Ecuador

There are cultural and class differences in how adolescence is viewed. The role of adults, such as parents and teachers, in assisting youth to make the transition from school to work or further training has been highlighted already. In ways which are strongly linked to socioeconomic status and their own educational background, parents influence students’ decision-making about leaving school. Parenting practices are reinforced for middle class children by schooling but not for those of working class backgrounds. It is likely that for this reason international literature showed low socioeconomic status to be strongly associated with drop out (Dorn, 1996; Kaufman, Kwon, Klein, & Chapman, 2000; Tanner, Krahn, & Hartnagel, 1995), as well as closely linked to achievement (Nash & Harker, 1997, p. 42), regardless of ethnic background (Drew & Gray, cited in Demie, 2001, p. 98). Similar patterns were found in New Zealand but comparisons were limited by the scope of data collected annually from every secondary school and lack of research in the area of gender, ethnicity, and social class differences available at that time (Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 5).

There was a trend for secondary students to stay at school longer but even so, at the commencement of this study more than half of those students starting school in Year

9 left before completing five years of secondary schooling. There were some differential retention rates exhibited for specific groups, as the 2003 data well illustrate (Table 1).

Table 1:

Apparent Retention Rates by Age, Ethnicity and Gender for 2003* Ethnicity Age 16 Age 17 Age 18 Total

Male Female Male Female Male Female Age 16 Age 17 Age 18

All** 78.6% 85.5% 53.9% 62.4% 13.7% 13.5% 81.9% 58.1% 13.6% Maori 53.9% 66.1% 33.4% 39.9% 8.6% 8.6% 62.7% 36.7% 8.6% Pasifika 79.8% 88.5% 59.3% 68.2% 25.4% 20.4% 84.1% 63.7% 23.0% From Ministry of Education (2006, p. 9; 2004b, p. 37)

Note. *Compared with age 14 enrolments: no adjustments were made to account for migration. **Excludes Foreign Fee-paying students and NZAID Scholarships.

Of all 14 year olds at school in July 2001, 82 per cent of them were still at school at the age of 16 in July 2003 (Ministry of Education, 2004b, p. 37). Of all the 14 year olds at school in July 2003, 80 per cent of them were still at school in 2005, showing similar student retention into the senior school over the period of study (Ministry of Education, Data Management and Analysis Division, 2006, p. 4). Maori students had the highest drop out rate and Pasifika students had the highest retention rates in 2003, continuing longstanding trends since 1986 (ibid., p. 9). Whilst the proportions of males and females staying on until age 18 were not greatly dissimilar, progression beyond the age of compulsory education (age 16) was less likely for males. So, retention rates at secondary school appeared to show a strong correlation with sociocultural factors.

The raising of the school leaving age from 15 to 16 years in 1993 had little effect on retention; it simply consolidated a trend for generally higher retention rates. Despite this trend for longer stay at school, evident since 1986 (ibid.), on average69

69

Although the year 2000 figure peaked at 19 per cent, the 2003 numbers (8,195 left with no qualifications out of a total 53,471 leavers) showed 15.33 per cent, reverting back to the pattern of previous years (Ministry of Education, 2005a, p. 74).

16 per cent of leaving students left high school without qualifications in the years which followed (Statistics New Zealand, 2001). Up until 2000, Maori and Pasifika students

were consistently over-represented amongst those students who left without qualifications: Pasifika students formed 6-7 per cent of all leavers but 9-10 per cent of those leaving without qualifications; Maori students made up 17-19 per cent of all leavers in this period but consistently high proportions (36-39%) of those leaving with no qualifications. Data for the year of study (2003) showed that, despite a rise in the total high school population, the proportions of Maori and Pasifika students had not varied greatly70

In 2003 a total of 53,471 students left school and, of these, Year 13 was the last year of schooling for 57.1 per cent of them (Ministry of Education, 2005a, p. 37). The leavers’ profile for the top end of the senior school was comparable with the previous year’s results, with 67 per cent of all leaving students gaining NCEA Level 2

.

71

or higher. Twenty per cent (10,523) gained A or B Bursaries and, of students leaving with UEBS, 5.14 per cent were Maori and 1.6 per cent Pasifika compared to 74.28 per cent European. However, because this study took place at a time when there was a changeover of national qualifications, comparing the percentages of students leaving school who were eligible to attend university72

70 _{Secondary school ethnic composition in 2003: European 60 per cent; Maori 17.4 per cent; Pasifika 7.4 per cent;}

Asian 8.2 per cent. Since 2000 the numbers of students from minority ethnic groups have been increasing, whilst European numbers have declined slightly (Ministry of Education, 2005a, p. 37). Higher school retention and differential birth rates were factors in increased high school numbers.

