Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
41
Albert Julià
Cómo citar
Julià, Albert (2016). «Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión
lectora». Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 156: 41-58.
(http://dx.doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.156.41)
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
42 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 43
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
44 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 45
nero en el rendimiento de la comprensión aula, son más ruidosos y se distraen más fá-
lectora (H1). Así, sería de esperar que una cilmente que las niñas (Francis, 2000; Youn-
composición social de menor calidad au- ger et al., 1999).
mentaría la brecha de género en compren- A partir de las teorías de identidades de
sión lectora y viceversa. género en los estudiantes y las relacionadas
La escuela es un marco contextual de con el clima escolar, planteamos la segunda
peso para entender el logro educativo en hipótesis de este artículo: si el comporta-
comprensión lectora (Chiu y McBride-Chang, miento de los estudiantes (clima escolar) en
2006). Profundizando en el análisis del clima la escuela tiene una influencia en el rendi-
escolar, algunos autores sugieren que el am- miento de los estudiantes en la comprensión
biente escolar podría influir en las habilida- lectora, tendrá un efecto diferenciado entre
des no cognitivas de los individuos. Algunos niños y niñas (H2). Siguiendo el anterior argu-
de estos estudios han demostrado que exis- mento de Legewie y DiPetre (2012), debería-
te una mayor variabilidad en el rendimiento mos esperar que la brecha de género se re-
en lectura entre las diferentes escuelas que dujera al mejorar el clima escolar.
dentro de las propias escuelas, y en ello jue-
ga un papel clave el clima escolar (Ogle et al.,
2003; Griffin et al., 1998). Por el contrario, La posición de la mujer en la
Bertrand (2011) pone en duda alguna de las sociedad y la brecha de género
conclusiones derivadas de la influencia de la en el rendimiento en lectura
escuela en el rendimiento educativo y la in-
fluencia en chicos y chicas. En su investiga- Son pocos los estudios que contemplan los
ción, en la que siguieron la trayectoria de factores macrosociales como factores de-
veinte mil niños y niñas durante doce años, terminantes que expliquen las diferencias
no llegaron a encontrar diferencias en las ha- de género en el logro educativo. En las úl-
bilidades no cognitivas entre chicos y chicas, timas décadas se han desarrollado diver-
ya sea en función de variables como el grado sos indicadores con el fin de cuantificar la
escolar, la disciplina escolar, la edad en la brecha de género en diversas temáticas a
que los niños empiezan la guardería o el gé- nivel macro como la salud, la participación
nero del profesor. económica o el empoderamiento político
Las identidades estereotipadas de géne- entre otros (Hausmann et al., 2008). Algu-
ro aún representan un marco de actitudes, nos estudios sugieren que en las socieda-
creencias y comportamientos hacia la edu- des más igualitarias respecto al género, las
cación que tanto los estudiantes, los padres, mujeres resultan favorecidas en diferentes
las madres y los maestros mantienen como ámbitos, como en el educativo. En el estu-
transmiten. Esta cultura de género puede lle- dio realizado por Guiso et al. (2008), utilizan
gar a ser un factor importante en la explica- cuatro indicadores para enmarcar las ca-
ción del logro o el éxito académico de chicos racterísticas macrosociales (características
y chicas y de la brecha educativa entre ellos. culturales y sociales) en torno a los niveles
Algunos estudios etnográficos destacan el de igualdad de género que influyen en el
patrón en el que las identidades de género rendimiento en lectura y matemáticas
se forman en la escuela y cómo estas identi- (usando la encuesta PISA 2003): el Índice
dades tienen una influencia diferente en sus de Brecha de Género (GGI, Gender Gap In-
actitudes y comportamientos hacia la educa- dex) del Foro Económico Mundial, un índi-
ción (Francis, 2000; Skelton, 1997). En con- ce de actitudes culturales hacia las mujeres
secuencia, los chicos tienen actitudes y (índice proporcionado por la World Values
comportamientos más indisciplinados en el Survey), el ratio de la actividad económica
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
46 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 47
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
48 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
terísticas educativas de los padres y madres racterísticas a nivel de escuela para evaluar su
son nueve categorías, a las que añadimos una influencia en las puntuaciones en compren-
décima, «otros», con el fin de incluir los casos sión lectora de los alumnos y su influencia en
de las madres/padres solteras/os. La catego- la brecha de género. Acorde con las hipótesis
ría de referencia en este caso es «los dos con previamente planteadas, utilizamos dos varia-
nivel educativo terciario». bles independientes claves para el análisis en
En último lugar, añadimos a modo de va- este nivel. La variable «comportamiento de los
riables de control una serie de índices que estudiantes»7 que relacionamos con las teo-
proporciona PISA con el objetivo de incluir la rías basadas en el clima escolar (H2). Se trata
información relacionada con las posesiones de un índice proporcionado por PISA que ex-
que tiene cada estudiante en su hogar (OCDE, presa los aspectos relacionados con los estu-
2012; Buchmann, 2000). Estos índices se ba- diantes y las conductas disruptivas en clase y
san en la recopilación de dieciséis artículos u la escuela. La segunda variable de este nivel
objetos que se pueden encontrar en los hoga- es otro índice al que llamamos «composición
res, tres de los cuales son específicos de social de la escuela». Este índice muestra el
porcentaje de padres que tienen un nivel edu-
cada país. Estos ítems se distribuyen en tres
cativo inferior a CINE 3 (segundo ciclo educa-
índices diferenciados. Dos de los índices es-
ción secundaria obligatoria). Esta variable ya
tán altamente relacionados con el rendimiento
ha sido planteada y utilizada en análisis en
escolar de los niños y se basan en la teoría del
anteriores investigaciones (Marí-Klose et al.,
capital cultural de Bourdieu (Bourdieu, 1977;
2009) en las que se pretende captar el efecto
Sullivan, 2001). Estos índices son las llama-
de capital social que puede provocar la com-
das «posesiones culturales en el hogar»4 y los
posición del alumnado según el nivel educa-
«recursos educativos del hogar»5. El tercer
tivo de sus progenitores. Cuanto mayor sea el
índice, el más genérico, es el llamado «pose-
valor de este índice indica que el porcentaje
siones de riqueza en el hogar»6.
de padres que tienen un bajo nivel de educa-
ción es más alto que los que tienen un alto
Variables explicativas nivel 2: nivel de educación. Con esta variable preten-
características de las escuelas
demos esclarecer si la composición social de
Aparte del nivel individual, en el análisis se las escuelas tiene una influencia significativa
incluyen diferentes variables que captan ca- sobre la brecha de género en el rendimiento
de la comprensión lectora (H1).
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 49
Media PV
comprensión lectora
% Media (DE) Mín. Máx. (DE)
Variables individuales
Sexo
Hombre 48,9 456,8 (98,4)
Mujer 51,1 490,3 (93,1)
Estructura familiar
Biparental 79,7 480,6 (95,2)
Monoparental 16,5 460,9 (97,5)
Otros 3,8 389,7 (91,7)
Nivel de homogamia educativa
Padre primaria - madre secundaria 3,7 440,7 (87,5)
Padre primaria - madre terciaria 0,9 439,2 (92,6)
Padre secundaria - madre primaria 4,2 431,3 (87,2)
Padre secundaria - madre terciaria 9,8 491,7 (93,3)
Padre terciaria - madre primaria 0,9 426,1 (91,3)
Padre terciaria - madre secundaria 10,1 487,3 (96,0)
Ambos primaria 6,6 409,7 (83,4)
Ambos secundaria 34 473,1 (89,8)
Ambos terciaria 24,5 502,2 (101,0)
Otros 5,2 440,3 (95,1)
Origen
Nativos 89,9 474,0 (97,0)
Inmigrante 1a generación 4,7 471,9 (101,5)
Inmigrante 2a generación 5,4 474,1 (95,9)
Posesiones culturales en el hogar -0,02 (0,96) -2,24 1,86
Recursos educativos en el hogar -0,14 (1,03) -4,74 2,13
Posesiones de riqueza en el hogar -0,43 (1,17) -6,69 3,84
Variables de escuela
Comportamiento de los estudiantes 0,03 (1,04) -3,42 2,36
Composición social de la escuela a 18,05 (22,24) 0,0 100
Variables de país
GGI 0,70 (0,05) 0,58 0,83
Número de casos 412.367
Nota: Desviación estándar entre paréntesis.
a porcentaje de padres de los hijos que van a la escuela con un nivel educativo inferior a CINE 3.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
50 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 51
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
52 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
TABLA 2. Análisis multinivel. Estimación de los coeficientes de la influencia de la escuela y el contexto del país en el efecto
que tiene el género en los resultados de comprensión lectora
Efectos fijos
Constante 460,1 *** -6,5 460,1 *** -6,5 460,1 *** -6,5 460 *** -6,5
Variables individuales
Sexo (hombre=ref.)
