Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research

by Selcuk Sirin

EDU 7901: ADVANCED EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH DESIGN

Professor: Richard Bernato, Ed.D.
Fall 2014

By Ryan OHara, Elizabeth Bradshaw, Linda Pfaffe, Dawn Mason, Michael Giacchetto, Scott Payne,
Alison Offerman-Celentano and Sharon Hayes

Question 1: The extent to which the author develops a cogent rationale for the
subject he is exploring.
Socioeconomic status (SES) is probably the most widely used contextual
variable in education research (Sirin, 2005, p.417)
The correlation between SES and academic achievement has ranged from strong (Lamdin, 1996; Sutton &
Soderstrom, 1999) to no significant correlation (Ripple & Luthar, 2000; Seyfried 1998)
Sirin uses Whites (1982) initial work to demonstrate that there have been significant changes in social,
economic and methodological reviews (p.418) since 1982

Question 2
How clearly the author(S) have framed their problem statement and
research question(s).
Sirins meta-analysis was designed to examine the relation between students socioeconomic status
and their academic achievement by reviewing studies published between 1990 and 2000
The explicitly stated research goals/questions were (p. 418):
1. To determine the magnitude of the relation between SES and academic achievement
2. To assess the extent to which this relation is influenced by various methodological
characteristics (e.g., the type of SES or academic achievement measure), and student
characteristics (e.g., grade level, ethnicity, and school location)
3. To replicate Whites meta-analysis with data from recently published studies.

Question 3
How clearly the author(S) have linked the dimensions above
to relevant empirical research.

Sirin distinguishes between the approaches pre-1990 and after

(anecdotal with no research cited)
Inclusion of maternal education level
Inclusion of family structure
Inclusion of moderating factors (race/ethnicity, neighborhood, grade level)
Sirin justifies the need for a new meta-analysis
U.S. Dept of Education (2000) - changes in parental education & family structure
Analysis of family structure (multiple researchers - pg. 418)

Question 3
How clearly the author(S) have linked the dimensions above to relevant empirical research.

Definition of SES in research

Bornstein & Bradley (2003) - ongoing dispute

Ensminger & Fothergill (2003) - many researchers use SES

and social class interchangeably. (pg. 418)

Mueller & Parcel (1981) - defines SES as an individuals or a

familys ranking on a hierarchy according to access to or
control over some combination of valued commodities such as
wealth, power, and social status. (pg. 418)

Three studies (1981, 1985, 1994) that support a reference to

the tripartite nature of SES.

Hauser & Warren (1997), Hauser (1994)

Home Resources - Fourth indicator?

Six studies cite inclusion of this factor

Question 3
How clearly the author(S) have linked the dimensions above to relevant empirical research.

Family SES data vs. Aggregated SES data

Ecological Fallacy
Inclusion of student characteristics
Grade Level
Minority Status
School Location

Question 4
How the method(s) the author(S) have used appear validly suited to
answer their research questions.
Sirin describes the methodology for the study, which included the following steps:
1.

Identified studies to be included in the meta-study.

1.

Use of ERIC, PschINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and Social Science Citation Index reference
databases
1.

Use of search terms, including socioeconomic status, socio-economic status, social class,
social status, income, disadvantaged, poverty, achievement, success, performance

1.2.

Applied the inclusion criteria to select 201 articles from the initial 2,477 articles

1.3.

Read the 201 articles and selected 58 that satisfied the inclusion criteria.

2.

Coded the articles according to the following components: identification (authors, publication year, etc.),
school setting, student characteristics, methodology, SES and academic achievement measures, effect size.

3.

Calculated average effect sizes, using Pearsons correlation coefficient

4.

Tested for homogeneity of correlations

5.

Tested for Moderator Effects

6.

Evaluated publication bias

Question 5
How clearly the author(s) have demonstrated their data analyses and
have linked these to the problem statement and / or research questions.
74 studies from 1990 2000 were utilized in the analysis were presented in 2 tables.

Table 1 provided a summary of independent samples

Table 2 provided a summary of nationwide studies included in the meta-analysis

The next two tables summarize the calculated mean effect size and 95% confidence intervals for the mean
effect size.

Table 3 contains the methodological characteristics moderators of the relationship between SES and
academic achievement

Table 4 shows the student characteristics moderators of the relationship between SES and academic
performance.

Correlation used as effect size

Question 6
The depth to which the author(S) conclusions and
recommendations appear valid insofar as the data may suggest.

Impact of SES on school achievement was much higher when focus was on
schools and not individuals. Financial equity between districts are not
providing enough financial support for our lower-family-SES schools.
Society is failing our SES students
1 in 5 students live in poverty
Policy decisions at local, state, and federal levels aimed at correcting this
issue
Equality of funding by recognizing that most lower SES families deal with
Limited social services
More violence
Homelessness
Illegal drug trafficking
The need to attract and keep qualified teachers

Question 6
The depth to which the author(S) conclusions and
recommendations appear valid insofar as the data may suggest.
Focus on Adequacy
Sufficient resources for optimal academic achievement vs. equity
Appropriate and successful interventions proven in reducing this achievement gap
Small school & class size
Early childhood education
Federal programs
Title1
Head Start
After-school and summer programs
Financially qualified school personnel
Without support our current system an intergenerational cycle of school failure because of
family SES

Question 7
Limitations of the Study

Sirin cites a number of limitations to this study the and cautions that the results should be interpreted
with caution.

this study was limited to published journal articles

unpublished studies were not believed to have an impact on the studies
original study did not empirically test the impact of publication types as a factor
This study was limited to U.S. schools. It is not possible in this study to draw conclusions about
how the data would apply in other countries
the latest study utilized electronic databases for relevant studies: There may be relevant
studies not included in the study that were not found on an electronic database
each meta-analysis is limited by the quality of the research on which it relies. Project studies
were not eliminated on the basis of the quality of each study.

Question 8
The depth to which the author(s) conclusions and recommendations appear valid insofar as
the data may suggest
Sirins review will serve as a practical use for educational researchers and policymakers (page 446) as they
assess the implications of family SES on educational process and to provide equal educational opportunities
for all (page 447).
Discusses meta-analysis and includes methodological challenges for future research in education, (page 447).
He concludes with future research questions such as: Should we continue to SES as a contextual indicator
school success for minority students? (page 447) and Should SES data collection still come from the students
and administrators even when there continues to be a discrepancy that data and the data collected parents and
other
Overall recommendations are solid but statistically hard to replicate which limits the validity of the results and
supports the need for future research.