71

To illustrate the complexity of this period of transition between qualification regimes, this category was noted as including “Sixth Form Certificate, at least 14 credits at National Certificate Level 2, National Certificate Level 2, ACE or overseas awards at Year 12 level, and 1-13 credits at Level 3 or above” (Ministry of Education, 2005a, p. 74).

72

During 2004, NCEA Level 3 was offered for the first time and New Zealand (NZ) Scholarship was introduced. The Data Management and Analysis Division of the Ministry of Education consider that students leaving with University Entrance, NCEA Level 3, NZ Scholarship or a Level 4 NQF qualification can be compared with students who would have left previously with eligibility to attend university (2006, p. 4). However, it was actually harder to gain university entrance with NCEA than under UEBS (3 Bursary passes at C grade or better), Principal’s Nominee (Awa High) explained in a personal communication of July 26, 2007. This was because in addition to gaining the requisite 42 Level 3 credits from approved subjects, there were additional numeracy and literacy requirements (14 Level 1 mathematics credits and eight Level 2 English credits from the reading and writing strands) which made it more difficult for some students to gain entry. In addition, the New Zealand (NZ) Scholarship was a monetary award, not a qualification, so students entering for this examination still needed to enter for NCEA as well.

is probably the best way to illustrate differences in achievement across ethnic groups (Table 2). Considering the overall high school ethnic composition (Maori about 20% nationally), it is clear that Maori underachievement has been a longstanding trend.

Table 2:

Year Ethnic Group Total

Maori Pasifika Asian European/

Pakeha

2000 7% 10% 52% 30% 27%

2001 7% 10% 54% 30% 26%

2002 8% 9% 52% 31% 27%

2003 8% 9% 54% 33% 29%

Note. Data derived from Ministry of Education (Data Management and Analysis Division, 2006, p. 4).

Reflecting the implementation of a more flexible qualifications structure (NCEA73

Despite this fact, there were some notable trends apparent, for example differences by geographical region in the proportions of students leaving with few or no formal qualifications. These differences were attributable to either differing ethnic mixes of localities or socioeconomic factors. Of relevance to my work as Executive Dean at Northland Polytechnic was the finding that Northland was a case in point, with ), I had expected the percentage of those leaving without any qualifications to have dropped but Ministry figures showed a similar percentage leaving with no qualifications. However, in 2003 the “No qualifications” category included students who had achieved some credits (but fewer than 14 credits); any credits gained could be carried over to accumulate towards qualifications in the future. The apparent lack of change reported for 2003 could arguably be because the new framework was not fully bedded in: NCEA was only available at Level 1 and 2 nationwide. Of the leavers with no qualifications, 48.24 per cent were European, 35.67 per cent were Maori, and 9.97 per cent Pasifika—once again similar results to previous years. The results for Level 1 were further disaggregated to identify those students gaining 14 plus credits and those attaining NCEA Level 1 (80 credits or more). With the complexity of the transition period, it was therefore difficult to compare results on a national basis with those of previous years.

73

It had been optional for schools to adopt the unit standards approach at first, but in 2002 all schools were expected to have senior students engaged in the standards-based national qualifications, National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) Level 1, with a roll out of mandatory adoption over successive years (i.e. 2003, Level 2 and 2004, Level 3). Data published since 2003 for individual schools are able to show both the new qualification achievements in a year and, in addition, a comparison with all qualifications of students on the July 1 roll in that same year.

secondary school achievements below the national average. That there were strong correlations between school attainment and Socio-Economic Status (SES) was illustrated by results in 200074

Whilst social class differences are important, Lareau (1992, p. 222) argued that “they are mediated in critical ways by gender.”

and 2001, which showed that 80 and 60 per cent respectively of all school leavers from decile 8-10 schools gained Sixth Form Certificate whilst only 49 and 47 per cent of leavers from decile 1-3 schools achieved at this level (Ministry of Education, 2004a, p. 37). Although the figures are not easily comparable because of the introduction of NCEA reporting, the 2003 leavers’ data indicated similar correlations with achievements and school decile ratings, with proportionally more students being retained into Year 13 and gaining Bursary in decile 8-10 schools than in decile 1-3 (Ministry of Education, 2005a, p. 76). Over all secondary schools 15 per cent of students left with no qualifications that year, and these students represented 26 per cent of the number leaving from decile 1-3 schools but only 8 per cent of those leaving from decile 8-10 schools.

