The Multiple Dimensions of Student Mobility
Amy Ellen Schwartz
Leanna Stiefel
Luis Chalico
EFRC Condition Report
October 19th 2007
Roadmap of presentation
• Motivation
• Objectives
• Findings
– Mobility by type
– Mobility by performance and residency
– Mobility and academic performance
• Policy implications
1
Motivation: Why focus on mobility?
• Might affect student academic performance
• Might make teaching harder
• Probably costly to districts and schools
• Makes accountability harder
2
Objectives
• Develop alternative measures of student mobility
• Document magnitudes of each type (and by subgroups)
• Analyze how mobility affects academic performance
• For NYC, grades 1-8, 1996-97 to 2000-01
3
Findings: Summary
• Considerable mobility from outside (into) New York City
• Considerable mobility across schools within the district
• Considerable mobility over student’s schooling history
• Entrants/frequent movers associated with harder-toeducate characteristics
• Mobility negatively affects 8th grade reading
4
Annual Mobility Measure I: Inter-Year Inter-District
Mobility
• Refers to mobility in or out of the NYC primary schools
between years
• What percentage of students are new
entrants/exiters/stable in each year?
5
Annual Mobility Measure II: Inter-Year Inter-School
Mobility
• Refers to mobility between schools in NYC primary
schools between years
• Among the stable students, what percent of students are
switchers between years?
6
Annual Mobility Measure III: Intra-Year Inter-School
Mobility
• Refers to mobility between schools in NYC primary
schools within academic years
• What percentage of students are switchers during a given
academic year?
7
Cumulative Mobility Measures IV: Prospective Cohort
Mobility
• Follows a cohort of students who begin in a given grade
and year
• Asks what percentage of students in a cohort
– Move in standard progress
– Move to a non-standard grade
– Are exiters/entrants from 3rd to 8th grade?
8
Cumulative Mobility Measures V: Retrospective Cohort
Mobility
• Traces the paths followed by a cohort of eighth grade
students
• Asks what percentage of students are switchers within
and across academic years in a cohort of eighth grade
students?
9
Annual Inter-Year Inter-District Mobility I (T1)
N. Obs.
% of col (1)
% of col (7)
All
Students
2000
2001
1-7
All
8th Grade Stayers New 1st New 2-8
Grade
Grade
Grade Students
Exiters Graduates
(1)
660,698
100
(2)
52,982
8
(3)
65,147
10
(4)
(5)
542,569 80,085
82
81.76
12.07
(6)
(7)
40,970 663,624
6.17
100
10
Annual Inter-Year Inter-School Mobility II (T2b)
90.00
% of switchers by race and grade (from 99-00 to 00-01)
79.68
80.00
70.00
66.26
60.00
50.00
40.00
33.14
30.00
20.18
20.00
13.84
12.06
7.08
10.00
13.02
11.45
6.88
5.85
8.30
6.77
4.13
0.00
Black White Black White Black White Black White Black White Black White Black White
1st grade
N.
71, 414
2nd grade
70, 913
3rd grade
4th grade
71, 590
68, 779
5th grade
6th grade
7th grade
65, 573
63, 733
60, 203
11
Annual Inter-Year Inter-School Mobility II (T4)
% of mandatory switches by race and grade
From 3rd to 4th (in 96- From 4th to 5th (in 97- From 5th to 6th (in 9897)
98)
99)
From 6th to 7th (in 99- From 7th to 8th (in 0000)
01)
%
%
%
%
%
Switchers Mandatory Switchers Mandatory Switchers Mandatory Switchers Mandatory Switchers Mandatory
Total 6,868 12.68 5,598 45.18 39,987 92.42 18,960 81.25 4,220 16.52
White 754 3.71 413 13.56 8,334 95.13 2,160 78.10 443 20.99
Black 2,816 13.03 2,125 40.80 13,167 89.86 7,554 80.18 1,696 9.79
12
Annual Intra-Year Inter-School Mobility III (T6b)
% of switchers by poverty status and grade (during 2000-01)
8.00
7.32
7.28
6.67
6.71
7.00
6.28
6.27
6.00
5.96
5.64
5.73
5.50
5.00
5.96
5.49
5.38
4.87
3.91
4.00
3.71
4.90
4.37
4.28
3.86
3.84
3.69
3.54
3.00
All
Poor
Non-poor
2.00
2.19
1.00
0.00
1st grade
N.
