IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eaa/eerese/v11y2011i3_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Segmentation of the Argentine Education System: Evidence from PISA 2009

Author

Listed:
  • Krüger, N.

Abstract

For decades, one of the main goals for policy makers throughout the world has been to provide equal educational opportunities. Nevertheless, many countries still face great challenges in this respect, especially considering equality in the distribution of resources. Since the early eighties, Argentina has focused the fact that the education system is segmented, i.e., divided into groups of institutions of differential quality in which students are distributed according to their socio-economic background. This means that schooling reproduces and reinforces existing patterns of social inequality. The purpose of this article is to contribute to the comprehension and the diagnosis of the current relevance of this phenomenon. Based on information from the PISA 2009 survey, the aim is to establish the degree of educational segmentation, evaluating the distribution of the schools physical, human, and social capitals, as well as the interaction of these resources with student characteristics. A cluster analysis is performed for visualising how these factors lead to the configuration of different school profiles. This may be a useful tool to assist in designing strategies to level the most disadvantaged schools, thus better mediating the impact of socio-economic background on educational success.

Suggested Citation

  • Krüger, N., 2011. "The Segmentation of the Argentine Education System: Evidence from PISA 2009," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 11(3).
  • Handle: RePEc:eaa:eerese:v:11:y2011:i:3_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usc.es/economet/reviews/eers1133.pdf
    Download Restriction: No.
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Hutchens, 2004. "One Measure of Segregation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 45(2), pages 555-578, May.
    2. Jacob M. Markman & Eric A. Hanushek & John F. Kain & Steven G. Rivkin, 2003. "Does peer ability affect student achievement?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 527-544.
    3. Mª Jesús Mancebón Torrubia & Domingo Pérez-Ximénez de Embún, 2007. "Conciertos educativos y selección académica y social del alumnado," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 180(1), pages 77-108, March.
    4. MANCEBÓN TORRUBIA, María Jesús & PÉREZ XIMÉNEZ-DE-EMBÚN, Domingo, 2010. "Una Valoracion Del Grado De Segregación Socioeconómica Existente En El Sistema Educativo Español. Un Analisis Por Comunidades Autonómas A Partir De Pisa 2006," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 10(3).
    5. Oecd, 2011. "Private schools: Who Benefits?," PISA in Focus 7, OECD Publishing.
    6. Iatarola, P. & Stiefel, L., 2003. "Intradistrict equity of public education resources and performance," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 69-78, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Susana Faria & Maria Conceição Portela, 2016. "Student Performance in Mathematics using PISA-2009 data for Portugal," Working Papers de Gestão (Management Working Papers) 01, Católica Porto Business School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Casilda Lasso de la Vega & Oscar Volij, 2020. "The Measurement Of Income Segregation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1479-1500, November.
    2. Burger, Kaspar, 2019. "The socio-spatial dimension of educational inequality: A comparative European analysis," MPRA Paper 95309, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2019.
    3. Joao Firmino & Luis C. Nunes & Silvia de Almeida & Susana Batista, 2020. "Student segregation across and within schools. The case of the Portuguese public school system," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp633, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    4. Maria De Paola & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2010. "Peer group effects on the academic performance of Italian students," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(17), pages 2203-2215.
    5. Anne Ardila Brenøe & Ulf Zölitz, 2020. "Exposure to More Female Peers Widens the Gender Gap in STEM Participation," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(4), pages 1009-1054.
    6. Alonso-Villar, Olga & del Río, Coral, 2010. "Local versus overall segregation measures," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 30-38, July.
    7. Oscar Volij, 2018. "Segregation: theoretical approaches," Chapters, in: Conchita D’Ambrosio (ed.), Handbook of Research on Economic and Social Well-Being, chapter 21, pages 480-503, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Oded Stark & Wiktor Budzinski, 2021. "A social‐psychological reconstruction of Amartya Sen’s measures of inequality and social welfare," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 552-566, November.
    9. Steven N. Durlauf & Yannis M. Ioannides, 2010. "Social Interactions," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 451-478, September.
    10. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    11. repec:mpr:mprres:7547 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Rhys Murrian & Paul A. Raschky & Klaus Ackermann, 2024. "Friends, Key Players and the Adoption and Use of Experience Goods," Monash Economics Working Papers 2024-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    13. Brian Beach & Martin Saavedra, 2015. "Mitigating the Effects of Low Birth Weight: Evidence from Randomly Assigned Adoptees," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 1(3), pages 275-296, Summer.
    14. Clifton-Sprigg, Joanna, 2014. "Educational spillovers and parental migration," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon TN 2015-46, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Marco Tonello, 2011. "Mechanisms of peer interactions between native and non-native students: rejection or integration?," Working Papers 2011/21, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    16. Cattaneo, Maria Alejandra & Wolter, Stefan C., 2012. "Migration Policy Can Boost PISA Results: Findings from a Natural Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 6300, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Tugce, Cuhadaroglu, 2013. "My Group Beats Your Group: Evaluating Non-Income Inequalities," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-49, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    18. Chin, Aimee & Daysal, N. Meltem & Imberman, Scott A., 2013. "Impact of bilingual education programs on limited English proficient students and their peers: Regression discontinuity evidence from Texas," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 63-78.
    19. Yann Bramoullé & Habiba Djebbari & Bernard Fortin, 2020. "Peer Effects in Networks: A Survey," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 603-629, August.
    20. ,, 2009. "Monopolistic group design with peer effects," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 4(1), March.
    21. Bet Caeyers, 2014. "Peer effects in development programme awareness of vulnerable groups in rural Tanzania," CSAE Working Paper Series 2014-11, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    equality; educational resources; clusters;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • C38 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Classification Methdos; Cluster Analysis; Principal Components; Factor Analysis

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eaa:eerese:v:11:y2011:i:3_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: M. Carmen Guisan (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.usc.es/economet/eaa.htm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.