Relationship between money and academic results

[Swagadaktal]

Mod (J41): this thread is the continuation of a discussion started here.

Wealth plays a part too. The jewish schools you see high up there take in students from pretty wealthy backgrounds. Bialik only has 5% of its students from the bottom 50% of earners (77% from the top quarter).
Mount Scopus only has 3% in the bottom half, with not a single student in the poorest quarter. Nearly 80% are in the top quarter.
Yeshivah has a more reasonable spread, but it fluctuates due to a small cohort. 30% in the bottom half, 40% in the top quarter
Leibler Yavneh has 8% in the bottom half, over 70% in the top half.

Just outta curiosity, what influence does money have? Like I know it does have an influence and this is a genuine question. I didn't really spend much on my tuition - nothing outside of my textbooks and my teachers and I did just fine. But I look at the scores of expensive private schools and they seem to rack in countless high scores and im just fascinated about what's going on in those schools. Like surely the students aren't smarter than my peers?

[Orb]

There is definitely a correlation between wealth and academic results.

Eg. Wealthier families tend to prioritise a bit more on education, would be more willing and have the resources to spend on education, etc
What this leads to is a culture where education is more valued and probably leads to somewhat better results for their children.

[vox nihili]

Just outta curiosity, what influence does money have? Like I know it does have an influence and this is a genuine question. I didn't really spend much on my tuition - nothing outside of my textbooks and my teachers and I did just fine. But I look at the scores of expensive private schools and they seem to rack in countless high scores and im just fascinated about what's going on in those schools. Like surely the students aren't smarter than my peers?

I don't think anybody has ever been able to account for all of the factors that lead to wealthy students doing better than poorer students; however, there's a huge amount of evidence that academic achievement is correlated with wealth. This correlation explains why private schools outperform public schools. There's actually very little evidence to suggest that going to a private school adds value to an individuals education, with the difference in performance between the sectors coming down to selection bias (i.e. "better" students go to the private schools in the first place).

Orb identified a few different factors. A few other things:

-people with higher IQs are more likely to have high paying jobs...also more likely to have high IQ kids
-wealthier families live in better suburbs with more resources
-wealthier families have a better capacity to pay for educational resources themselves
-more likely to have good health (both from genetic and environmental impacts)...bad health negatively affects education
-less likely to suffer domestic abuse

That's just off the top of my head, but truly, the list goes on. Even without being able to fully explain why, the effect of wealth on education is still directly observable and thus well established.

[Calebark]

There is definitely a correlation between wealth and academic results.

Eg. Wealthier families tend to prioritise a bit more on education, would be more willing and have the resources to spend on education, etc
What this leads to is a culture where education is more valued and probably leads to somewhat better results for their children.

Purely anecdotal here, but myself, and quite a lot of my peers in primary school and high school, were told a lot by parents that education is unnecessary, and that it's silly to go to university and pay money to get a job, when you can just leave school and get a job. This did affect a lot of my friends, who either didn't care about their education, or dropped out at some point.

Again, take it with a grain of salt, but it's just what I have experienced and seen amongst mates.

[Aaron]

Purely anecdotal here, but myself, and quite a lot of my peers in primary school and high school, were told a lot by parents that education is unnecessary, and that it's silly to go to university and pay money to get a job, when you can just leave school and get a job. This did affect a lot of my friends, who either didn't care about their education, or dropped out at some point.

Again, take it with a grain of salt, but it's just what I have experienced and seen amongst mates.

Definitely Calebark and it's important to acknowledge this actually exists in education today. I have seen this type of attitude and influence from parents first hand whilst on placements.

(P.S - This is the first time i've seen this thread since I posted my first reply directly after the OP and didn't realise what it would lead to - MY BAD)

[Litigator]

Purely anecdotal here, but myself, and quite a lot of my peers in primary school and high school, were told a lot by parents that education is unnecessary, and that it's silly to go to university and pay money to get a job, when you can just leave school and get a job. This did affect a lot of my friends, who either didn't care about their education, or dropped out at some point.

Again, take it with a grain of salt, but it's just what I have experienced and seen amongst mates.