Mujer 27,28 *** -1,4 27,3 *** -1,4 29,39 *** -1,3 -39,35 * -17,9
Monoparental -5,69 *** -1,0 -5,69 *** -1,0 -5,69 *** -1,0 -5,69 *** -1,0
Otros -28,62 *** -2,3 -28,61 *** -2,3 -28,68 *** -2,3 -28,67 *** -2,3
Nivel homogamia educativa (ambos
terciaria=ref.)
Padre primaria - madre secundaria -14,50 *** -2,2 -14,52 *** -2,2 -14,48 *** -2,2 -14,45 *** -2,2
Padre primaria - madre terciaria -17,79 *** -1,9 -17,81 *** -1,9 -17,84 *** -1,9 -17,77 *** -1,9
Padre secundaria - madre primaria -15,71 *** -1,9 -15,73 *** -1,9 -15,61 *** -1,9 -15,60 *** -1,9
Padre secundaria - madre terciaria -3,28 *** -1,0 -3,28 *** -1,0 -3,30 *** -1,0 -3,29 *** -1,0
Padre terciaria - madre primaria -19,21 *** -2,1 -19,20 *** -2,1 -19,15 *** -2,1 -19,13 *** -2,1
Padre terciaria - madre secundaria -4,58 *** -0,9 -4,58 *** -0,9 -4,58 *** -0,9 -4,53 *** -0,9
Ambos primaria -20,21 *** -2,1 -20,23 *** -2,1 -20,04 *** -2,1 -20,07 *** -2,1
Ambos secundaria -10,66 *** -1,8 -10,66 *** -1,8 -10,68 *** -1,8 -10,66 *** -1,8
Otros -22,83 *** -2,6 -22,85 *** -2,6 -22,82 *** -2,6 -22,81 *** -2,6
Origen (Nativo=ref.)
Inmigrante 1a generación -21,46 *** -5,6 -21,45 *** -5,6 -21,44 *** -5,6 -21,44 *** -5,6
Inmigrante 2a generación -11,57 *** -3,4 -11,57 *** -3,4 -11,55 *** -3,4 -11,58 *** -3,4
Posesiones culturales en el hogar 8,72 *** -1,0 8,71 *** -1,0 8,69 *** -1,0 8,7 *** -1,0
Recursos educativos en el hogar 8,64 *** -0,5 8,64 *** -0,5 8,65 *** -0,5 8,65 *** -0,5
Posesiones de riqueza en el hogar -5,63 *** -0,6 -5,63 *** -0,6 -5,63 *** -0,6 -5,65 *** -0,6
Variables de escuela
Comportamiento de los estudiantes 11,74 *** -1,2 12,77 *** -1,3 11,73 *** -1,2 11,75 *** -1,2
Composición social de la escuela -1,31 *** -0,1 -1,31 *** -0,1 -1,26 *** -0,1 -1,31 *** -0,1
Variables de país
Nota: En todos los análisis las variables están centradas en la media general.
EE: Error Estándar; DE= Desviación Estándar; e = σ2; r0 = τπ ; u00 = τβ.
a Los efectos aleatorios en el modelo nulo (solo el intercepto) son: e=5.187,29; r0=3.382,55; u00=2.710,95.
*=significativo al 0,05; **= significativo al 0,01; ***= significativo al 0,001.
Fuente: Elaboración propia a partir de PISA 2009.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 53
GRÁFICO 1. Valores predichos (plausible values) en la puntuación de comprensión lectora según sexo, nivel
de comportamiento del alumnado en la escuela y composición social de la escuela
550 550
500 500
comprensión lectora
comprensión lectora
450 450
400 400
350 350
300 300
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 50 100
Nivel de comportamiento de la escuela % de padres en la escuela con nivel educativo bajo
Mujer Hombre Mujer Hombre
educativas en el hogar indican que cuanto mente del sexo del alumno, la situación de
mayor es la concentración de dichos elemen- igualdad de la mujer en el país tiene una in-
tos en el hogar, los estudiantes son más pro- fluencia en el resultado de los estudiantes. El
pensos a tener mejores puntuaciones en coeficiente de esta variable es relativamente
comprensión lectora. Por el contrario, no ob- bajo, ya que es importante recordar que el
servamos el mismo resultado del indicador de índice de GGI va de 0,58 a 0,83.
posesiones de riqueza en el hogar. En los modelos 2, 3 y 4 se añaden las
Si nos fijamos en las variables de la es- interacciones entre las variables de los dife-
cuela y el GGI en el modelo 1, se observa rentes niveles con el fin de responder a dis-
que tanto en el comportamiento de los estu- tintas hipótesis planteadas anteriormente.
diantes como en la composición social del Los resultados en el modelo 2 confirman la
alumnado son estadísticamente significati- segunda hipótesis propuesta en esta inves-
vas (p < 0,001). Los datos muestran la in- tigación, la cual relaciona el efecto de la in-
fluencia del entorno y el clima escolar en el teracción entre el comportamiento de los
desempeño educativo. Cuando el comporta- estudiantes en la escuela y el género del
miento general de los estudiantes es menos alumno. De acuerdo con estos resultados, el
disruptivo en la escuela, los alumnos tienden clima escolar derivado del comportamiento
a tener mejores resultados. Así mismo, los general de los estudiantes tiende a afectar en
estudiantes que asisten a escuelas con una mayor medida a los chicos que a las chicas.
alta proporción de padres con un bajo nivel Así pues, el efecto negativo producido por el
educativo tienen más probabilidades de ob- comportamiento disruptivo de los compañe-
tener peores puntuaciones. La variable de ros en los resultados en comprensión lectora
nivel macro de GGI es también estadística- de los estudiantes es mayor para los chicos
mente significativa (p < 0,05) con un efecto que para las chicas. En el modelo 3 ponemos
positivo. Esta variable nos indica que, a a prueba la primera hipótesis, la cual plantea
igualdad de condiciones e independiente- que la composición social de la escuela, en-
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
54 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
tendida como la concentración de padres sa sobre cómo los entornos escolares dan
con niveles educativos bajos, tiene también forma al desarrollo del aprendizaje de niñas
mayor influencia en los niños que en las ni- y niños. Las dos variables utilizadas en nues-
ñas. En este caso los resultados van en el tro análisis a nivel escolar están relacionadas
sentido contrario al esperado. La brecha de en gran medida con la influencia que tiene el
género se reduce a mayores concentracio- grupo de iguales en el contexto escolar. La
nes de padres con niveles educativos bajos. influencia de la escuela, medida por el com-
Tanto en el modelo 2 como en el modelo 3, portamiento general de los estudiantes y la
las interacciones son estadísticamente signi- composición social del alumnado, tiene una
ficativas (p < 0,001)10. magnitud diferenciada según el género de
Por último, en el modelo 4 se puede ob- los estudiantes. Los chicos son más permea-
servar un efecto positivo de la interacción bles a las condiciones negativas del clima
entre los diferentes niveles entre GGI y de escolar pero no de la composición del alum-
género, que también es significativo en p < nado. Por el contrario, las chicas son más
0,001. Este resultado confirma la tercera hi- permeables a las variaciones de la composi-
ción social del centro. Es decir, la brecha de
pótesis: cuanto más igualitario es el país res-
género en comprensión lectora es mayor en
pecto al género, la brecha de género en las
entornos más disruptivos y en escuelas con
puntuaciones en comprensión lectora au-
menor concentración de estudiantes cuyos
menta a favor de las chicas.
padres tienen niveles educativos bajos.
