Search

Teachers are the evaluators of academic merit. Identifying if their assessments are fair or biased by student-ascribed status is critical for equal opportunity but empirically challenging, with mixed previous findings. We test status characteristics beliefs, statistical discrimination, and cultural capital theories with a pre-registered factorial experiment on a large sample of Spanish pre-service teachers (n = 1, 717). This design causally identifies, net of ability, the impact of student-ascribed characteristics on teacher short- and long-term assessments, improving prior studies' theory testing, confounding, and power. Findings unveil teacher bias in an essay grading task favoring girls and highbrow cultural capital, aligning with status characteristics and cultural capital theories. Results on teachers' long-term expectations indicate statistical discrimination against boys, migrant origin, and working-class students under uncertain information. Unexpectedly, ethnic discrimination changes from teachers favoring native origin in long-term expectations to migrant origin in short-term evaluations, suggesting compensatory grading. We discuss the complex roots of discrimination in teacher assessments as an educational (in)equality mechanism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the role of genes and environments in predicting educational outcomes. We test the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis, suggesting that enriched environments enable genetic potential to unfold, and the compensatory advantage hypothesis, proposing that low genetic endowments have less impact on education for children from high socioeconomic status (SES) families. We use a pre-registered design with Netherlands Twin Register data (426 ≤ N individuals ≤ 3875). We build polygenic indexes (PGIs) for cognitive and noncognitive skills to predict seven educational outcomes from childhood to adulthood across three designs (between-family, within-family, and trio) accounting for different confounding sources, totalling 42 analyses. Cognitive PGIs, noncognitive PGIs, and parental education positively predict educational outcomes. Providing partial support for the compensatory hypothesis, 39/42 PGI × SES interactions are negative, with 7 reaching statistical significance under Romano-Wolf and 3 under the more conservative Bonferroni multiple testing corrections (p-value < 0.007). In contrast, the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis lacks empirical support, with just 2 non-significant and 1 significant (not surviving Romano-Wolf) positive interactions. Overall, we emphasise the need for future replication studies in larger samples. Our findings demonstrate the value of merging social-stratification and behavioural-genetic theories to better understand the intricate interplay between genetic factors and social contexts. • Genes and family socio-economic status (SES) interact in predicting educational outcomes. • The Scarr-Rowe hypothesis states that high-SES families enable children to fully express their genetic potential. • The compensatory advantage hypothesis claims that low genetic endowments have less impact on education for high-SES children. • We build polygenic indexes for cognitive and noncognitive skills to predict seven outcomes across three research designs. • The Scarr-Rowe hypothesis lacks empirical support, while the compensatory advantage hypothesis is partially validated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article bridges the literature on educational inequality between and within families to test whether high–socioeconomic status (SES) families compensate for low cognitive ability in the transition to secondary education in Germany. The German educational system of early-ability tracking (at age 10) represents a stringent setting for the compensatory hypothesis. Overall, previous literature offers inconclusive findings. Previous research between families suffers from the misspecification of parental SES and ability, while most within-family research did not stratify the analysis by SES or the ability distribution. To address these issues, I draw from the TwinLife study to implement a twin fixed-effects design that minimizes unobserved confounding. I report two main findings. First, highly educated families do not compensate for twins' differences in cognitive ability at the bottom of the ability distribution. In the German system of early-ability tracking, advantaged families may have more difficulties to compensate than in countries where educational transitions are less dependent on ability. Second, holding parents' and children's cognitive ability constant, pupils from highly educated families are 27% more likely to attend the academic track. This result implies wastage of academic potential for disadvantaged families, challenging the role of cognitive ability as the leading criterion of merit for liberal theories of equal opportunity. These findings point to the importance of other factors that vary between families with different resources and explain educational success, such as noncognitive abilities, risk aversion to downward mobility, and teachers' bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]