85,335
2nd grade
82,782
3rd grade
82,748
4th grade
81,131
5th grade
6th grade
7th grade
78,641
74,323
72,622
8th grade
68,521
13
Cumulative Prospective Cohort Analysis IV (T7)
Looking Forward from the Third Grade
Year
New
Continued to
Continued from the
Entered Grade Number of
Entrants to
Registered Continued to Other Than
Previous Grade
from NonDistrict
standard Grade Students Next Grade Next Grade
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
3rd Grade 1995-96
4th Grade 1996-97
73,642
5th Grade 1997-98
6th Grade 1998-99
70,192
7th Grade 1999-00
8th Grade 2000-01
67,896
Exited
(7)
71,778
68,752
68,521
14
Cumulative Prospective Cohort Analysis IV (T7)
Looking Forward from the Third Grade
Year
3rd Grade 1995-96
4th Grade 1996-97
New
Continued to
Continued from the
Entered Grade Number of
Entrants to
Registered Continued to Other Than
Previous Grade
from NonDistrict
standard Grade Students Next Grade Next Grade
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
--
--
--
73,642
90.4%
7.3%
2.3%
71,778
5th Grade 1997-98
6th Grade 1998-99
91.8%
5.9%
2.3%
70,192
89.4%
6.1%
4.5%
68,752
7th Grade 1999-00
8th Grade 2000-01
88.3%
7.2%
4.5%
67,896
87.9%
5.8%
6.4%
68,521
Exited
(7)
15
Cumulative Prospective Cohort Analysis IV (T7)
Looking Forward from the Third Grade
Year
New
Continued to
Continued from the
Entered Grade Number of
Entrants to
Registered Continued to Other Than
Previous Grade
from NonDistrict
standard Grade Students Next Grade Next Grade
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Exited
(7)
3rd Grade 1995-96
4th Grade 1996-97
73,642 88.1%
71,778 89.8%
5.2%
6.7%
3.2%
7.0%
5th Grade 1997-98
6th Grade 1998-99
70,192 87.6%
68,752 87.2%
4.1%
8.3%
7.5%
5.2%
7th Grade 1999-00
8th Grade 2000-01
67,896 88.7%
68,521
--
4.1%
--
7.2%
--
16
Cumulative Retrospective Cohort Analysis V (T8)
Looking Backwards from the Eighth Grade (2001-02), % of
students by number of schools attended by race and grade
80.00
75.38
70.00
60.10
60.00
50.00
40.00
27.46
30.00
18.40
20.00
7.51
10.00
3.41
3.67
2.34
1.52
0.21
White
Black
White
0.00
Black
White
1 school
Black
White
2 schools
Black
White
3 schools
Black
4 schools
5 schools
17
Characteristics of “New” Schools (T10)
% of switchers that moved to a school with lower/higher peer test
scores 3rd graders, 1995-96 to 1996-97
70
63.35
59.02
60
50
40.98
40
36.65
30
20
10
0
Black
White
Lower Peer Tests Scores
N. 3,863
Black
White
Higher Peer Tests Scores
3,006
18
Student Moves and Residential Moves (T12)
% of switchers that moved to a different zip code/borough, 3rd
graders, 1995-96 to 1996-97, percentages
50
47.51
45
42.31
40
35
30
25
18.86
20
15
12.73
10
5
0
Black
White
Different Zip Code
N. 3,166
Black
White
Different Borough
1,142
19
Mobility and Student Performance
Academic performance is potentially affected by:
• Differences in socio-demographic composition
– Poverty
– Age
– Language skills
• Teacher and school quality
20
Mobility and Student Performance
We use the following education production function to test
for the effect of mobility on performance:
Yij = β0 + β1Xi + β2Mi + φj + εij ,
Where:
Yij is the reading test score of student i on school j
Xi is a vector of SES characteristics for student i
Mi is a vector of measures of mobility for student i
φj is a control for fixed characteristics of school j
εij is an statistical error term
21
Mobility and Student Performance (T14)
Regression results, reading test scores, 8th graders in 2001-2001
(only the coefficients of M are shown)
Variable
2 schools attended
3 schools attended
4 schools attended
5 schools attended
Coeff.
-0.203***
-0.246***
-0.258***
-0.276***
1 moving year
2 moving years
3 moving years
4 moving years
5 moving years
-0.022***
0.009
-0.088*
0.043
0.187
Observations
R-squared
School Fixed Effects
51129
0.51
No
Inter-year inter-school mobility
Intra-year inter-school mobility
Notes: i) * significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%
ii) Other controls included
22
Results
• Considerable mobility of students in NYC primary
schools
• Mobility affects performance
• Those who move frequently are in general the least welloff groups
• Follow up: Distribution of switches by type of school
23
Policy implications
• “Longer-span” schools like K-8 schools could help to
minimize student moves
• Addressing the academic needs of those students who
switch could foster higher performance
• Targeting “high-switching” groups in order to diminish
their mobility could improve performance
24