Nuestros resultados son parcialmente con-
sistentes con investigaciones como la de
Conclusión
Legewie y DiPetre (2012), en el sentido de
En las últimas décadas, y en la mayoría de que los niños son más sensibles e influencia-
los países, la brecha género educativa ha ido bles al entorno escolar y al grupo de iguales
aumentando. En este panorama parece que las niñas. Sin embargo, no sucede en la
oportuno preguntarse si las escuelas están misma dirección cuando consideramos el
promoviendo esta desigualdad de género y efecto del entorno escolar según la compo-
su incremento, como también qué peso jue- sición social. Así pues, el clima o ambiente
ga el contexto social a nivel de género. El escolar y el capital social de la escuela jue-
objetivo de este artículo es proporcionar una gan un papel importante para explicar tanto
mejor comprensión sobre los elementos in- la brecha de género como el bajo rendimien-
fluyentes respecto a la brecha educativa de to de los chicos en comprensión lectora,
género centrada principalmente en los facto- pero de forma contraria.
res contextuales en sus diversos niveles. Otra de las hipótesis de esta investiga-
Los resultados obtenidos en esta investi- ción ha sido comprobar la influencia de fac-
gación representan un avance en la comple- tores macro sociales en la brecha de género
ja tarea de determinar qué factores contribu- educativa. En este caso nos hemos centrado
yen a la brecha de género en el rendimiento en el análisis de los niveles de igualdad de
educativo y capturan una información valio- género medido por el GGI. Acorde con la in-
vestigación de Guiso et al. (2008), nuestros
resultados muestran que a mayor igualdad
10 Alternativamente, se ha realizado un modelo introdu- de género en la sociedad, la brecha de géne-
ciendo las dos interacciones de las variables de escue- ro en los resultados de comprensión lectora
la. Comportamiento de los estudiantes*Mujer: -2,27** se amplifica en favor de las niñas. En los paí-
(0,03); Composición social de la escuela*Mujer: -0,12**
(0,44). Los resultados se mantienen semejantes a las ses con un mayor nivel de GGI las mujeres
interacciones de los Modelos 2 y 3. tienen mejores condiciones para desarrollar
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 55
tanto la carrera laboral como la escolar o ser utilizados como una oportunidad para
académica. Esto supone un contexto social incrementar su rendimiento académico. Se
de mayores expectativas para las chicas que ha observado que unas condiciones desfa-
acaban influenciando en sus calificaciones vorables del entorno escolar son altamente
en mayor medida que en otros países menos influyentes en los chicos y son retroalimen-
igualitarios. Asimismo, mientras las chicas se tadas por el efecto de grupo. Sin embargo,
favorecen por las condiciones sociales de unas condiciones favorables pueden crear
mayor igualdad de género, los chicos perma- un entorno positivo para el desarrollo educa-
necen menos permeables a las variaciones tivo tanto de las chicas como de los chicos.
que puedan sucederse a este nivel. Siguiendo la argumentación de DiPrete y Bu-
¿Dichos resultados son comparables en chmann (2013), la estrategia win-win (todos
otras materias educativas clave que tradicio- ganan) se basaría en que las mismas refor-
nalmente no han sido favorables a las chicas, mas que ayudarían a los chicos en el logro
como matemáticas o ciencia? Los análisis educativo también ayudarían a las chicas.
llevados a cabo sobre estas materias (las cua- No se trataría de crear reformas orientadas
les tienen mejores notas los chicos que la chi- únicamente a reducir la brecha de género o
cas en promedio) muestran que los factores favorecer a los chicos, sino reformas que
analizados a nivel escuela y de equidad de mejoren el entorno escolar, que aumenten el
género en la sociedad se mantienen significa- nivel de expectativas y motiven a todos los
tivos (menos en las interacciones entre géne- alumnos a invertir en sus estudios.
ro y composición social de la escuela y GGI
para el rendimiento en ciencias) y los efectos Bibliografía
son sensiblemente más reducidos pero en la
misma dirección que los mostrados. Alegre, Miguel A. y Benito, Ricard (2012). «Climas y
(sobretodo) culturas escolares: cómo se explican
Los resultados del presente artículo y de y qué permiten explicar». En: Gómez-Granell, C.
anteriores investigaciones avalan que es fun- y Mari-Klose, P. (dirs.). Familia y relaciones in-
damental tener en cuenta que hay factores tergeneracionales: un espacio de oportunidades
exógenos que influyen en el rendimiento aca- para la educación de los hijos e hijas. Barcelona:
démico, y en términos de política educativa, Instituto de Infancia y Mundo Urbano.
intentar influir sobre ellos. Es posible desarro- Bertrand, Marianne (2011). «New Perspectives on Gen-
llar políticas orientadas a influir en la compo- der». Handbook of Labor Economics, (4): 1543-1590.
sición social de los centros, asignando perfi- Bettinger, Eric P. y Long, Bridget T. (2005). «Do Fac-
les de familias a las escuelas según factores ulty Serve as Role Models? The Impact of In-
relacionados con la clase social como, por structor Gender on Female Students». American
ejemplo, por el origen o los ingresos de los Economic Review, 95(2): 152-157.
hogares. Con estas medidas se puede evitar Bourdieu, Pierre (1977). «Cultural Reproduction and
una alta concentración de alumnos con pa- Social Reproduction». En: Karabel, J. y Halsey,
dres con bajo nivel educativo o familias con A. H. (eds.). Power and Ideology in Education.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
niveles elevados de privación económica, y
así obtener una mayor equidad en el sistema Bryk, Anthony S. y Raudenbush, Stephen W. (1992).
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data
escolar que favorecería tanto a chicos como
Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, California:
a chicas. Sin embargo, como los resultados
Sage Publications.
muestran, este tipo de acciones tenderían a
Buchmann, Claudia (2000). «Family Structure, Paren-
incrementar la brecha educativa de género.
tal Perceptions and Child Labour in Kenya: What
La influencia del entorno escolar y el gru- Factors Determine Who is Enrolled in School?».
po de iguales en los niños también podrían Social Forces, 78: 1349-1379.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
56 Contexto escolar y desigualdad de género en el rendimiento de comprensión lectora
Carrell, Scott. E.; Page, Marianne E. y West, James poral Punishment in the U.S. Public Schools».
E. (2010). «Sex and Science: How Professor Gen- Journal of Negro Education, 64: 454-462.
der Perpetuates the Gender Gap». The Quar-
Griffin, Peg; Burns, Susan M. y Snow, Catherine E.
terly Journal of Economics, 125(3): 1101-1144.
(eds.). (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in
Chiu, Ming M. y McBride-Chang, Catherine (2006). Young Children. Washington, D.C.: National
«Gender, Context, and Reading: A Comparison Academy Press.
of Students in 43 Countries». Scientific Studies
Guiso, Luigi et al. (2008). «Culture, Gender and Math».
of Reading, 10(4): 331-362.
Science, 320: 1164-1165.
Coleman, James S. et al. (1966). Equality of Educa-
Hausmann, Ricardo et al. (2008). The Global Gender
tional Opportunity. Washington, D.C.: Govern-
Gap Report 2008. World Economic Forum.
ment Printing Office.
Heckman, James J.; Stixrud, Jora y Urzua, Sergio
Cooley, Sid (1995). Suspension/Expulsion of Regular
(2006). «The Effects of Cognitive and Noncogni-
and Special Education Students in Kansas: A Re-
tive Abilities on Labor Market Outcomes and
port to the Kansas State Board of Education. To-
Social Behavior». Journal of Labor Economics,
peka, Kansas: Kansas State Board of Education.
24(3): 411-482.
DeBaryshe, Barbara D.; Patterson, Gerald R. y Ca-
Jacob, Brian A. (2002). «Where the Boys Aren’t: Non-
paldi, Deborah M. (1993). «A Performance Model
cognitive Skills, Returns to School and the Gen-
for Academic Achievement in Early Adolescent
Boys». Developmental Psychology, 29(5): 795. der Gap in Higher Education». Economics of
Education Review, 21(6): 589-598.
Dee, Thomas. S. (2007). «Teachers and the Gender
Gaps in Student Achievement». Journal of Hu- Legewie, Joscha y DiPrete, Thomas A. (2012).
man Resources, 42(3): 528-554. «School Context and the Gender Gap in Educa-
tional Achievement». American Sociological Re-
DiPrete, Thomas. A. y Buchmann, Claudia (2013). The view, 77(3): 463-485.
Rise of Women: The Growing Gender Gap in
Education and what it Means for American Ma, Xin (2008). «Within School Gender Gaps in Read-
Schools. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. ing, Mathematics, and Science Literacy». Com-
parative Education Review, 52(3): 437-460.
Duckworth, Angela L. y Seligman, Martin E. P. (2006).
«Self-discipline Gives Girls the Edge: Gender in Self- Ma, Xin y Willms, J. Douglas (1995). «The Effects of
discipline, Grades, and Achievement Test Scores». School Disciplinary Climate on Eighth Grade
Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1): 198. Achievement». American Educational Research
Association, San Francisco, California.
Francis, Becky (2000). Boys, Girls and Achievement:
Addressing the Classroom Issues. London: Rout- Maccoby, Eleanor E. y Jacklin, Carol Nagy (eds.).
ledge Falmer. (1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences (vol.
1). Stanford, California: Stanford University
Freeman, Catherine E. (2004). Trends in Educational
Press.
Equity of Girls and Women: 2004. NCES 2005-
016, U.S. Department of Education, National Machin, Stephen y McNally, Sandra (2005). «Gender
Center for Education Statistics. Washington, and Student Achievement in English Schools».
D.C.: GPO. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(3): 357-372.