This is true. Alot of people in my area are kinda confused why I am studying and not working when I can be making money. During VCE, there was alot of VCAL students who professed they were going to make a lot of money after spending short time in TAFE or what not. I had one friend who finished VCE with poor grades, did a diploma in some sort of mechanic workshop and now is working full time getting some green. It sometimes depends on the mentality and culture of certain places. For me and my family, being academic and becoming a professional is highly regarded, whilst others around me (Craigieburn, Broadmeadows area) look down upon it because I could be raking in money from construction.

[vox nihili]

Purely anecdotal here, but myself, and quite a lot of my peers in primary school and high school, were told a lot by parents that education is unnecessary, and that it's silly to go to university and pay money to get a job, when you can just leave school and get a job. This did affect a lot of my friends, who either didn't care about their education, or dropped out at some point.

Again, take it with a grain of salt, but it's just what I have experienced and seen amongst mates.

This is true. Alot of people in my area are kinda confused why I am studying and not working when I can be making money. During VCE, there was alot of VCAL students who professed they were going to make a lot of money after spending short time in TAFE or what not. I had one friend who finished VCE with poor grades, did a diploma in some sort of mechanic workshop and now is working full time getting some green. It sometimes depends on the mentality and culture of certain places. For me and my family, being academic and becoming a professional is highly regarded, whilst others around me (Craigieburn, Broadmeadows area) look down upon it because I could be raking in money from construction.

Same where I'm from (Geelong). A lot of families really didn't believe in education, and that really matters. Getting everyone at home involved is so important.

I guess that's the thing though. A lot of families in low SES areas leave the system early. Their life really didn't depend on education and the way they've made a living was derived from other skills. So it's more likely that these families will value education less because it had less of an impact on them.

I just want to make really clear that what I'm saying applies to the "average person" in the demographics we're discussing. Obviously, there's a distribution of educational achievement in each SES rank. It's just that the average of each distribution, and the majority of people who cluster around that average, that makes SES a good predictor.

[Swagadaktal]

Also need to mention that private schools cost a fortune - I looked up the fees of one private school and shat myself, it's ridiculous the costs. And I think that's some pretty intense motivation if your parents are paying $25K per year for you to attend school.

But my curiosity lies here: if a student who got an 85 atar at a public school attended one of these private schools, would they get a higher atar, for instance a 95? And if so, what is it about the private school which results in this outcome? Are the teachers better? resrources better? environment? Are the students pushed harder?

[Jakeybaby]

Also need to mention that private schools cost a fortune - I looked up the fees of one private school and shat myself, it's ridiculous the costs. And I think that's some pretty intense motivation if your parents are paying $25K per year for you to attend school.

But my curiosity lies here: if a student who got an 85 atar at a public school attended one of these private schools, would they get a higher atar, for instance a 95? And if so, what is it about the private school which results in this outcome? Are the teachers better? resrources better? environment? Are the students pushed harder?

Having attended both a public and private school throughout my time at high school, I can answer both of these paragraphs. 

Recognising the money that my parents were now spending on my education was a BIG motivation, as I didn't want to "waste" their money.

With regards to an improved ATAR, certainly not. I firmly believe that I would have gotten the same/similar year 12 results at either school if you just compared teachers. However, I realised that at the private school, more resources are available for years 7-10, allowing students to develop their understanding of key scientific concepts earlier in their education.
The only factor that would have made my ATAR increase from the private school compared to public would've been the motivation, as you mentioned.

[vcestressed]

Also need to mention that private schools cost a fortune - I looked up the fees of one private school and shat myself, it's ridiculous the costs. And I think that's some pretty intense motivation if your parents are paying $25K per year for you to attend school.

But my curiosity lies here: if a student who got an 85 atar at a public school attended one of these private schools, would they get a higher atar, for instance a 95? And if so, what is it about the private school which results in this outcome? Are the teachers better? resrources better? environment? Are the students pushed harder?

i went to an 'elite' private school for year 6 in South Australia and i was on a scholarship. Stayed there for 6 months only because the environment was not suitable for me. Here are my experiences of that school:
- so many facilities, more sports, more activities, more excursions
- more strict? i felt like we didn't necessarily get more homework but parents were always notified of our progress (every 2 weeks)
- i think the teachers were more better and approachable. In government schools, teachers don't help if they are busy, but in (most) private schools , they are 'forced' to help since they know the students pay a lot of money to come everyday. That school also had help-time till 8:30pm for senior students where students could work and there were roaming teachers every single day.
- money wise - most students could afford things that i still am not able to (some kids didn't know the real value of money tbh)
- most people had lots of pressure to study. my very close friend still goes to that school and she tells me that she 'has' pressure to do well because her parents pay 25k.
Is a student able to get a better ATAR in a private school? Maybe. But not necessarily. You can have the best teachers, facilities etc but if a student doesn't have the inner motivation, then they will not do well anyway.
 

