[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

Other indicators of school performance

The Report Card also includes a number of indicators that, while they do not contribute to the overall rating out of 10 (Cote globale sur 10), can provide useful information about each school's effectiveness.

Is the school improving academically? The Trend indicator (Tendances)

On all but the graduation rate indicator (Diplomation; see below), the Report Card provides six years of data for most schools. Unlike a simple snapshot of one year's results, this historical record provides evidence of change (or lack thereof) over time. However, it can sometimes be difficult to determine whether a school's performance is improving or deteriorating simply by scanning several years of data. This is particularly the case in the measurement of examination results. In one year, a relatively easy annual uniform examination may produce a high average mark and a low failure rate. In the following year, the opposite may occur. It can, therefore, be difficult to tell whether an individual school's results are changing over time due to real change in the school's performance or to differences in the make-up of the annual examination.

To detect trends in the performance indicators more easily , we developed a trend indicator (Tendances). It uses regression analysis to identify those dimensions in which the standardized scores achieved by the school show a statistically significant change.¹⁵ In these circumstances, it is likely that the school's results have actually changed relative to the results of other schools. Because trend calculation is very uncertain when only a small number of data points is available, trends are calculated only in those circumstances where five years of data are available.

Do students at the school complete their studies at secondary school in a timely fashion?

During the high-school years, students must make a number of decisions of considerable significance about their education. They will choose the priority that they will assign to their studies. They will chose among optional courses. They will plan their post-secondary education or careers.

Will these young people make good decisions? It is unrealistic to presume that they can do so without advice, encouragement, and support. What practical, well-informed counselling can they call upon? While parents, in the main, are willing to help, many lack the information they need to be able to provide good advice. It falls, therefore, to the schools to shoulder some responsibility for advising students and their parents about these and other educational choices. Of course, wise students will seek guidance not only from the counsellors designated by the schools but also from teachers and administrators, parents, and other relatives. Where students have strong support from family and community, the school's responsibility for counselling may be lighter; where students do not have such strong support, the school's role may be more challenging. The indicator for graduation rate (Diplomation) measures the school's success in using the tools at its disposal to help students make good decisions about their education.

One of the most important decisions that students must make is to stay in school and complete their secondary studies in a timely fashion. There are many justifications for doing otherwise. "The few courses I need can be picked up later." "I'm going to fail anyway, so why try?" "There's a job that pays $12.25 an hour available right now, so I can't afford to stay in school." The list is conveniently long.

A secondary-school diploma retains considerable value since it increases options for post-secondary education. Further, graduates from secondary school who decide to enter the work-force immediately will, on average, find more job opportunities than those who have not graduated. Moreover, for the majority of students, the minimum requirements for receipt of a diploma are not particularly onerous. The chance that students will not earn their diploma solely because they are unable to meet the intellectual demands of the curriculum is, therefore, relatively small. Nevertheless, the graduation rate (Diplomation) varies quite widely from school to school throughout the province.

The graduation rate (shown in the tables as Diplomation) reports the percentage of the school's incoming Secondary I class that graduated within five years (the normal length of time for completion of the secondary-school program). The result is reported in the year of graduation.

While there are factors not related to education--absence or emigration from the school or province, sickness, death, and the like--that can affect the data, there is no reason to expect these factors to influence particular schools systematically. Accordingly, we take variations in the graduation rate to be an indicator of the extent to which students are being well coached in their educational choices.

As noted above, this indicator has not been used in the calculation of the overall rating out of 10 (Cote globale sur 10) because it is at present only available for public schools. We plan to consider using this indicator in calculating the overall rating next year, when, we believe, it will be available for private schools as well.

To what extent do socio-economic factors affect the school's overall rating out of 10?

The socio-economic indicators

Educators can and should take into account the abilities, interests, and backgrounds of their students when they design their lesson plans and deliver the curriculum. By doing so, they can minimize the effect of any disadvantages that their students may have. The Report Card includes two indicators related to socio-economic factors. Average parental income (shown in the tables as Revenus des parents) enables us to identify schools that are roughly similar to each other with respect to the economic background of their students. The socio-economic factor (shown in the tables as Effet socio-économique) suggests the extent to which the overall rating out of 10 (Cote globale sur 10) can be attributed to those socio-economic characteristics with which it was significantly associated.

The socio-economic factor was derived as follows. First, using the Ministry of Education's enrolment data sorted by postal code and socio-economic data derived from the 1996 Census and provided by Statistics Canada,¹⁶ we established a profile of the student body's home characteristics for each of the schools in the Report Card. We then used multiple regression--a tool used in statistical analysis--to determine the home and school characteristics that were associated with variations in school performance as measured by the overall rating out of 10 (Cote globale sur 10).

Taking into account all of these variables simultaneously, we identified several family characteristics that possessed a statistically significant association with the overall rating: the percentage of families in which the mother (in two parent families) or the lone parent (in single parent families) claims no knowledge of either official language; the average parental employment income (expressed as the value's natural logarithm); and the average age of the mother (in two parent families) or the lone parent (in single parent families). Higher values for the first variable were associated with lower overall ratings. Higher values of the latter two variables were associated with higher overall ratings.

We used a formula derived from the regression analysis to re-calculate the overall rating for each school taking into account the values of these socio-economic characteristics. That difference between the actual overall rating and the re-calculated rating is reported in the tables as the Socio-economic effect (shown in the tables as Effet socio-économique). Compare, for example, the socio-economic effect at three schools in the Quebec administrative region. Séminaire Saint-François achieved an overall rating for 1998/1999 of 8.7 but its socio-economic effect of 1.0 suggests that 1.0 rating point is accounted for by the relatively advantageous family characteristics of the students. When that effect is taken into account, the school's rating would be only 7.7 out of 10. The school's rating is higher than it otherwise might be because of socio-economic characteristics.

At École Vanier, on the other hand, the school's actual rating (4.2 out of 10) is being negatively effected by socio-economic effects. If these are taken into account, the school's rating would be recalculated upward by the amount of the socio-economic factor (Effet socio-économique) of -1.0. Finally, at Polyvalente Saint-Aubin, its overall rating out of 10 appears not to be affected by socio-economic characteristics.

This measure of the socio-economic background of a school's student body is presented with two important notes of caution. First, when all the schools in the Report Card are considered, only a small amount of the variation among schools in the overall rating is associated with the socio-economic factors studied. Clearly, many other factors--including good teaching, counselling, and school administration--contribute to the effectiveness of schools. Second, these statistical measures describe past relationships between socio-economic characteristics and a measure of school effectiveness. It should not be inferred that these relationships will or should remain static. The more effectively the school enables all of its students to succeed, the weaker will be the relationship between the home characteristics of its students and their academic success. Thus, these socio-economic indicators should not be used as an excuse or rationale for poor school performance.

Results of the multiple regression analysis used to derive this socio-economic indicator can be found in Appendix 2.

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

info@fraserinstitute.ca You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.

If you know someone who would be interested in this web page, please enter their email address below, and we will forward this URL to them: Email Address:

Last Modified: October 20, 2000.