16 studies that implemented multilevel modeling in
order tostudy academic achievement in developing countries and didnot find evidence of the HL effect.
Baker et al. (2002) also didnot find evidence of the HL effect but posited that the effectmay have
diminished over time due to the increased efforts ofpoorer countries to invest in formal education as an
economicstrategy.Heyneman (2005) argued that any failures to replicate theHL effect could be
attributed to significant differences insamples of countries across studies. Heyneman also
stressedthatthe influence of student SES is not consistent acrosssocieties and that it may differ due
tograde level of students,gender composition of students, and how academic achieve-ment is
operationalized. While Baker et al. (2002) did notfind evidence of the HL effect, a more recent cross-
nationalstudy by Chiu (2010) found evidence that the associationbetween individual student SES and
achievement wasstronger in richer countries, which is consistent with the HLeffect.

Ethnicity
Ethnicity and SES are closely related; so much so that it canbecome difficult to disentangle the two
constructs (Jussimet al., 1996). Regarding the student characteristics of thestudies reviewed by White
(1982) and Sirin (2005), it wasfound that minority status moderated the relationship betweenSES and
academic achievement. Specifically, the mean effectsize for Caucasian students was significantly larger
than themean effect size for minority students. This suggests thatparental education, income, and
occupation may be lessrelated to achievement for minorities than issues such as theenvironment, the
neighborhood and/or the school SES(Sirin, 2005).When examining the relationship between
SESandacademic achievement, it is often the case that researchers needto consider the minority status
or ethnicity of the student. The educational environment in which students find themselves can be
extremely influential in their development. Unfortu-nately, there is disparate access to affluent
educational environments; previous research has indicated that low-income,minority students are often
subject to ineffective teachers, lowteacher expectations, inadequate teaching aides, and defiantpeers
(Conchas, 2001). In the US, African Americans andLatinos are more likely to be members of low-SES
familiesand attend low-SES schools (Williams and Collins, 2001); itis also the case that African Americans
and Latinos tend to beunder represented in higher education (Oakes et al., 2004). InTaiwan, Aborigines
are a minority ethnic group that holds a disadvantaged socioeconomic position; they also tend to have
lower academic achievements in comparison to Taiwanese students (Sung et al., 2013). Findings such as
these illustrate the ecological validity of the relationship between SES, academic achievement, and
ethnicity. The ethnicity of students is an important contextual variable that can provide meaningful
information about students; such information is relevant to research and application. Ideally, future
research and metaanalytical studies will be able to code for multiple ethnic groups rather than only code
for minority status. For example, it would be useful to determine if a specific ethnicity is associated with
significantly different outcomes in comparison to other ethnic groups within a given country.

Immigrant Status
Similar to ethnicity, SES is an important factor when accounting for differences in academic achievement
between native and immigrant students. Schnepf (2004) found a posi- tive correlation between SES gaps
between natives and immi- grants and achievement gaps in reading scores. Relatedly, Buhlmahn (2003,
as cited in Sung et al., 2013) found that students of immigrant status had lower academic achievements
than native German students. Similarly, in a comparison of native students and low-SES, second-
generation students, Alba et al. (2011) presented data that depicts achievement gaps in reading and
mathematics within European countries and the US. Understanding the influence of immigrant status
and its relation to SES is a complex matter. The selection of an appropriate measure of SES requires
careful consideration. For example, Schnepf (2004) argues that the SES indicator of parental education is
problematic when comparing native and immigrant students because the quality of parental education
may not be equal across countries. Furthermore, Schnepf also points out that it is important to consider
an immigrant’s country of origin, migration motives, and integration into the receiving country. Each of
these factors may provide important contextual information when understanding the interrelation-ships
between SES, academic achievement, and immigrantstatus.

