1. An Inquiry into Individual Student Science Achievement in Hong Kong: How can school-sponsored science activities effect the relationship between social inequity and science achievement? June 29 th, 2012 SurvMeth 988 Yuanyuan Liu lyyzju@umich.edu Anthony H. Kourtakis mrtakis@umich.edu

2. Research Questions How does a student’s socioeconomic status predict science achievement scores in high school? How can school average socioeconomic status vary between schools and how does that impact science achievement? How can the promotion of science activities predict higher individual science scores?

3. Data: PISA 2006, Hong Kong Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2006 study  an international study aiming at evaluating education systems worldwide by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students in participating countries The Hong Kong samples contained 4675 students attending 146 schools Cross-sectional

5. Multilevel Model for investigating school effects, in particular the effects of school programs that encourage science activities, on science achievement scores Student Science Achievement Scores Student Characteristics Sex Age Grade Language SES Enjoyment of Science School Demographics Average SES Student Teacher Ratio Structure Science Promotion

6. According to the 2006 PISA Technical Manual, SCIPROM, the measure by PISA access the promotion by schools of science through activities is a composite of “yes or no” questions regarding science clubs, science competitions, extracurricular projects, excursions and field trips

7. Table 1: Characteristics of Schools with More Science Promotion Activities and Schools with Less Promotion Activities School Mean More Science Promotion ActivitiesLess Science Promotion Activities Science achievement.0017(0.61)-0.273(0.639) Aggregate SES -0.6463(.495)-0.7(0.478) Student-teacher ratio 17.35(2.04)18.14 (2.14) Female (%) 48.40%51.6% School responsibility in resource allocation -0.1719(0.79)0.996(0.64) School responsibility in curriculum and assessment 0.9252(0.686)0.457(0.858) Aggregate Instrumental Motivation of Science 0.379(0.187).372(.213) N, (%) 57, (40%)89, (60%)

8. [1] [1] τ = between-school variance = 0.374427368 σ 2 = 0.50799 And ICC = τ / (τ + σ 2 ) Random level-1 coefficient Reliability estimate INTRCPT1, β 0 0.842 ZESCS, β 1 0.142 ICC =.37

9. Table 3 Between-School Model: How School Programs that Promote Science Activities Relate to Individual Student Science Achievement Scores ~p<.10. *p<.05. **p<.01. ***p<.001.

10. Table 3, continued ~p<.10. *p<.05. **p<.01. ***p<.001.

12. Discussion and Findings Science activities offer interested students opportunity to learn more about science However, higher performing individuals may be specifically “recruited” for such activities School programs, like those that promote science activities, are linked to lower SES students who are able to overcome the achievement gap More research is needed in order to better understand program efficacy of school promotion of science activities –mainly a longitudinal study and better data on types of schools, students and a more detailed measure of promotion levels and types De-centralization

13. Questions

14. References