(否)计算能力和语言推理发展之间的权衡:来自意大利学术跟踪的PISA证据

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Matteo Zullo
{"title":"(否)计算能力和语言推理发展之间的权衡:来自意大利学术跟踪的PISA证据","authors":"Matteo Zullo","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2022.101703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The study uses PISA data to evaluate cognitive development trade-offs between numeracy and literacy skills. The compendious literature validating the educational and financial gains from technical education fails to address the potential underdevelopment of verbal skills. Exploiting academic tracking in Italy’s high school education with distinctive Liberal Arts (<em>n</em> = 841) and STEM (<em>n</em><span> = 1968) pathways, the study rules out any cognitive trade-off and estimates the STEM premium on the reading section at about one-fifth of an international standard deviation (20 PISA points). Decomposition of the education production function reveals that the technical track outperforms Liberal Arts due to greater educational production efficiency overcompensating for worse educational production inputs. Further regression analysis links the STEM advantage to the four additional instructional units in math and physics. Robustness checks conducted using TIMSS and PIRLS test scores exclude that effects are secondary to differences in preexisting levels of student skills.</span><span><sup>1</sup></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(No) Trade-off between numeracy and verbal reasoning development: PISA evidence from Italy's academic tracking\",\"authors\":\"Matteo Zullo\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.intell.2022.101703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The study uses PISA data to evaluate cognitive development trade-offs between numeracy and literacy skills. The compendious literature validating the educational and financial gains from technical education fails to address the potential underdevelopment of verbal skills. Exploiting academic tracking in Italy’s high school education with distinctive Liberal Arts (<em>n</em> = 841) and STEM (<em>n</em><span> = 1968) pathways, the study rules out any cognitive trade-off and estimates the STEM premium on the reading section at about one-fifth of an international standard deviation (20 PISA points). Decomposition of the education production function reveals that the technical track outperforms Liberal Arts due to greater educational production efficiency overcompensating for worse educational production inputs. Further regression analysis links the STEM advantage to the four additional instructional units in math and physics. Robustness checks conducted using TIMSS and PIRLS test scores exclude that effects are secondary to differences in preexisting levels of student skills.</span><span><sup>1</sup></span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289622000848\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289622000848","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究使用PISA数据来评估计算能力和读写能力之间的认知发展权衡。简明扼要的文献验证了技术教育的教育和经济收益,但未能解决语言技能潜在的发展不足。该研究利用意大利高中教育中独特的文科(n = 841)和STEM (n = 1968)途径的学术跟踪,排除了任何认知上的权衡,并估计STEM在阅读部分的优势约为国际标准偏差(PISA 20分)的五分之一。对教育生产函数的分解表明,由于更高的教育生产效率过度补偿了更差的教育生产投入,技术轨道优于文科。进一步的回归分析将STEM的优势与数学和物理的四个额外教学单元联系起来。使用TIMSS和PIRLS测试分数进行的稳健性检查排除了影响是继发于先前存在的学生技能水平差异
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
(No) Trade-off between numeracy and verbal reasoning development: PISA evidence from Italy's academic tracking

The study uses PISA data to evaluate cognitive development trade-offs between numeracy and literacy skills. The compendious literature validating the educational and financial gains from technical education fails to address the potential underdevelopment of verbal skills. Exploiting academic tracking in Italy’s high school education with distinctive Liberal Arts (n = 841) and STEM (n = 1968) pathways, the study rules out any cognitive trade-off and estimates the STEM premium on the reading section at about one-fifth of an international standard deviation (20 PISA points). Decomposition of the education production function reveals that the technical track outperforms Liberal Arts due to greater educational production efficiency overcompensating for worse educational production inputs. Further regression analysis links the STEM advantage to the four additional instructional units in math and physics. Robustness checks conducted using TIMSS and PIRLS test scores exclude that effects are secondary to differences in preexisting levels of student skills.1

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
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信