Abstract
AbstractThis study demonstrates that the Gini coefficient works as a dispersion measure for gauging educational heterogeneity in and between classrooms and schools. The method for this is to compare Gini coefficients for empirical data from various areas such as gender proportions in upper secondary school programmes and dispersion in achievement within classroom and between schools. The main results are that the Gini coefficient works for gauging heterogeneity on different statistical measurement scales and different sample sizes. An example of small sample is the nominal categories of upper secondary school study programmes, for which the Gini coefficient gauges differences in gender proportions while this sample size should be too small for several other measures of inequality and dispersion. An example of large sample of quotient scale data is two neighbour schools that mainly enrol different achievement strata from the same student cohort. Here the Gini coefficient displays the two schools’ student heterogeneity to be different. An example of moderate size sample is to explore how the teaching group heterogeneity, gauged as Gini coefficient on achievements, re-distributes from within to between classes as the same students proceed from cohesive compulsory school to the students’ individual choice of upper secondary school programmes. Since the Gini coefficient can gauge heterogeneity on small samples, a suggestion for further research is to use it for exploring the relation between strategies for classroom orchestration and levels of classroom heterogeneity, for example between teaching groups at different achievement strata.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference25 articles.
1. Aitchinson J, Brown JAC (1957) The lognormal distribution with special reference to its uses in economics. University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Economics, Monograph 5. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Pp. xviii, 176
2. Anderhag P, Emanuelsson P, Wickman P-O, Hamza KM (2013) Students’ choice of post-compulsory science: in search of schools that compensate for the socio-economic background of their students. Int J Sci Educ 35(18):3141–3160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.696738
3. Boaler J, Wiliam D, Brown M (2000) Students’ Experiences of Ability Grouping—disaffection, polarisation and the construction of failure. Br Edu Res J 26(5):631–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/713651583
4. Cheng RW et al (2008) When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: the roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. Br J Educ Psychol 78(2):205
5. Cobham A, Schlögl L, Sumner A (2016) Inequality and the tails: the Palma proposition and ratio. Global Pol 7(1):25–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12320
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献