75

74

Sixty four per cent of all students leaving schools in 2001 gained Sixth Form Certificate or higher (Ministry of Education, 2004a, p. 37). There was no explanation offered by the Ministry of Education for the significant drop in the percentage of school leavers gaining these qualifications between 2000 and 2001, nor for the apparent numbers leaving without qualifications (Statistics New Zealand, 2001), although labour market fluctuations may have been a factor. Another factor may be that, with increased retention and a greater diversity of students in senior levels, many schools had incorporated alternative programmes and commenced vocational unit standards delivery, for which there was no central reporting system at that time.

75

For statistical purposes gender can be taken simply to refer to males and females, Alton-Lee and Praat explained, (2001, p. 7), but gender is: “more than biological differences between men and women. It includes the way those differences, whether real or perceived, have been valued, used and relied upon to classify women and men and to assign roles and expectations to them (Ministry of Women's Affairs, 1996, cited in Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 7, emphasis in original). A brief overview of six commonly used theories to explain gender differences is given by Alton-Lee and Praat (2001, pp. 7-8).

New Zealand statistics indicated gender differences in student performance at school and in drop out rates, with slightly more males leaving without qualifications, averaging 56-59% of those leaving in any year (Ministry of Education, Data Management and Analysis Division, 2006, p. 9). The underperformance of boys and wastage of talent as increasing numbers of young men drop out of school, are killed or jailed, has been attributed to a variety of causes (Lashlie, 2005). These include lack of role models, with the increasing number of mothers who are sole parents, and the feminisation of the teacher workforce in primary schools. Increasingly in the secondary system, differential treatment of children in the classroom and the nature of parent involvement in schooling are thought to contribute to

the reproduction of the inequalities of society (Bishop, Berryman, Richardson, & Tiakiwai, 2003b; Lareau, 1992).

Despite historic arguments that the New Zealand curriculum favoured boys, gains in girls’ achievements in school (Maharey, 2006) are such that Baker (cited by Dye, 2006, p. A7) asserted changes to curriculum, teaching and assessment now favour girls. This trend was identified more than a decade ago by Nash (1993, p. 151) who noticed that whilst in 1978 a greater proportion of boys than girls gained UEBS, this position was reversed by 1991. The proportion of girls gaining this highest level school qualification quadrupled in contrast to the much less substantial increase (barely double) for boys over that same 13 year period. Whilst in 1991 proportionally more boys than girls left school with School Certificate, proportionally more boys than girls also left without any formal school qualifications at all, leading Nash to conclude that “the performance of girls in national examinations at all levels is now superior to that of boys” (ibid.). The greater achievement of boys in the past may be attributable to gender biases in parents’ involvement in schooling, as mothers spend more time assisting their sons to succeed than their daughters, an early study found (Stevenson & Baker, 1987, cited in Lareau, 1992, pp. 222-223). However, now more mothers are in employment possibly they no longer have the same time to spend in supporting their sons as they had in the past.

Nash clearly showed that girls were outperforming boys in national qualifications yet 10 years later Steve Benson, Senior Policy Analyst for the Ministry of Education, reported that “843 of the elite Scholarship awards went to boys and just 341 to girls” in the 2005 examinations, indicating girls still lag behind boys in certain fields of achievement ("Ministry plans to take a leaf out of Australia’s book", 2006) 76

76

The most recent information at the time of publication still referred to “old” qualifications data, suggesting that the Ministry of Education had also experienced some difficulties in making comparisons. Their analysis concludes that “gender differences in participation and achievement in the compulsory school sector favour both females andmales, and are related to the particular curriculum topic and level under examination” (Ministry of Education, 2006, p. 3).

. Gender differences in certain subjects, especially at the higher levels, had also been highlighted by Nash (1993, p. 151): More boys than girls sat UEBS in physics, mathematics (statistics and calculus options), accountancy and design in 1990. However, he recognised that the proportion of girls studying these subjects appeared to be on the increase, a consequence of increased labour market opportunities for girls.