Goldin, Claudia; Katz, Lawrence F. y Kuziemko, Ilyana Moffitt, Terrie E. (ed.) (2001). Sex Differences in An-
(2006). «The Homecoming of American College tisocial Behavior: Conduct Disorder, Delinquency,
Women: The Reversal of the College Gender and Violence in the Dunedin Longitudinal Study.
Gap». Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(4): Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
133-156. OCDE (2012). PISA 2009 Technical Report. PISA,
González de San Román, Ainara y de la Rica, Sara OCDE Publications.
(2012). «Gender Gaps in PISA Test Scores: The Ogle, Laurence T. et al. (2003). International Compa-
Impact of Social Norms and the Mother’s Transmis- risons in Fourth-grade Reading Literacy: Findings
sion of Role Attitudes». IZA Discussion Paper 6338.
from the Progress in International Reading Lite-
Gregory, James F. (1996). «The Crime of Punishment: racy Study (PIRLS) of 2001. U.S. Department of
Racial and Gender Disparities in the Use of Cor- Education, NCES. Washington, D.C.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 57
Rosenbaum, James E. (2001). Beyond College for Sommers, Christina H. (2000). The War Against Boys:
All: Career Paths for the Forgotten Half. New How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young
York: Russell Sage. Men. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Ryan, Allyson M. (2000). «Peer Group as a Context
Sullivan, Alice (2001). «Cultural Capital and Educa-
for the Socialization of Adolescents’ Motivation,
tional Attainment». Sociology, 35: 893-912.
Engagement, and Achievement in School». Edu-
cational Psychologist, 35: 101-111. Thrupp, Martin (1999). Schools Making a Difference.
Ryan, Allyson M. (2001). «The Peer Group as a Con- Let’s Be Realistic. Buckingham, Philadelphia:
text for the Development of Young Adolescent Open University Press.
Motivation and Achievement». Child Develop-
Trzesniewski, Kali H. et al. (2006) «Revisiting the As-
ment, 72: 1135-1150.
sociation between Reading Achievement and
Skelton, Christine (1997). «Primary Boys and Hege- Antisocial Behavior: New Evidence of an Envi-
monic Masculinities». British Journal of Sociol-
ronmental Explanation from a Twin Study». Child
ogy of Education, 18(3): 349-369.
Development, 77(1): 72-88.
Skiba, Rusell J. et al. (2002). «The Color of Discipline:
Sources of Racial and Gender Disproportionality Weaver-Hightower, Marcus (2003). «The Boy Turn in
in School Punishment». The Urban Review, 34(4): Research on Gender and Education». Review of
317-342. Educational Research, 73(4): 471-498.
Slee, Roger; Weiner, Gaby y Tomlinson, Sally (eds.) World Economic Forum (2013). The Global Gender
(1998). School Effectiveness for Whom?: Challen- Gap Report 2013. World Economic Forum.
ges to the School Effectiveness and School Im-
provement Movements. London; Bristol, Penn- Younger, Michael; Warrington, Molly y Williams,
sylvania: Falmer Press. Jacquetta (1999). «The Gender Gap and Clas-
Sokal, Laura et al. (2007). «Good-bye, Mr.Chips: Male sroom Interactions: Reality and Rhetoric?».
Teacher Shortages and Boys’ Reading Achieve- British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(3):
ment». Sex Roles, 56(9-10): 651-659. 325-341.
RECEPCIÓN: 13/01/2015
REVISIÓN: 07/10/2015
APROBACIÓN: 25/02/2016
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, Octubre - Diciembre 2016, pp. 41-58
doi:10.5477/cis/reis.156.41
Albert Julià
Citation
Julià, Albert (2016). “School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement”. Revista
Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 156: 41-58.
(http://dx.doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.156.41)
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
42 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 43
and the ability to work independently, as the that the empirical evidence is not conclusive
main determinants in the gender gap found on whether the gender of the teacher plays a
in education. Boys and girls with a deficit in role in differences in achievement by gender
these skills tend to have much poorer outco- (Buchmann, et al., 2008; Carrell et al., 2010).
mes in their educational paths. According to In a study by Sokal et al. (2007), which exa-
these studies, in general boys tend to have mined the effect of teachers’ gender on rea-
greater deficits in interpersonal and commu- ding performance and boys’ self-perception
nicative skills, are less persistent and less as readers, no differential effect was found in
disciplined than girls (McFadden et al., 1992; performance when boys were taught by wo-
Skiba et al., 1997; Jacob, 2002; Skiba et al., men or men. Other types of studies have
2002;) and are more likely to develop anti- looked beyond the influence of the characte-
social behaviours (Moffitt, 2001) or to be pu- ristics of the school and the teacher’s gender
nished in school. Cooley (1995) and Gregory to determine the possible causes of the gen-
(1996) found that boys are four times as likely der gap in academic performance. Studies
to be punished in school as girls. As other examining the impact of the school climate
studies show, these factors are intrinsically and its social composition are becoming
related to boys’ greater difficulty in reading more common. According to Legewie and
comprehension (Trzesniewski et al., 2006) or DiPetre (2012), the school environment is de-
their greater likelihood of repeating a grade termined by perceptions of masculinity in
than girls (Freeman, 2004). In contrast, girls peer culture and, therefore, fosters or inhibits
appear to have better non-cognitive skills, in the development of anti-school attitudes and
terms of attention, organizational abilities behaviours among boys. In contrast, peer
(Jacob, 2002) and self-discipline (Duckworth groups and the environment do not have
and Seligman, 2006), and greater interest in such a significant effect on girls. As a result,
school and education (Rosenbaum, 2001; boys are more sensitive to school resources
Jacob, 2002). In this regard, the study by and climate than girls, in both a positive and
Heckman et al. (2006), which quantified the negative sense.
relative value of cognitive and non-cognitive
abilities, must be mentioned. Some of their
findings indicate that an increase in non-cog- School context and the gender
nitive abilities at an early age increases the gap in reading achievement
probability of greater personal and social de- Schools have a direct influence on students’
velopment. results. The effectiveness, composition and
Studies on the interactions between climate of a school are essential for unders-
school and the school environment have re- tanding differences in school results. But
ceived some attention in recent years. Some what elements and mechanisms in the school
authors consider the role of the teacher to be explain the gender gap? There are various
a primary determinant in explaining the gap factors related to the school that can have an
between boys and girls (Bettinger and Long, impact on academic performance and rea-
2005). In this regard, some researchers have ding comprehension in particular, such as
found that the teacher’s gender can have a the influence of peer groups, the social com-
significant impact. Teachers may have their position of the school and the educational
own biases in regard to the way they involve climate. These are factors that can provide a
boys and girls in the classroom and the ex- more favourable or more adverse setting, im-
pectations they have regarding the clas- pacting the attitudes of students toward their
sroom and the students (Sommers, 2000; involvement in or enjoyment of reading. This
Dew, 2007). However, some authors argue is particularly the case among adolescents,
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
44 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
who tend to be more affected by their peers the socioeconomic profile of students' fami-
than by their families (Ryan, 2000, 2001). In lies intensify the effect on educational perfor-
this regard, parents may have less influence mance and vice versa. Based on the results of
in getting their children to read at these ages. Legewie and DiPetre (2012), boys, being more
Regarding this idea, the influence of parents permeable to variations in their social environ-
on fostering reading in their children may be ment than girls, should be more negatively
lower at these ages than, for example, cer- impacted by attending schools with lower le-
tain factors related to school context, mar- vels of social capital. Based on this assump-
ked in great measure by the composition of tion, we suggest the hypothesis that the social
the student body and its social profile. composition of schools has a significant in-
Another factor used to define school con- fluence on the gender gap in reading achieve-
text is the so-called school climate. Various ment (H1). Thus, it would be expected that a
studies on the effectiveness of schools indica- social composition of lower quality would
te that school climate has a significant influen- increase the gender gap in reading compre-
ce (DeBaryshe et al., 1993; Ma and Willms, hension, and vice versa.
