没有想象的那么令人担忧:关于德国中学教育转移效应的新见解

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Felix Bittmann
{"title":"没有想象的那么令人担忧:关于德国中学教育转移效应的新见解","authors":"Felix Bittmann","doi":"10.1016/j.stueduc.2025.101495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Reforms have aimed to make the German educational system more permeable. Today, obtaining the highest level of secondary education is possible regardless of the track to which a student has transferred. However promising, research has indicated that these hopes of easier upward mobility have only been partially fulfilled, as many students who began their educational journeys on a non-academic track displayed diversion effects—that is, a loss of initially high aspirations. Panel data allows for testing whether educational outcomes are influenced by the choice of school track among highly motivated students. Our results show that competencies and satisfaction are not affected once self-selection into tracks is accounted for. Regarding the attainment of the final degree, the difference between the academic track (Gymnasium) and the non-academic tracks amounts to approximately 13 percentage points. These findings suggest that diversion effects are smaller than previously reported. Policymakers, in particular, should be aware of these differences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47539,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Educational Evaluation","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 101495"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Less alarming than assumed: New insights on diversion effects in German secondary education\",\"authors\":\"Felix Bittmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.stueduc.2025.101495\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Reforms have aimed to make the German educational system more permeable. Today, obtaining the highest level of secondary education is possible regardless of the track to which a student has transferred. However promising, research has indicated that these hopes of easier upward mobility have only been partially fulfilled, as many students who began their educational journeys on a non-academic track displayed diversion effects—that is, a loss of initially high aspirations. Panel data allows for testing whether educational outcomes are influenced by the choice of school track among highly motivated students. Our results show that competencies and satisfaction are not affected once self-selection into tracks is accounted for. Regarding the attainment of the final degree, the difference between the academic track (Gymnasium) and the non-academic tracks amounts to approximately 13 percentage points. These findings suggest that diversion effects are smaller than previously reported. Policymakers, in particular, should be aware of these differences.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47539,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Educational Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"86 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101495\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Educational Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X25000525\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Educational Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X25000525","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

改革旨在使德国的教育体系更具渗透性。今天,无论学生转到哪个方向,获得最高水平的中等教育都是可能的。无论多么有希望,研究表明,这些更容易向上流动的希望只是部分实现了,因为许多从非学术轨道开始教育旅程的学生表现出了转移效应——也就是说,失去了最初的远大抱负。小组数据允许测试教育成果是否受到高动机学生的学校轨道选择的影响。我们的研究结果表明,一旦自我选择进入轨道,能力和满意度不会受到影响。就获得最终学位而言,学术轨道(体育馆)和非学术轨道之间的差异约为13个百分点。这些发现表明,转移效应比以前报道的要小。政策制定者尤其应该意识到这些差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Less alarming than assumed: New insights on diversion effects in German secondary education
Reforms have aimed to make the German educational system more permeable. Today, obtaining the highest level of secondary education is possible regardless of the track to which a student has transferred. However promising, research has indicated that these hopes of easier upward mobility have only been partially fulfilled, as many students who began their educational journeys on a non-academic track displayed diversion effects—that is, a loss of initially high aspirations. Panel data allows for testing whether educational outcomes are influenced by the choice of school track among highly motivated students. Our results show that competencies and satisfaction are not affected once self-selection into tracks is accounted for. Regarding the attainment of the final degree, the difference between the academic track (Gymnasium) and the non-academic tracks amounts to approximately 13 percentage points. These findings suggest that diversion effects are smaller than previously reported. Policymakers, in particular, should be aware of these differences.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
90
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Studies in Educational Evaluation publishes original reports of evaluation studies. Four types of articles are published by the journal: (a) Empirical evaluation studies representing evaluation practice in educational systems around the world; (b) Theoretical reflections and empirical studies related to issues involved in the evaluation of educational programs, educational institutions, educational personnel and student assessment; (c) Articles summarizing the state-of-the-art concerning specific topics in evaluation in general or in a particular country or group of countries; (d) Book reviews and brief abstracts of evaluation studies.
×
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