Writing at the same time, Jones found that “in New Zealand society, middle- class and working-class women still have relatively limited entry into those well-paid and expanding job areas which demand mathematical and science skills” (1991, p. 153). Interviews with both Pakeha and Pasifika girls in streamed classes revealed most girls’ career aspirations were tempered by their perceptions that they were weak in mathematics and science (ibid., pp. 153-154). Participation and performance in these areas is related to access to particular areas of work and knowledge. This contention is supported by Baker and Jones (1992, p. 198), who found that “in systems with higher percentages of women working in the formal workforce, girls are more likely to perform as well as or better than boys in mathematics.” This point is amplified by the subject-specific analyses completed by Alton-Lee and Praat in Questioning Gender

(2001, p. 12), which found that, whilst gender differences in participation rates in senior science had been reducing, physics is still chosen by twice as many males as females. With biology the pattern is reversed.

Recent changes in the technology curriculum had “attempted to confound the traditional gendered pattern of participation but there is evidence that these persist” (Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 17). Girls did better at tasks which involved design, whereas boys did better at tasks involving electrical circuitry or understanding how a technological device works, a finding consistent with Nash’s earlier findings about subject preferences and performance. Interestingly there were no significant gender differences reported in performance on computing tasks (Crooks & Flockton, 1997, cited in Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 17). N.E.M.P. findings77

The Questioning Gender analysis found that whilst mathematics was chosen by relatively similar proportions of girls and boys in School Certificate (69 and 70 per cent respectively in 1995; a marked increase in female participation since the 1970s), at showed also that students from low decile schools had the lowest performance and those from high decile schools had the highest performance on 40 per cent of tasks involving technology. Furthermore, children in decile 1-3 schools fall further behind as they get older (Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 17). Maori and Pasifika students performed less well than other students on technology tasks in N.E.M.P.

77

N.E.M.P. is the National Education Monitoring Project which began assessments in 1995 to provide dependable, consistent information about the educational achievements, attitudes and motivation of New Zealand students.

UEBS level boys were still more likely than girls to take both Mathematics with Statistics (52 and 41 percent respectively) and Mathematics with Calculus (40 and 26 per cent respectively). What was particularly interesting was Gilmore’s finding that, at school entry level, girls “perform significantly better than boys” in mathematics (1998, cited in Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 13) but, by school leaving age, males outperformed girls.

Gender differences in technology, science and mathematics are thought to be attributable to “the constraints imposed by traditional assumptions…concerning the nature of male and female social roles” (Grafton, Miller, Smith, Vegoda, & Whitfield, 1987, p. 108). These were reflected in teacher conceptions of what courses are “appropriate” to particular pupils (ibid., p. 110), the “way in which encouragement to pursue academic success in math and science is directed more to boys than girls” (Lareau, 1992, p. 221), as well as in differences in teacher expectations of students’ abilities “which establish science as a male preserve” (Kelly, 1987, p. 127). Girls who see science as masculine achieve less well than other girls. This perception is supported by the sheer numbers of boys taking sciences, the absence of female science teachers or role models as scientists, the dominance of male illustrations and examples in textbooks, and the “ordinary, everyday, taken-for-granted ways that boys behave [that] form a link between masculinity and dominance in science,” according to Kelly (p.134). Her conclusion that it is social factors which produce gender differences in participation and performance is supported by the research of Baker and Jones (1992, p. 199) into academic mathematics.

Responding to renewed debate about inborn superior mathematics abilities, Baker and Jones analysed data from 77,000 grade eight students over 19 nations and found a degree of international variability that supported a sociological rather than biological explanation for differing performance in academic mathematics. They found that males did not outperform females everywhere, and they attributed differences to access to higher education and the labour market. Changes in gender gaps also occur over time, providing further evidence for their conclusion that “parity in opportunity yields parity in performance” (ibid.). As an example, Hacker’s (1991, cited in Alton- Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 7) essentialist explanations for Australian boys’ superior science

achievement were similarly invalidated when girls’ science achievement exceeded that of boys in Victoria.

It is interesting to reflect on these conclusions in the context of literacy and English performance, areas where boys underperform in comparison to girls. Girls perform significantly better than boys on half of the N.E.M.P. reading tasks at Year 4, and on 64 per cent of reading tasks at Year 8. The findings for information skills showed that girls do better than boys at accessing written information, a skill that is important right across the curriculum (Alton-Lee & Praat, 2001, p. 14). More girls take English in senior school and they perform better, Alton-Lee and Praat’s analysis of