1995). For some authors, school climate is The school is an important contextual fra-
defined as the internal functioning of a school, mework for understanding the level of rea-
for example, how students are organized for ding comprehension attained (Chu and Mc-
instruction, administrators and teachers’ aca- Bride-Chang, 2006). Deepening our analysis
demic expectations for their students, the of school climate, some authors suggest that
administration’s style of leadership and deci- school environment could influence stu-
sion making, and teachers’ practices in the dents’ non-cognitive skills. Some of these
classroom (Ma, 2008). Although school clima- studies have shown that there is a greater
te has been studied through many different variability in reading performance between
variables, the majority of studies have not different schools than within schools, and
adequately incorporated the weight that varia- that school climate plays a key role in this
bles related to school composition may have (Ogle et al., 2003; Griffin et al., 1998). Howe-
on the results of their students (Slee et al., ver, Bertrand (2011) questions some of the
1998; Thrupp, 1999). To a great extent, this conclusions regarding the influence of the
criticism comes from studies on the scope of school on academic performance and, spe-
the effect of composition, the majority based cifically, its influence on boys and girls. Her
on the premises raised in the report by Cole- study, which followed the educational path of
man et al. (1966). If the social composition of twenty thousand children over 12 years, did
a school has a significant effect on student not find differences in non-cognitive skills
performance, it is due to the effect of proces- between boys and girls, whether in function
ses and social networks that are produced in of variables such as school year, school dis-
the school context. These processes affect cipline, age at which students began pres-
the formation, reproduction and modification chool, or the gender of the teacher.
of the dispositions of the school and student Stereotypical gender identities still repre-
groups within it (Alegre and Benito, 2012). sent a framework for attitudes, beliefs and
One of the main conclusions of the Coleman behaviours toward education that students,
report is that “the social composition of the parents and teachers hold and transmit. This
student body is more highly related to achie- gender culture can be an important factor in
vement, independently of the student’s own explaining educational achievement and suc-
social background, than is any school factor”( cess among boys and girls and the educatio-
Coleman et al., 1966:325). Schools with a nal gap between them. Some ethnographic
greater concentration of social capital due to studies emphasize the pattern in the forma-
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 45
tion of gender identities in school and how ment also provided by the World Economic
these identities have a differential impact on Forum. Guiso et al found only slight diffe-
attitudes and behaviours related to education rences between the results of boys and girls
(Francis, 2000; Skelton, 1997). As a conse- in mathematics in OECD countries with a
quence, boys have more undisciplined attitu- more gender egalitarian culture. This re-
des and behaviour in the classroom, are noi- veals that the greater the level of gender
sier and are more easily distracted than girls equality in a society, the lesser the differen-
(Francis, 2000; Younger et al., 1999). ce in the results between boys and girls.
We propose the following second hypothe- This finding is important, as girls tend to
have much lower average scores in mathe-
sis for this article based on theories of gender
matics than boys. In the rest of the OECD
identities in students and related to school
countries, exception five, boys score higher
climate: If the behaviour of the students in
than girls in mathematics - an average of 12
school (school climate) has an influence on
points higher (PISA 2009). However, Guiso
students’ performance in reading, the effect
et al. (2008) found no correlation in the va-
will be differentiated by gender (H2). Following
riations among countries regarding differen-
the earlier argument of Legewie and DiPetre
ces in the results of boys and girls in mathe-
(2012), we should expect the gender gap to
matics and reading. This was the case for all
decline if the school climate improves.
four indicators of gender equality analysed.
In contrast, the results of this study show
that in countries that score higher on the
The position of women in GGI, the gap between boys and girls is re-
society and the gender gap in
duced in mathematics, due to better results
reading
for girls, and is greater in regard to reading,
There are few studies that look at macro so- for the same reason. In a comparative study
cial factors as determinants explaining diffe- carried out by González and De la Rica
rences in educational achievement by gen- (2012), using data from PISA 2009, a positi-
der. In recent decades different indicators ve and significant correlation was found
have been developed that aim to quantify between indicators of gender equality and
the gender gap in diverse areas at the ma- the gender gap in reading and mathematics,
cro level, such as in health, economic parti- which again suggests that in more gender
cipation and political empowerment, among egalitarian societies, girls reduce the gap in
others (Hausmann et al., 2008). Some stu- mathematics and tend to increase their ad-
dies suggest that in societies that are more vantage in reading. Based on these studies,
gender egalitarian, women are favoured in our third hypothesis is that in more gender
egalitarian societies, the gap in scores in
certain spheres, such as in education. In a
reading comprehension between boys and
study by Guiso et al., (2008), four indicators
girls is greater, in favour of girls (H3).
were used as markers of macro-social cha-
racteristics (social and cultural characteris-
tics) related to levels of gender equality that
influence skills in reading and mathematics
Data and Methodology
(using the 2003 PISA survey): the Gender This article aims to advance our understan-
Gap Index (GGI) of the World Economic Fo- ding of the factors at the supra-individual le-
rum; an index of cultural attitudes toward vel that have a significant impact on the gen-
women (index provided by the World Values der gap in education, and concretely in
Survey); the ratio of economic activity of reading skills. Based on data from PISA (Pro-
women, and an index of political empower- gramme for International Student As-
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
46 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
sessment) 2009, we look at the gender gap in dents, families and the characteristics of the
reading scores through school context and school.
countries’ levels of gender inequality. PISA is The PISA sample is stratified in two sta-
an international study that measures 15 year ges. First, the schools are randomly selected,
old students’ knowledge and skills in different and secondly, the students at each school are
areas (mathematics, science and reading chosen randomly to take the tests in the three
comprehension). The study is carried out subject areas. PISA assigns a probability dis-
every three years with slight modifications to tribution for the pattern of answers for each
some of the questions. In this article we test. Missing data must be inferred from the
analyse data from the fourth wave, carried out responses given on other items. PISA uses an
in 2009. That year PISA included data from imputation method called “plausible values”
475,460 students in 17,093 schools in 65
(PV), which provide alternative estimates of
countries2. The size of the sample is slightly
the aptitudes students could have obtained
smaller due to missing information for certain
(OECD, 2009). In this article we employ the
variable3. The final sample used in our analy-
methodology most recommended for the use
sis is composed of 412,367 students from
of PV, that is, to repeat the analysis five times,
16,107 schools in 60 countries. Table 1 shows
once for each PV. Through this process, the
all the variables used in the analysis to exa-
correct standard errors are calculated and the
mine their distribution and relationship with
final estimate of the score on reading compre-
scores in reading comprehension.
hension, which is the arithmetical average of
The analysis carried out in this study is the five estimates obtained. We use the PV for
based on a hierarchical research design at reading comprehension in all analysis as the
three levels (multilevel analysis), which dependent variable. Table 1 shows the diffe-
means that information is included from va- rence between girls and boys in scores on
riables at the individual level (level 1), the reading comprehension based on the catego-
school level (level 2) and the country level
ries included in our analysis. Girls score on
(level 3). The dependent variable (score on
average almost 35 points higher than boys.
reading comprehension) is located at level 1.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 47
gory, “first generation immigrant” (both the The third index, the most generic, is called
students and parents were born outside of “wealth possessions in the household”6.
the country) and “second generation immi-
grant” (students born in the county, but who- Level 2 explanatory variables: School
se parents were born in another country). characteristics
To control for the education level of the In addition to the individual level, the analy-
parents, the variable “level of educational ho- sis includes variables that capture charac-
mogamy” has been included in the analysis. teristics at the level of the school to evalua-
This variable was constructed through the te its impact on students’ reading
combination of the education levels attained comprehension scores and on the gender
by both the mother and father. Education le- gap. Based on the hypotheses previously
vel is based on the 1997 International Stan- discussed, we use two key independent va-
dard Classification of Education (ISCED). We riables in our analysis of this level. The va-
group ISCED levels into three categories: riable “behaviour of students”7, which we
levels 0 and 1 are “primary education”, levels based on theories regarding the impact of
2 to 4 are “secondary education”, and levels school climate (H2), is an index provided by
5 and 6 are “tertiary education”. The result of PISA that expresses aspects related to stu-
the combination of the educational characte- dents and disruptive behaviours in the clas-
ristics of mothers and fathers is nine catego- sroom and the school. The second variable
ries, to which we add a tenth, “others”, in at this level is another index, which we call
order to include cases of single-parents. The “social composition of the school”. This in-
reference category in this case is “both pa- dex measures the percentage of parents
rents with tertiary level educations”. that have a level of education below ISCED
Lastly, we add as control variables a se- level 3 (second cycle of obligatory secon-
ries of indicators that PISA provides with the dary education). This variable has been
aim of including information regarding the used in previous studies (Marí-Klose et al.,
possessions that each student has in his/her 2009) that aimed to capture the effect that
household (OECD, 2012; Buchmann, 2000). social capital, based on the composition of
These indicators are based on 16 articles or the student body (as measured by parents’
objects that can be found in households, education levels), can have: The higher the
three of which are specific to each country. value on this index, the greater the percen-
These items are distributed in three differen- tage of parents with low education levels.
tiated indices. Two of the indices are closely
related to school performance and are based
on Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital (Bou- books to help you with your school work in your home?
Do you have reference books in your home? Do you have
rdieu, 1977; Sullivan, 20019. These indices
a dictionary at home?
are “cultural possessions in the household”4 6 Thefollowing items form the index: having your own
and “household educational resources”5. bedroom at home, having an Internet connection at
home, a dishwasher, a DVD player, the number of tele-
phones, televisions, computers, cares, bedrooms with
bath or shower, and three items specific to each country.