Teachers
The quality and effectiveness of teachers can be very influential on student performance. The
importance of teachers cannot be overlooked as they can directly influence student achievement.
Teacher effectiveness and quality relate to SES because students of low-SES, low achievement, and
minority status are less likelyto be exposed to highly qualified, effective teachers (Lankford et al., 2002).
This is due, in part, to the tendency for more qualified teachers to eventually seek employment in
schools that have high-achieving students, greater resources, and strong administrative support
(Hanushek et al., 2004; Rumberger and Palardy, 2005). Research investigating the effects of teacher
quality on academic performance has demonstrated that having access to highly qualified teachers can
have a significant impact on student achievement. For example, in a cross-national study of teacher
quality and mathematics achievement, Akiba et al. (2007) found that countries containing a higher
percentage of students taught by highly qualified mathematics teachers (i.e., having earned a degree in
mathematics, teacher certification, and at least 3 years experience) achieved a significantly higher
national average mathematics score. 44 Academic Performance, Effects of Socio-Economic Status on
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition, 2015, 43–48

Author's personal copy

They also examined opportunity gaps in access to qualified teachers. Opportunity gaps were calculated
by determining the percentage of high-SES students that have access to qualified teachers, determining
the percentage of low-SES students that have access to qualified teachers, then calculating the
difference between these two values. The largest opportunity gaps between high-SES and low-SES
students were found in the countries of Syria, Chile, Taiwan, the US, and Hong Kong. Any opportunity
gaps in access to qualified teachers can create a learning opportunity gap; this is an added disadvantage
for low-SES students who may already experience a significant resource gap (Akiba et al., 2007).

An additional factor relevant to the issue of teachers is the influence of their expectations on student
performance.Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) demonstrated that teacher expectations could have a
definite influence on the academic performance of students; specifically, if teachers have high
expectations of their students, this can translate into stronger student performance. To further explore
this outcome, Harris and Rosenthal (1985) conducted metaanalyses on the effects of
teachers’expectations on the intellectual functioning of theirstudents and discovered not only that these
interpersonal expectancy effects occur but that their magnitudes are of substantial practical importance
as well. These metaanalyses supported the importance of behaviors that teachers may exhibit (e.g.,
praise, encouragement, long interactions, smiles) that mediate expectancy effects. In addition, these
analyses provided support for a theoretical frame- work involving the mediation of interpersonal
expectancy effects. Specifically, teachers who hold positive expectations for a student will tend to
display a warmer affect, express more positive feedback, provide more input with regards to the
quantity and difficulty of material that is taught, and increase the amount of student participation by
offering more response opportunities (Harris and Rosenthal, 1985). This research is pertinent to the
discussion of SES because previous research has indicated that teachers hold higher expectations and
more positive attitudes for high-SES students, in comparison to their low-SES counterparts (e.g.,
Auwarter and Aruguete, 2008). Furthermore, in relation to SES, Jussim et al. (1996) found that students
of low-SES backgrounds were more susceptible to expectancy effects. They posited that low-SES
students may have “reduced social and psychological resources for combating erroneous teacher
expectations” (p. 371).

Academic Climate
The academic climate a student experiences can also have an impact on the relationship between SES
and academic achievement. Evaluating academic climate may consist of determining the types of
messages students receive from their peers, teachers, and administrators with regard to academic
achievement and educational attainment. It can also involve an assessment of school safety, the average
number of hours spent completing homework per week, and the average number of college prep
courses taken (Rumberger and Palardy, 2005). Additionally, a more comprehensive approach to under-
standing academic climate has considered factors both in and out of school (e.g., home atmosphere,
neighborhood unem- ployment rate). Lee et al. (1999) studied how academic achievement is related to
student social support and school academic press. They defined student social support as the personal
relation- ships between a student and individuals (e.g., peers, parents, and teachers) who are able to
provide them with encourage- ment and assistance in and out of school. Academic press was defined as
the extent to which school members (e.g., students, teachers, and administrators) emphasize academic
success and satisfying standards of achievement. Their analyses revealed that social support and
academic press were positively corre- lated with academic achievement in the subject areas of
mathematics and reading. Furthermore, the constructs of academic press and social support were
related to SES; specif- ically, they found that students who attended low-SES schools were least likely to
experience the ideal combination of high social support and high academic press.

