Does Private Tutoring Help High School Students Gain Higher Education Opportunity?

Xue Haiping; Zhao Yang

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2020.05.005

Volume 38 Issue 5

May 2020

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences) > 2020 > 38(5): 93-102

Xue Haiping, Zhao Yang. Does Private Tutoring Help High School Students Gain Higher Education Opportunity?[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 2020, 38(5): 93-102. doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2020.05.005

Citation:

Xue Haiping, Zhao Yang. Does Private Tutoring Help High School Students Gain Higher Education Opportunity?[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 2020, 38(5): 93-102. doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2020.05.005

Citation:

PDF( 793 KB)

Does Private Tutoring Help High School Students Gain Higher Education Opportunity?

doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2020.05.005

College of Education, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China

Available Online: 2020-05-22
Publish Date: 2020-05-01

Abstract

Abstract

Based on the four-year mixed cross-section data of the Peking University Chinese Family Tracking Survey in 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016, a structural equation model was used to test the intermediary effect of private tutoring and the quality of general high schools between family capital and higher education opportunities. The findings show that: (1) participating in private tutoring can help high school students get into college, but it cannot help them to further into undergraduate colleges; studying in general high schools with high teaching quality can help high school students go to college and get into undergraduate college; (2) high school students’ participation in private tutoring and school quality differences play a part of the intermediary role between family capital and whether they are admitted to university. The intermediary role of participating in private tutoring is slightly greater than that of school quality differences; The difference in school quality between general high schools played an intermediary role between family capital and whether they were promoted to undergraduate colleges, while private tutoring did not play an intermediary role between family capital and whether they were promoted to undergraduate colleges.
- family capital,
- private tutoring,
- higher education access,
- intermediary effect

FullText(HTML)

References(39)