4 The following items form the index: Is there classic
7 There are six elements that make up the variable «be-
literature in the home? Are their poetry books in the haviour of students», and they come from the following
home? Are there artworks in the home? question: In your school, to what extent is students’
5 The following items from the index: Do you have a learning affected by the following phenomena: absen-
desk to study at in your home? Do you have a quiet teeism of students, the interruption of classes by stu-
place to study in your home? Do you have a computer dents, students cutting classes, students lacking respect
that you can use for school work in your home? Do you for teachers, students using alcohol or illegal drugs,
have educational software in your home? Do you have students intimidating or bullying other students?
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
48 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
Average PV
% Average (SD) Min. Max. Reading
comprehension (SD))
Individual variables
Sex
Boy 48.9 456.8 (98.4)
Girl 51.1 490.3 (93.1)
Family structure
Biparental 79.7 480.6 (95.2)
Monoparental 16.5 460.9 (97.5)
Others 3.8 389.7 (91.7)
Level of educational homogamy
Father primary - mother secondary 3.7 440.7 (87.5)
Father primary - mother tertiary 0.9 439.2 (92.6)
Father secondary - mother primary 4.2 431.3 (87.2)
Fahter secondary - mother tertiary 9.8 491.7 (93.3)
Father tertiary - mother primary 0.9 426.1 (91.3)
Father tertiary - mother secondary 10.1 487.3 (96.0)
Both primary 6.6 409.7 (83.4)
Both secondary 34 473.1 (89.8)
Both terciary 24.5 502.2 (101.0)
Others 5.2 440.3 (95.1)
Origin
Natives 89.9 474.0 (97.0)
1st generation immigrant 4.7 471.9 (101.5)
2nd generation immigrant 5.4 474.1 (95.9)
Cultural goods in the home -0.02 (0.96) -2.24 1.86
Educational resources in the home -0.14 (1.03) -4.74 2.13
Wealth possessions in the home -0.43 (1.17) -6.69 3.84
School variables
Student behaviour 0.03 (1.04) -3.42 2.36
Social composition of the school 18.05 (22.24) 0.0 100
Country variables
GGI 0.70 (0.05) 0.58 0.83
Number of cases 412,367
Note: Standard deviation in parentheses.
a percentage of parents of children who go to school with a lower educational level CINE 3.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 49
What we intend to clarify with this variable parentijk) + π8jk*(Othersijk) + π9jk*Both primaryijk)
is whether the social composition of schools + π10jk*(Both secondaryijk) + π11jk*(Father pri-
has a significant influence on the gender mary - mother secondaryijk) + π12jk*(Father
gap in reading comprehension (H1). primary - mother tertiaryijk) + π13jk*(Father secon-
dary -mother primaryijk) + π14jk*(Father secon-
Level 3 explanatory variables: Country dary - mother tertiaryijk) + π15jk*(Father tertiary
characteristics - mother primaryijk) + π16jk*(Father tertiary -
mother secondaryijk) + π17jk*(Othersijk) + eijk
For each country, we include the GGI from
the World Economic Forum (from the year
Model level 2:
2009). This indicator synthesizes the position
of women in each country, taking into ac- π0jk = β00k + β01k*(School compositionjk)
count gender differences related to health, + β02k*(Student behaviour jk) + r 0jk π (n+1)
education, economic and political rights. jk = β(n+1)0k . . π17jk = β170k
Higher values indicate a better position for
women in the society (World Economic Fo- Model level 3:
rum, 2013). The minimum score of 0.583 is
for Turkey, and the maximum score of 0.828 β00k = γ000 + γ001(GGIk) + u00k β01k = γ010
is for Iceland. The average score is 0.698. β02k = γ020 β10k = γ100 β(n+1)0k = γ(n+1)00
Through the interaction of this variable with . β170k = γ1700
the gender of the students we can see if the
level of equality between men and women in Table II, Model 1, shows the three level
society overall influences the effect that gen- hierarchical analysis. At level 1, the reading
der has on boys’ and girls’ reading compre- results of students i, in school j, and in coun-
hension scores (H3). try k, is modelled as a function of the cova-
riates at the student level, and the random
error term at the student level. Pi are the
Models coefficients at level 1 (π0 el is the intercept
and πnj is the vector of the slopes) and eijk is
To test the hypotheses proposed regarding the residual at level 1.
the variation between school characteristics To test the hypotheses raised in this arti-
and the level of gender equality among coun- cle, we add the different transversal interac-
tries, we carried out an analysis that con- tions (interaction between variables at diffe-
forms to a linear hierarchical model at three rent levels) between gender (level 1 variable)
levels (multilevel analysis). The logic behind and variables at levels 2 and 3. In table II,
the model is that students are nested within Model 2, we test our hypothesis regarding
the schools, and the schools are nested the influence of the social composition of the
within the countries. This three-level hierar- school (level 2 variable) on the gender gap in
chical model is described as: reading comprehension results. In Model 3,
we carry out the same operation, but this
Model level 1: time with the hypothesis regarding the in-
fluence of student behaviour in the school
Reading comprehensionijk = π0jk + π1jk *(Cul- (level 2 variable) on the effect of gender on
tural possessionsijk) + π2jk*(Educational re- reading skills. Lastly, in Model 4 we present
sourcesijk) + π3jk*(Wealthijk) + π4jk*(Womenijk) the effect of the interaction between gender
+ π5jk*(1st generation immigrantijk) + π6jk*(2nd and GGI (level 3 variable). The following
generation immigrant ijk ) + π 7jk *(Single- equation shows the three level hierarchical
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
50 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
linear model with the interactions between Model 1 is the complete model, with all
levels as Wijk. the variables but without adding any of the
interactions previously considered (Table II).
Reading comprehensionijk = γ000 + γ001*GGI The variance explained by level 1 or the “bet-
ween students” level, is 11.2%. In contrast,
k + γ010*(School compositionjk) + γ020*(Student
behaviourjk) + γ100*(Cultural possessionsijk) in this model the variance explained by level
+ γ 200 *(Educational resources ijk ) + 2, or the “between schools” level, is 48.2%.
γ300*(Wealthijk) + γ400*(Womanijk)+ γ500*(1st ge- Only 7.7% of the variance is explained by
neration immigrantijk) + γ600*(2nd generation level 3, or the “between countries” level. Ba-
immigrant ijk ) + γ 700 *(Single-parent ijk ) sed on these components of the variance,
+ γ800*(Othersijk) + γ900*(Both primaryijk) the total variance explained by this model is
+ γ1000*(Both secondaryijk) + γ1100*(Father pri- calculated9. The proportion of the total va-
mary - mother secondaryijk) + γ1200*(Father riance explained by the model is 21.5%. In
primary - mother tertiaryijk) + γ1300*(Father se- model 1, the average reliability of the bet-
condary - mother primaryijk) + γ1400*(Father ween schools intersection is approximately
secondary - mother tertiaryijk) + γ1500*(Father 0.88, and the reliability of the between-coun-
tertiary - mother primaryijk) + γ1600*(Father ter- tries intersection is 0.99.
tiary - mother secondaryijk) + γ1700*(Othersijk) All the coefficients at level 1 have the ex-
+ γ1800*(Wijk) + r0jk + u00k + eijk pected sign and are statistically significant
(p <0,001). Girls score 27.3 points more in
reading comprehension than boys, maintai-
Results ning all the other variables constant (see
Table II, Model 1). Belonging to a single-
The first step of the multivariate analysis is parent family and, especially, a family struc-
the estimation of the “base model”, that is, ture different from the two-parent family, has
the model without explanatory variables (the a negative effect on students’ reading sco-
results of the random effects of the null mo- res. A similar negative effect is found for all
del are in the footnote in Table II). After, we the combinations of educational homogamy
add the variables at the micro and macro le- among the parents, except when both pa-
vels. This model is used to obtain estimates rents have tertiary educations. The effect is
of the variance explained by each level of the particularly strong if one or both parents do
model (Bryk and Raudenbush, 1992). We cal- not have educations above primary school
culate the variation at the different levels of level. In the case of country of birth, native
the estimates for the components of the va- students obtain better results than immi-
riance. Based on this analysis, level 1 ex- grants (particularly in comparison with first
plains 46% of the variance, level 2, 30%, generation immigrants). Indices measuring
and level 3, or the macro model, 24% of the cultural goods and educational resources in
variance in reading comprehension results. In the home indicate that the greater the con-
other words, the greatest proportion of the centration of these elements in the home,
variance is explained by differences among the greater the likelihood of the students to
students (46%), followed by schools (30%), score higher in reading comprehension. In
with the smallest proportion explained by di- contrast, we do not find the same result for
fferences between countries (24%)8.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 51
the indicator of household wealth (posses- significant to p <0.001. This result confirms
sions) in the home. the third hypothesis: the more gender equa-
If we look at school variables and the GGI lity in the country, the greater the gap in rea-
in Model 1, we find that both student beha- ding comprehension in favour of girls.