Socioeconomic Segregation
Throughout the world, there are students belonging to affluent families that receive a distinguished
education and students belonging to low-income families that receive a substandard education. These
disparate educational experiences contribute to the academic achievement gap that has been a source
of concern for decades. The existence of socioeconomic segregation should be of concern because of its
relationship to individual student performance (e.g., Bankston and Caldas, 1996;Rumberger and Palardy,
2005). In their analysis of cohort data, Duncan et al. (2013) found that the familial income gap between
low-SES children and high-SES children accounted for significant amounts of the academic achievement
gap. According to Duncan and Murnane’s (2011) conceptual model, high-SES children are more likely to
have greater access to high quality child care, schools, and settings that enhance the development of
important skills related to education while low-SES children may have parents who cannot afford such
resources. In reaction to the unequal educational experiences associated with socioeconomic
segregation, socioeconomic integration (e.g., low-status immigrants attending more affluent schools,
low-SES students attending high-SES schools) has been discussed as a potential means to reduce the
achievement gap and improve equity in education (e.g., Alba et al., 2011;Ryan and Heise, 2002).
Rumberger and Palardy (2005) conducted a study to further investigate the effect of socioeconomic
segregation on academic performance. Their analyses were conducted on hierarchical data that
included students nested within schools as they were followed from Grades 8 through 12. They found
that the average SES of a student’sschoolhad a near equal influence on achievement as individual
student SES. Additionally, school SES had a similar influence on low- SES students and high-SES students.
Further analysis revealed that the effect of school SES on academic outcomes was no longer significant
after controlling for school policies and practices (e.g., teacher expectations, academic climate). Based
on these results, Rumberger and Palardy concluded that socioeconomic integration may not be
Academic Performance, Effects of Socio-Economic Status on 45 International Encyclopedia of the Social
& Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition, 2015, 43–48 Author's personal copy necessary, provided school
policies and practices can be reformed. It may be the case that improving low-SES schools in this fashion
would be more effective and realistic, in comparison to mandated socioeconomic integration.

Disparate Funding
The inequity created by socioeconomic segregation is related to the amount of funding a school district
receives as well as the amount of funding a school receives from their respective district. Governing
bodies are faced with the responsibility of ensuring that schools receive sufficient funding so they can
provide equitable, effective education to all of its students (Augenblick et al., 1997). This objective can
become more challenging for low-income countries; the amount of funding schools receive can depend
on the wealth of a nation and how they disperse public expenditures on schooling (Colclough and Al-
Samarrai, 2000). In their review of school funding equity, Augenblick et al. (1997) demonstrate that SES
is associated with school funding by providing evidence that school districts with wealthier residents
tend to receive significantly higher per-pupil funding. It is also the case that disparities in funding can
exist within a school district. Condron and Roscigno (2003) conducted a study that included urban
elementary schools of diverse racial and SES composition. They found that within districts, instructional
per-pupil expenditure and percentage of students eligible for free or price-reduced lunch were
negatively correlated. Further, they found that operations and maintenance per-pupil expenditure were
also negatively correlated with the percentage of students eligible for the free or price-reduced lunch
program. This provides evidence that it may be insufficient to only address disparate school funding
between districts; disparate school funding within districts is also worthy of close attention and
resolution. Augenblick et al. (1997) provided recommendations as to how districts should proceed in
funding its schools. These recommendations include: districts establishing a base level of per-pupil
funding that is consistent with expectations of academic achievement; governing bodies distributing
funding to districts and then districts distributing funding to schools, which should be based on relative
needs such as students enrolled in high-cost programs, prevalence of students at risk of failure, and the
size of the school; and governing bodies providing equal support for the construction and maintenance
of school facilities. For example, within the United States, a potential solution could involve states being
encouraged to ensure more equi- table funding through incentives provided by the federal government;
the establishment of a more significant federal role in financing education is a matter of collective and
political will (U.S. Department of Education, 2013). Among other recommendations, the U.S.
Department of Education’s Equity and Excellence Commission calls for new federal funding that should
be allocated to schools with high concentrations of low-SES students and the expansion of the
government’s authority to ensure the equity of school financing. Additional funding to schools with high
concentrations of low-SES students could facilitate efforts to accrue new educational resources and, if
necessary, reform the policies and practices of these schools.