[Joseph41]

This is a really interesting discussion, and it deserves its own thread IMO. So for now, I've moved it across to Rants and Debates. It wasn't an overly clean split, because there was some discussion earlier in the original thread, but those posts also discussed the initial topic.

You can find the previous thread here.

Looking forward to more reasoned and respectful discussion.

[HasibA]

not talking about the effects of a great environment, etc.
wouldnt going to a better private school help in the statistical moderation and thus affect ur results?
i mean, a friend of mine scored a high A+ on her english exam but due to a weak cohort, didnt even hit 40 ahaha and another friend one like bottom of his cohort on a D+, improved to a B+ on his exam and managed a great score
i think in VCE (and maybe the other states?) , while you are not guaranteed a higher atar, stat. moderation is in your favour?

[Jakeybaby]

not talking about the effects of a great environment, etc.
wouldnt going to a better private school help in the statistical moderation and thus affect ur results?
i mean, a friend of mine scored a high A+ on her english exam but due to a weak cohort, didnt even hit 40 ahaha and another friend one like bottom of his cohort on a D+, improved to a B+ on his exam and managed a great score
i think in VCE (and maybe the other states?) , while you are not guaranteed a higher atar, stat. moderation is in your favour?

Nothing of the sort here in SA.
Schools names are not even mentioned in moderation and pieces of work are completely anonymous.

[nt2387]

Also need to mention that private schools cost a fortune - I looked up the fees of one private school and shat myself, it's ridiculous the costs. And I think that's some pretty intense motivation if your parents are paying $25K per year for you to attend school.

But my curiosity lies here: if a student who got an 85 atar at a public school attended one of these private schools, would they get a higher atar, for instance a 95? And if so, what is it about the private school which results in this outcome? Are the teachers better? resrources better? environment? Are the students pushed harder?

I went to a 25k/year private school.

I wouldn't say that all students are pushed harder. There are plenty of students who don't do anything all year and there are plenty of students who will work extremely hard, like in all schools. I think some students would push themselves harder because the school costs so much or they're on scholarships. But obviously there are some who just don't care because 25k is nothing to them.

I think the major difference is that these schools can afford more resources which attracts higher achieving students from public schools. A lot of students are from public schools and are on scholarships from year 7 and this tends to motivate them to work harder. So at the top end of the school you have a really competitive environment as they're all on scholarships.

As for teachers I can't really comment on whether or not they're 'better.' But I will say that there is a lot of spoon feeding involved. Most teachers probably don't really care if you truly understand calculus; instead they're concerned about whether you can write out the correct answer on the day because it makes them look good.

[brenden]

I think it's also worth noting what a lack of money can do for academic results.

There's been a lot of discussion about wealthier families producing higher achieving students, but I think another piece of the puzzle is that it can be difficult for financially worse off students to focus as much. Where do you study at home if you don't have a study desk, your dining table is next to the constantly blaring TV, and you wouldn't dream of asking your parents to fork out for a suitable desk/study space? How do you devote yourself to your studies when your focus is split between homework and actual part-time work so you can contribute financially to the household?

This is distinct from things like 'how much does the family value education' (at least a little bit). I agree with the above that some people just don't care about it and don't foster than care in their kids, but there's disadvantaged attached to to the practicalities of low disposable income.

The answer to my above rhetorical question - where do you study - is "at the public library!" Which is a suitable answer, but just that extra bit more effort that student has to go through. If they had a study desk, or even a devoted study in the family home, that process would be unnecessary. Money can't buy attitude, but it can buy convenience, and inherently involves financial security - where a lack of money can negatively impact in small ways that end up adding up.