How can welfare regime and production regime theories explain differences in schools’ ability grouping policies? A comparative study using the PISA school survey

IF 3.3 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
British Educational Research Journal Pub Date : 2026-04-12 Epub Date: 2025-10-01 DOI:10.1002/berj.70037
Monica Reichenberg, Girma Berhanu, Lena Fridlund
{"title":"How can welfare regime and production regime theories explain differences in schools’ ability grouping policies? A comparative study using the PISA school survey","authors":"Monica Reichenberg,&nbsp;Girma Berhanu,&nbsp;Lena Fridlund","doi":"10.1002/berj.70037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research evidence is mixed on the consequences of ability grouping policies, but most research has found an overrepresentation of disadvantaged social demographics in low-ability groups. However, researchers have neglected to explain why ability grouping policies vary between countries. Departing from welfare regime theory, our study aimed to explain schools’ ability grouping polices. For data, we used the principal survey from PISA 2022 sampling approximately 9000 schools in 34 countries. As the explanatory variable, we used welfare regimes, and as the outcome, we analysed schools’ ability grouping policy (a) within the school or (b) within the class. For analysis, we reported descriptive statistics, correspondence analysis and multilevel ordinal regression (adjusting for school demographics). In support of our predictions, we found large differences in ability grouping policies within school between welfare regimes (social democratic welfare regime vs. liberal regime). For ability grouping within the class, we found only meagre differences between social democratic regime compared with conservative regime. In contrast to our predictions, ability grouping within the class seems to be driven by school demographics rather than welfare regimes. As a sensitivity check, we compared welfare regimes with production regimes as in Varieties of Capitalism (VoC or production regime theory; Liberal vs. Coordinated Market Economy). The result suggests that VoC offers an alternative explanation that supplements that of welfare regimes. We conclude that our study both agrees and disagrees with the theory of welfare regime and its alternative (i.e. VoC). Finally, we discuss the wider implications of our findings for educational research.</p>","PeriodicalId":51410,"journal":{"name":"British Educational Research Journal","volume":"52 2","pages":"839-863"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/berj.70037","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Educational Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.70037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research evidence is mixed on the consequences of ability grouping policies, but most research has found an overrepresentation of disadvantaged social demographics in low-ability groups. However, researchers have neglected to explain why ability grouping policies vary between countries. Departing from welfare regime theory, our study aimed to explain schools’ ability grouping polices. For data, we used the principal survey from PISA 2022 sampling approximately 9000 schools in 34 countries. As the explanatory variable, we used welfare regimes, and as the outcome, we analysed schools’ ability grouping policy (a) within the school or (b) within the class. For analysis, we reported descriptive statistics, correspondence analysis and multilevel ordinal regression (adjusting for school demographics). In support of our predictions, we found large differences in ability grouping policies within school between welfare regimes (social democratic welfare regime vs. liberal regime). For ability grouping within the class, we found only meagre differences between social democratic regime compared with conservative regime. In contrast to our predictions, ability grouping within the class seems to be driven by school demographics rather than welfare regimes. As a sensitivity check, we compared welfare regimes with production regimes as in Varieties of Capitalism (VoC or production regime theory; Liberal vs. Coordinated Market Economy). The result suggests that VoC offers an alternative explanation that supplements that of welfare regimes. We conclude that our study both agrees and disagrees with the theory of welfare regime and its alternative (i.e. VoC). Finally, we discuss the wider implications of our findings for educational research.

Abstract Image

福利制度和生产制度理论如何解释学校能力分组政策的差异?一项使用PISA学校调查的比较研究
关于能力分组政策的后果,研究证据不一,但大多数研究发现,在低能力群体中,弱势社会人口的比例过高。然而,研究人员忽略了解释为什么不同国家的能力分组政策不同。本研究从福利制度理论出发,试图解释学校的能力分组政策。对于数据,我们使用了PISA 2022的主要调查,抽样了34个国家的大约9000所学校。作为解释变量,我们使用了福利制度,作为结果,我们分析了学校(a)在学校内或(b)在班级内的能力分组政策。为了进行分析,我们报告了描述性统计、对应分析和多水平有序回归(调整学校人口统计)。为了支持我们的预测,我们发现不同福利制度(社会民主福利制度与自由福利制度)在学校内的能力分组政策上存在很大差异。对于班级内部的能力分组,我们发现社会民主政体与保守政体之间只有微弱的差异。与我们的预测相反,班级内的能力分组似乎是由学校的人口统计而不是福利制度驱动的。作为敏感性检查,我们比较了福利制度与生产制度,如资本主义的品种(VoC或生产制度理论;自由主义与协调市场经济)。结果表明,VoC提供了一种补充福利制度的替代解释。我们的结论是,我们的研究既同意也不同意福利制度及其替代理论(即VoC)。最后,我们讨论了我们的发现对教育研究的更广泛的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Educational Research Journal
British Educational Research Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The British Educational Research Journal is an international peer reviewed medium for the publication of articles of interest to researchers in education and has rapidly become a major focal point for the publication of educational research from throughout the world. For further information on the association please visit the British Educational Research Association web site. The journal is interdisciplinary in approach, and includes reports of case studies, experiments and surveys, discussions of conceptual and methodological issues and of underlying assumptions in educational research, accounts of research in progress, and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书