Search

We juxtapose (positive and negative) compositional effects of school-average achievement and school-average socioeconomic status (SES) on students’ academic self-concept (ASC), final high-school grade-point-average (GPA), and long-term outcomes at age 26 (educational attainment and educational and occupational expectations). We used doubly-latent multilevel compositional models with a large, nationally representative longitudinal sample (16,197 Year-10 students from 751 US high schools), controlling background variables (gender, age, ethnicity, academic track, and a composite risk factor). At the individual-student level, the effects of achievement, SES, ASC, and GPA on long-term outcomes were consistently positive. However, mostly consistent with a priori theoretical predictions, (1) the compositional effects of school-average achievement on ASC, GPA, and educational and occupational expectations were significantly negative (although non-significant for final attainment); (2) the compositional effects of school-average SES on ASC, educational attainment, and educational and occupational expectations were significantly positive (but nonsignificant for GPA); and (3) the compositional effects on long-term outcomes were partly mediated by ASC and particularly by GPA. These findings demonstrate that the positive effects of school-average SES are distinguishable from the adverse effects of school-average achievement. We discuss how these findings extend Göllner et al.'s (Psychological Science 29:1785–1796, 2018) highly controversial conclusion regarding the benefits of schools with high school-average SES but low school-average achievement. We also relate our research to Luthar et al.’s (American Psychologist 75:983–995, 2020) findings of adverse mental health problems associated with attending high-achieving schools. Our results have important implications not only for theory and methodology but also for parents’ selection of schools for their children and policy regarding the structure of schools (a substantive-methodological synergy). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The big-fish-little-pond effect (BFLPE), the negative effect of school-/class-average achievement on academic self-concept, is one of educational psychology's most universal findings. However, critiques of this research have proposed moderators based on achievement motivation theories. Nevertheless, because these motivational theories are not sufficiently well-developed to provide unambiguous predictions concerning moderation of the BFLPE and underlying social comparison processes, we developed a Theory-Integrating Approach; bringing together a panel of experts, independently making theoretical predictions, revising the predictions over several rounds based on independent feedback from the other experts, and a summary of results. We pit a priori hypotheses derived from achievement motivation theories against the more parsimonious a priori prediction that there is no moderation based on previous BFLPE empirical research and Darwinian-economic theory (N = 1,925 Hong Kong students, 47 classes, M age = 12 years). Consistent with both BFLPE research and Darwinian perspectives, but in contrast to achievement motivation theory predictions, the highly significant BFLPE was not moderated by any of the following: prior achievement, expectancy-value theory variables, achievement goals, implicit theories of ability, self-regulated learning strategies, and social interdependence theory measures. Although we cannot "prove" that there are no student-level moderators of the BFLPE, our synthesis of social comparison posited in the BFLPE theory and an evolutionary perspective support BFLPE's generalizability. We propose further integration of our Theory-Integrating Approach with traditional Delphi methods, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to develop a priori theoretical predictions and identify limitations in existing theory as an alternative form of systematic review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]