Inadequacies in the SES–Achievement model: Evidence from PISA and other studies

Abstract

Students’ socioeconomic status (SES) is central to much research and policy deliberation on educational inequalities. However, the SES model is under severe stress for several reasons. SES is an ill‐defined concept, unlike parental education or family income. SES measures are frequently based on proxy reports from students; these are generally unreliable, sometimes endogenous to student achievement, only low to moderately intercorrelated, and exhibit low comparability across countries and over time. There are many explanations for SES inequalities in education, none of which achieves consensus among research and policy communities. SES has only moderate effects on student achievement, and its effects are especially weak when considering prior achievement, an important and relevant predictor. SES effects are substantially reduced when considering parent ability, which is causally prior to family SES. The alternative cognitive ability/genetic transmission model has far greater explanatory power; it provides logical and compelling explanations for a wide range of empirical findings from student achievement studies. The inadequacies of the SES model are hindering knowledge accumulation about student performance and the development of successful policies.

Context and implications

Rationale for this study
This review was written in response to the disconnect between the literature surrounding student achievement studies, and the cognitive psychology and behavioural genetic academic literatures. It is well‐established that student achievement is closely related to cognitive ability and both have sizable genetic components, findings largely ignored in achievement studies. This review’s aim is for more considered responses to socioeconomic inequalities in student achievement by both researchers and policymakers.

Why the new findings matter
The review provides overwhelming evidence that much of the current thinking about SES and student achievement is mistaken.

Implications for researchers and policymakers
The current emphasis on SES is misleading and wastes considerable human and financial resources that could much better be utilized. The focus should be on student performance ensuring that low achievers have rewarding educational and occupational careers, and raising the overall skill levels of students, not on the nebulous, difficult to measure, concept of SES, which is only moderately associated with achievement.

Full text

Review of Educ ation. 2021;9:e3293.
|
1 of 36
https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3293
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/roe
Received: 7 August 2020
|
Accepted: 14 May 2021
DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3293
STATE- OF- THE- ART REVIEW
Inadequacies in the SES– Achievement model:
Evidence from PISA and other studies
Gary N. Marks1 | Michael O'Connell2
© 2021 British Educational Research Association
1Social and Political Sciences, University of
Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
2School of Psychology, UCD, Dublin,
Ireland
Correspondence
Gary N. Marks, Social and Political
Sciences, University of Melbourne,
Parkville 3052, Victoria, Australia.
Emails: gmarks@unimelb.edu.au;
garymarks2030@gmail.com
Abstract
Students’ socioeconomic status (SES) is central to
much research and policy deliberation on educational
inequalities. However, the SES model is under se-
vere stress for several reasons. SES is an ill- defined
concept, unlike parental education or family income.
SES measures are frequently based on proxy reports
from students; these are generally unreliable, some-
times endogenous to student achievement, only low
to moderately intercorrelated, and exhibit low com-
parability across countries and over time. There are
many explanations for SES inequalities in education,
none of which achieves consensus among research
and policy communities. SES has only moderate ef-
fects on student achievement, and its effects are es-
pecially weak when considering prior achievement,
an important and relevant predictor. SES effects are
substantially reduced when considering parent abil-
ity, which is causally prior to family SES. The alterna-
tive cognitive ability/genetic transmission model has
far greater explanatory power; it provides logical and
compelling explanations for a wide range of empirical
findings from student achievement studies. The inad-
equacies of the SES model are hindering knowledge
accumulation about student performance and the de-
velopment of successful policies.
KEYWORDS
assessment, educational psychology, socioeconomic circumstances
Funding information
None.