References

[1]	布尔迪厄. (1997). 文化资本与社会炼金术(包亚明译). 上海: 上海人民出版社.
[2]	楚红丽. (2009). 我国中小学生课外补习家庭之背景特征及个人因素. 教育学术月刊,(12),22−27.
[3]	郭丛斌, 闵维方. (2006). 家庭经济和文化资本对子女教育机会获得的影响. 高等教育研究,(11),24−31.
[4]	洪岩壁, 赵延东. (2014). 从资本到惯习: 中国城市家庭教育模式的阶层分化. 社会学研究,(4),73−93.
[5]	胡咏梅, 范文凤, 丁维莉. (2015). “影子教育”会扩大教育结果不均等吗?——基于PISA 2012上海数据的经验研究. 北京大学教育评论,(3),40−59.
[6]	李春玲. (2003). 社会政治变迁与教育机会不平等——家庭背景及制度因素对于教育获得的影响(1940—2001). 中国社会科学,(3),86−98.
[7]	李佳丽. (2018). 参加课外补习对西部农村学生的影响效应研究——基于面板数据的固定效应分析. 基础教育,(1),90−98. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-2232.2018.01.011
[8]	李煜. (2006). 制度变迁与教育不平等的产生机制——中国城市子女的教育获得(1966—2003). 中国社会科学,(4),97−109.
[9]	刘精明. (2006). 高等教育扩展与入学机会差异: 1978—2003. 社会,(03),158−179+209.
[10]	刘志民, 高耀. (2011). 家庭资本、社会分层与高等教育获得——基于江苏省的经验研究. 高等教育研究,(12),18−27.
[11]	人民网. (2017). 建设教育强国: 中华民族伟大复兴的基础工程. 取自人民网(2017年12月1日): http://theory.people.com.cn/n1/2017/1201/c40531-29680214.html.
[12]	沈艳, 张恺. (2005). 家庭背景对我国高等教育入学机会的影响——基于2013届高校毕业生调查的实证分析. 教育学术月刊,(5),30−36.
[13]	温忠麟, 张雷, 侯杰泰, 刘红云. (2004). 中介效应检验程序及其应用. 心理学报,(5),614−620.
[14]	吴次南, 陈卫洪. (2013). 高考中社会资本的作用力及其运行机制——高考与社会资本关系的实证分析. 教育学术月刊,(5),3−6.
[15]	薛海平, 丁小浩. (2009). 中国城镇学生教育补习研究. 教育研究,(1),39−46.
[16]	薛海平. (2015). 从学校教育到影子教育: 教育竞争与社会再生产. 北京大学教育评论,(3),47−69. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-9468.2015.03.004
[17]	薛海平. (2016). 课外补习、学习成绩与社会再生产. 教育与经济,(2),32−43. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2016.02.005
[18]	薛海平. (2018). 家庭资本与教育获得: 基于影子教育中介效应分析. 教育与经济,34(4),69−78. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2018.04.009
[19]	杨倩. (2011). 家庭背景对高等教育入学机会的影响. 现代教育管理,(7),22−24. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-5485.2011.07.006
[20]	曾满超, 丁小浩, 沈华. (2010). 初中生课外补习城乡差异分析——基于甘肃、湖南和江苏3省的初中学生课外补习调查. 教育与经济,(2),7−11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2010.02.002
[21]	周金燕, 邹雪. (2016). 中美学生教育补习机会的影响因素比较——基于2012年中国上海和美国PISA数据的实证探索. 教育与经济,(2),44−52. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2016.02.006
[22]	Bray, M., Zhan, S. L., Lykins, C., Wang, D., Kwo, O. (2014). Differentiated demand for private supplementary tutoring: Patterns and implications in Hong Kong secondary education. Economics of Education Review, 38, 24−37. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.10.002
[23]	Claudia, B., Condron, D. J., Roscigno, V, J. (2010). Shadow education, American style: test preparation, the SAT and college enrollment. Social Forces, 89(2), 435−461. doi: 10.1353/sof.2010.0105
[24]	Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95−120. doi: 10.1086/228943
[25]	Dang, H. A. (2007). The determinants and impact of private tutoring classes in Vietnam. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 683−698. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2007.10.003
[26]	De Graaf, N., De Graaf, P., Kraaykamp, G. (2000). Parental cultural capital and educational attainment in the Netherlands: A refinement of the cultural capital perspective. Sociology of Education, 73(2), 92−111. doi: 10.2307/2673239
[27]	Guill, K., Bonsen, M. (2010). LeistungsvorteiledurchNachhilfeunterricht in Mathematik am beginnder sekundarstufeI?. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 38(2), 117−133.
[28]	Katsillis, J., Rubinson, R. (1990). Cultural capital, student achievement and educational reproduction: the case of Greece. American Sociological Review, (2), 270−279.
[29]	Levin, H. M. (1976). Educational opportunity and social inequality in Western Europe. Social Problems, 24(2), 148−172. doi: 10.2307/800335
[30]	Lucas, S. R. (2001). Effectively maintained inequality: Education transitions, track mobility and social background effects. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1642−1690. doi: 10.1086/321300
[31]	McPherson, M. S., Schapiro, M. O. (1994). College choice and family income: Changes over time in the higher education of student from different income background (Discussion Paper). Williamstown, MA: Williams Project on the Economics of Higher Education, No. 29.
[32]	Raftery, A. E., Hout, M. (1993). Maximally maintained inequality: Expansion, reform and opportunity in Irish education:1921-1975. Sociology of Education, 66(1), 41−62. doi: 10.2307/2112784
[33]	Robinson, R. V., Maurice, A. G. (1985). Class reproduction among men and women in France: Reproduction theory on its home ground. American Journal of Sociology, 91(2), 250−280. doi: 10.1086/228277
[34]	Siu Loon, HOE. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, (1), 76−81.
[35]	Smyth, E. (2009). Buying your way into college? Private tuition and the transition to higher education in Ireland. Oxford Review of Education, 35(1), 1−22. doi: 10.1080/03054980801981426
[36]	Sunderman, G. L. (2006). Do supplemental educational services increase for minority students?. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(2), 117−122. doi: 10.1177/003172170608800208
[37]	Tansel, A., Bircan, F. (2008). Private supplementary tutoring in turkey recent evidence on its various aspects. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 9(1), 162−171.
[38]	Woessmann, L. (2010). Educational production in East Asia: the Impact of family background and schooling policies on student performance. German Economic Review, 6(3), 331−353.
[39]	Zhang, Y. (2013). Does private tutoring improve students' national college entrance exam performance? A case study from Jinan, China. Economics of Education Review, 32(1), 1−28.