viour and the social composition of the stu-
dent body are statistically significant (p
<0.001). The data reveal the influence of the Conclusion
school environment and climate on educatio- In recent decades and in the majority of
nal performance. When the general beha- countries, the gender gap in education has
viour of the students is less disruptive, stu- been increasing. As a result, it seems neces-
dents tend to have better results. In addition, sary to ask if schools are fostering this gen-
students that attend schools with a high per- der inequality and its increase, as well as to
centage of parents with a low education level understand the impact of social context on
are more likely to obtain lower scores. The gender. The aim of this article is to provide a
macro-level variable of the GGI score is also better understanding of the factors influen-
statistically significant (p <0.05) with a posi- cing the gender gap in education, focusing
tive effect. This variable indicates that under primarily on contextual factors at different
equal conditions and regardless of the sex of levels.
the student, the level of gender equality in a
The results from this study represent an
country has an impact on students’ results.
advance in the complex task of determining
The coefficient for this variable is relatively
what factors contribute to the gender gap in
low, as it is important to remember that the
educational achievement and provide valua-
GGI index ranges from 0.58 to 0.83.
ble information about how school environ-
In models 2, 3 and 4, the interactions bet- ments impact learning for boys and girls. The
ween the variables at different levels are two variables used in our analysis at the
added to test the different hypotheses pre- school level are related in great measure to
viously raised. The results from Model 2 con- the influence that peer groups have in the
firm the second hypothesis proposed, regar- school context. The influence of the school,
ding the effect of the interaction between measured by the general behaviour of stu-
students’ behaviour in school and student dents and the social composition of the stu-
gender. Based on the results, school climate dent body, differs depending on the gender
as derived from the general behaviour of stu- of the student. Boys are more permeable to
dents tends to affect boys more than girls. In a negative school climate, but not to the
Model 3 we test the first hypothesis, arguing compositon of the student body. In contrast,
that the social composition of the school, de- girls are more permeable to variations in the
fined by the educational level of the parents, social composition of the school. In other
also has a greater influence on boys than words, the gender gap in reading compre-
girls. In this case the results head in the op- hension is greater in more disruptive environ-
posite direction to that expected. The gender ments and in schools with a lower concen-
gap reduces itself to larger concentrations of tration of students whose parents have low
parents with low education levels. In both education levels. Our results are partially
Model 2 and Model 3 the interactions are sta- consistent with studies such as that of Le-
tistically significant (p <0.001). gewie and DiPetre (2012), in the sense that
Lastly, in model 4 we see a positive effect boys are more sensitive to and influenced by
from the interaction between the different le- school environment and peers than girls.
vels and the GGI and gender, which is also However, the impact is not in the same direc-
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
52 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
TABLE 2. Multilevel analysis. Estimate of coefficients for the influence of the school and country context on the effect that
gender has on results in reading comprehension
Fixed effects
Constant 460.1 *** -6.5 460.1 *** -6.5 460.1 *** -6.5 460 *** -6.5
Individual variables
Sex (boy=ref.)
Girl 27.28 *** -1.4 27.3 *** -1.4 29.39 *** -1.3 -39.35 * -17.9
Family structure (biparental=ref.)
Monoparental -5.69 *** -1.0 -5.69 *** -1.0 -5.69 *** -1.0 -5.69 *** -1.0
Others -28.62 *** -2.3 -28.61 *** -2.3 -28.68 *** -2.3 -28.67 *** -2.3
Level of educational homogamy (both
tertiary=ref.)
Father primary - mother secondary -14.50 *** -2.2 -14.52 *** -2.2 -14.48 *** -2.2 -14.45 *** -2.2
Father primary - mother tertiary -17.79 *** -1.9 -17.81 *** -1.9 -17.84 *** -1.9 -17.77 *** -1.9
Father secondary - mother primary -15.71 *** -1.9 -15.73 *** -1.9 -15.61 *** -1.9 -15.60 *** -1.9
Fahter secondary - mother tertiary -3.28 *** -1.0 -3.28 *** -1.0 -3.30 *** -1.0 -3.29 *** -1.0
Father tertiary - mother primary -19.21 *** -2.1 -19.20 *** -2.1 -19.15 *** -2.1 -19.13 *** -2.1
Father tertiary - mother secondary -4.58 *** -0.9 -4.58 *** -0.9 -4.58 *** -0.9 -4.53 *** -0.9
Both primary -20.21 *** -2.1 -20.23 *** -2.1 -20.04 *** -2.1 -20.07 *** -2.1
Both secondary -10.66 *** -1.8 -10.66 *** -1.8 -10.68 *** -1.8 -10.66 *** -1.8
Others -22.83 *** -2.6 -22.85 *** -2.6 -22.82 *** -2.6 -22.81 *** -2.6
Origin (Native=ref.)
1st generation immigrant -21.46 *** -5.6 -21.45 *** -5.6 -21.44 *** -5.6 -21.44 *** -5.6
2nd generation immigrant -11.57 *** -3.4 -11.57 *** -3.4 -11.55 *** -3.4 -11.58 *** -3.4
Cultural goods in the home 8.72 *** -1.0 8.71 *** -1.0 8.69 *** -1.0 8.7 *** -1.0
Educational resources in the home 8.64 *** -0.5 8.64 *** -0.5 8.65 *** -0.5 8.65 *** -0.5
Wealth possessions in the home -5.63 *** -0.6 -5.63 *** -0.6 -5.63 *** -0.6 -5.65 *** -0.6
School variables
Student behaviour 11.74 *** -1.2 12.77 *** -1.3 11.73 *** -1.2 11.75 *** -1.2
Social composition of the school -1.31 *** -0.1 -1.31 *** -0.1 -1.26 *** -0.1 -1.31 *** -0.1
Country variables
Note: In all the analyses the variables are centred on the general average. SE: Standard Error; SD= Standard Deviation; e =
σ2; r0 = τπ ; u00 = τβ.
a) The random effects of the null model (only the intercept) are: e=5.187,29; r0=3.382,55; u00=2.710,95.
*=significant to 0.05; **= significant to 0.01; ***= significant to 0.001.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 53
GRAPH 1. Predicted values ( plausible values) in reading comprehension scores by sex , level of student
behavior in school and social composition of school
550 550
500 500
comprehension scores
comprehension scores
450 450
400 400
350 350
300 300
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 50 100
Level of student behavior in school Social composition of school
Girl Boy Girl Boy
tion when we consider the effect of school remain less affected by the variations that
environment by social composition. Thus, can happen at this level.
the climate or environment of the school and Are these results comparable with those
social capital play an important role in explai- for other educational subjects that have tra-
ning both the gender gap and the low perfor- ditionally been favourable for boys, such as
mance of boys in reading comprehension, mathematics and science? The analyses ca-
although in opposite ways. rried out regarding these subjects (in which
Another hypothesis of this study was that boys on average have higher grades than
macro social factors influence the gender girls), show that school-level factors and le-
gap in education. In this case, we focused vels of gender equality in the society are also
our analysis on levels of gender equality as significant (less in the interaction between
measured by the GGI. As with the study by gender and the social composition of the
Guiso et al. (2008), our results show that the school and the GGI regarding performance in
higher the level of gender equality in the so- the sciences) and the effects are substantia-
ciety, the greater the gender gap is in reading lly reduced but in the same direction as those
comprehension in favour of girls. In countries shown.
with a higher score on the GGI, girls and wo- The results of this article and previous
men have better conditions for developing studies show that it is important to take into
their academic paths and careers. This gene- account that there are exogenous factors
rates a social context in which girls have hig- that influence academic performance, and in
her expectations, which ends up having an terms of education policy, to attempt to in-
impact on their qualifications to a greater fluence them. It is possible to develop poli-
degree than in other, less egalitarian coun- cies aimed at influencing the social compo-
tries. In addition, while girls are favoured by sition of schools, assigning profiles to families
conditions of greater gender equality, boys based on factors related to social class, for
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
54 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
example, origin or household income. With Bourdieu, Pierre (1977). “Cultural Reproduction and
these measures a high concentration of stu- Social Reproduction”. In: Karabel, J. and Halsey,
dents with parents with low education levels A. H. (eds.). Power and Ideology in Education.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
or high levels of economic privation can be
avoided, leading to greater equity in the Bryk, Anthony S. and Raudenbush, Stephen W.
school system, which would favour both (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications
and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, Cal-
boys and girls. However, as the results show,
ifornia: Sage Publications.
these types of actions may tend to increase
the educational gender gap. Buchmann, Claudia (2000). “Family Structure, Paren-
tal Perceptions and Child Labour in Kenya: What
The influence of the school environment Factors Determine Who is Enrolled in School?”.
and peers on boys could also be taken as Social Forces, 78: 1349-1379.
an opportunity to increase their academic
Carrell, Scott. E.; Page, Marianne E. and West, James
performance. We have seen that an unfa- E. (2010). “Sex and Science: How Professor Gen-
vourable school environment has a particu- der Perpetuates the Gender Gap”. The Quarterly
larly negative impact on boys, which is fur- Journal of Economics, 125(3): 1101-1144.
ther reinforced by the effect of peers. Chiu, Ming M. and McBride-Chang, Catherine (2006).
However, favourable conditions can create “Gender, Context, and Reading: A Comparison
a positive environment for the educational of Students in 43 Countries”. Scientific Studies
development of both boys and girls. Fo- of Reading, 10(4): 331-362.
llowing the arguments of DiPrete and Buch- Coleman, James S. et al. (1966). Equality of Educa-
mann (2013), a win-win strategy would be tional Opportunity. Washington, D.C.: Govern-
based on the idea that the same reforms ment Printing Office.
that would help boys in academic achieve- Cooley, Sid (1995). Suspension/Expulsion of Regular
ment would also help girls. It is not a ques- and Special Education Students in Kansas: A
tion of creating reforms only aimed at redu- Report to the Kansas State Board of Education.
cing the gender gap or favouring boys, but Topeka, Kansas: Kansas State Board of Educa-
reforms to improve the school environment, tion.
increase the level of expectations and moti- DeBaryshe, Barbara D.; Patterson, Gerald R. and
vate all students to become more invested Capaldi, Deborah M. (1993). “A Performance
in their education. Model for Academic Achievement in Early Ado-
lescent Boys”. Developmental Psycholo-
gy, 29(5): 795.
Dee, Thomas. S. (2007). “Teachers and the Gender
Bibliography Gaps in Student Achievement”. Journal of Hu-
man Resources, 42(3): 528-554.
Alegre, Miguel A. and Benito, Ricard (2012). “Climas
y (sobretodo) culturas escolares: cómo se expli- DiPrete, Thomas. A. and Buchmann, Claudia
can y qué permiten explicar”. In: Gómez-Granell, (2013). The Rise of WomIn: The Growing Gender
C. and Mari-Klose, P. (dirs.). Familia y relaciones Gap in Education and what it Means for Ameri-
intergeneracionales: un espacio de oportuni- can Schools. New York: Russell Sage Founda-
dades para la educación de los hijos e hijas. Bar- tion.
celona: Instituto de Infancia y Mundo Urbano. Duckworth, Angela L. and Seligman, Martin E. P.
Bertrand, Marianne (2011). “New Perspectives on (2006). “Self-discipline Gives Girls the Edge: Gen-
Gender”. Handbook of Labor Economics, (4): der in Self-discipline, Grades, and Achievement
1543-1590. Test Scores”. Journal of Educational Psychology,
98(1): 198.
Bettinger, Eric P. and Long, Bridget T. (2005). “Do
Faculty Serve as Role Models? The Impact of Francis, Becky (2000). Boys, Girls and Achievement:
Instructor Gender on Female Students”. Ameri- Addressing the Classroom Issues. London: Rout-
can Economic Review, 95(2): 152-157. ledge Falmer.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
Albert Julià 55
Freeman, Catherine E. (2004). Trends in Educational 1). Stanford, California: Stanford University
Equity of Girls and WomIn: 2004. NCES 2005- Press.
016, U.S. Department of Education, National
Machin, Stephen and McNally, Sandra (2005). “Gen-
Center for Education Statistics. Washington,
der and Student Achievement in English
D.C.: GPO. Schools”. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,
Goldin, Claudia; Katz, Lawrence F. and Kuziemko, 21(3): 357-372.
Ilyana (2006). “The Homecoming of American Moffitt, Terrie E. (ed.) (2001). Sex Differences in
College WomIn: The Reversal of the College Gen- Antisocial Behavior: Conduct Disorder, Delin-
der Gap”. Journal of Economic Perspectives, quency, and Violence in the Dunedin Longitu-
20(4): 133-156. dinal Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University
González de San Román, Ainara and de la Rica, Sara Press.
(2012). “Gender Gaps in PISA Test Scores: The OCDE (2012). PISA 2009 Technical Report. PISA,
Impact of Social Norms and the Mother’s Trans- OCDE Publications.
mission of Role Attitudes”. IZA Discussion Paper
6338. Ogle, Laurence T. et al. (2003). International Compa-
risons in Fourth-grade Reading Literacy: Findings
Gregory, James F. (1996). “The Crime of Punishment: from the Progress in International Reading Lite-
Racial and Gender Disparities in the Use of Cor- racy Study (PIRLS) of 2001. U.S. Department of
poral Punishment in the U.S. Public Schools”. Education, NCES. Washington, D.C.
Journal of Negro Education, 64: 454-462.
Rosenbaum, James E. (2001). Beyond College for
Griffin, Peg; Burns, Susan M. and Snow, Catherine All: Career Paths for the Forgotten Half. New
E. (eds.). (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties York: Russell Sage.
in Young Children. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press. Ryan, Allyson M. (2000). “Peer Group as a Context
for the Socialization of Adolescents’ Motivation,
Guiso, Luigi et al. (2008). “Culture, Gender and Math”. Engagement, and Achievement in School”. Edu-
Science, 320: 1164-1165. cational Psychologist, 35: 101-111.
Hausmann, Ricardo et al. (2008). The Global Gender Ryan, Allyson M. (2001). “The Peer Group as a Con-
Gap Report 2008. World Economic Forum. text for the Development of Young Adolescent
Heckman, James J.; Stixrud, Jora and Urzua, Sergio Motivation and Achievement”. Child Develop-
(2006). “The Effects of Cognitive and Noncogni- ment, 72: 1135-1150.
tive Abilities on Labor Market Outcomes and Skelton, Christine (1997). “Primary Boys and Hege-
Social Behavior”. Journal of Labor Economics, monic Masculinities”. British Journal of Sociol-
24(3): 411-482. ogy of Education, 18(3): 349-369.
Jacob, Brian A. (2002). “Where the Boys Aren’t: Non- Skiba, Rusell J. et al. (2002). “The Color of Discipline:
cognitive Skills, Returns to School and the Gen- Sources of Racial and Gender Disproportionality
der Gap in Higher Education”. Economics of in School Punishment”. The Urban Review, 34(4):
Education Review, 21(6): 589-598. 317-342.
Legewie, Joscha and DiPrete, Thomas A. (2012). Slee, Roger; Weiner, Gaby and Tomlinson, Sally (eds.)
“School Context and the Gender Gap in Educa- (1998). School Effectiveness for Whom?: Challen-
tional Achievement”. American Sociological Re- ges to the School Effectiveness and School Im-
view, 77(3): 463-485. provement Movements. London; Bristol, Penn-
Ma, Xin (2008). “Within School Gender Gaps in Read- sylvania: Falmer Press.
ing, Mathematics, and Science Literacy”. Com- Sokal, Laura et al. (2007). “Good-bye, Mr.Chips: Male
parative Education Review, 52(3): 437-460. Teacher Shortages and Boys’ Reading Achieve-
Ma, Xin and Willms, J. Douglas (1995). “The Effects ment”. Sex Roles, 56(9-10): 651-659.
of School Disciplinary Climate on Eighth Grade Sommers, Christina H. (2000). The War Against Boys:
Achievement”. American Educational Research How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young
Association, San Francisco, California. Men. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Maccoby, Eleanor E. and Jacklin, Carol Nagy (eds.). Sullivan, Alice (2001). “Cultural Capital and Educa-
(1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences (vol. tional Attainment”. Sociology, 35: 893-912.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58
56 School Context and Gender Inequalities in Reading Achievement
Thrupp, Martin (1999). Schools Making a Difference. World Economic Forum (2013). The Global Gender
Let’s Be Realistic. Buckingham, Philadelphia: Gap Report 2013. World Economic Forum.
Open University Press.
Younger, Michael; Warrington, Molly and Williams,
Trzesniewski, Kali H. et al. (2006) “Revisiting the As- Jacquetta (1999). “The Gender Gap and Clas-
sociation between Reading Achievement and sroom Interactions: Reality and Rhetoric?”.
Antisocial Behavior: New Evidence of an Envi- British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(3):
ronmental Explanation from a Twin Study”. Child 325-341.
Development, 77(1): 72-88.
Weaver-Hightower, Marcus (2003). “The Boy Turn in
Research on Gender and Education”. Review of
Educational Research, 73(4): 471-498.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. Nº 156, October - December 2016, pp. 41-58