Intervention
Closing the achievement gaps has become an important issue for many countries (Sung et al., 2013).
Reform efforts have been discussed and implemented throughout the world; these efforts aim to
improve the education practices believed to influence learning for low-performing students, and thus
decrease the achievement gap (Feuer et al., 2002;Hargreaves, 2000;Pressley et al., 2004). One such
program, developed by the United States is the ‘no child left behind’(NCLB) Act, which was implemented
in order to aid disadvantaged children. This program expanded the federal role in public education by
rewarding schools that set high standards and established measurable goals to improve individual
outcomes in education. While the U.S. Department of Education reported that student achievement had
improved in reading and math, critics of the program argued that these statistics were misleading. One
criticism was that creators of the standardized tests were accused of making the assessments less
challenging so that it was easier for schools to significantly improve. While there is debate surrounding
the effectiveness of intervention programs, some interventions seem to have narrowed the
achievement gap between high and low socio- economic groups. For instance, the Finnish government
has significantly invested in its country’s education and the implementation of educational policies that
include comprehensive schooling with no tuition or book fees for its students (Lavonen and Laaksonen,
2009). According to the findings of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the
achievement gap in Finland has significantly reduced over time. Still other interventions have not had a
significant impact on academic outcomes and disparities in performance. For example, the French
government implemented the Zone of Education Priority program; this intervention established new
teaching projects and distributed more resources to schools in low-SES areas (Sung et al., 2013). In their
evaluation of the effectiveness of this program, Bénabou et al. (2009) found evidence to suggest that
the program did not have a significant impact on student success, which was measured by several
measures (e.g., obtaining a diploma, performance on national examinations). In the United Kingdom, the
Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant was developed to reduce the achievement gap between immigrant,
minority students, and native English students. An evaluation of its effectiveness revealed that the
intervention contributed to a partial reduction in the achievement gap but significant differences
between ethnic minority achievement and national average achievement remained (Tikly et al., 2005).
In South Korea, the government implemented an education welfare action zone policy that was
designed to provide educational resources to low-income areas; this intervention was able to increase
positive educational activities among participating schools (i.e., increased student usage of school
libraries) however their results did not reveal significant changes in academic outcomes among low-SES
students (Lee, 2008). 46 Academic Performance, Effects of Socio-Economic Status on International
Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition, 2015, 43–48 Author's personal copy
For many intervention programs, the jury is still out. While SES may complicate the ability to establish a
standard of education that prepares all students for success, the charac- teristics of a successful school
can be achieved if teachers and administrators are willing to exert the necessary effort. See Edmonds
(1979) and other researchers (e.g., Purkey and Smith, 1983) for a discussion. Although these researchers
acknowledge that family SES does indeed make a difference, they were able to identify schools where
the student pop- ulations were comprised of low SES students who were achieving well academically.
Edmonds identified the following seven characteristics that these schools had in common: (1) strong
administrative leadership, (2) clear school mission, (3) high expectations for student success, (4)
frequent monitoring of school performance, (5) focus on basic skills, (6) safe and orderly environment,
and (7) a focus on home–school relations. These characteristics can serve as clear tenets for an
educational system that needs to remedy disparities in academic experiences and outcomes.
Furthermore, if schools and faculty members are committed, it is possible that these characteristics can
be met without significant changes to school funding. In the words of one highly successful educator: