Advertisement

Direct and Indirect Influences of School System on Youth Delinquent Offending Among Migrant and Native-Born Students in Eight Countries

  • Renske S. van der GaagEmail author
  • Majone Steketee
Chapter

Abstract

Stratified school systems select children into different educational tracks according to ability, in some countries as early as age 10. Tracks substantially determine future education and career opportunities. Comprehensive school system have no such selection before age 15. Children with a migrant background are often overrepresented in lower tracks, and possible negative consequences may affect them more than native-born children. We use data from the third wave of the International Self-Report Delinquency study (ISRD3) to examine direct and indirect influences of school system on self-reported life-time offending of native and migrant students in eight countries, four countries with comprehensive and four with stratified school systems. We find that migrant students are indeed overrepresented in lower tracks and report higher levels of offending across all tracks than native students. No such differences exist for comprehensive systems. Our analysis also shows a stronger (direct) relationship between lower-track enrolment and offending for migrant than for native students, while (indirect) protective influences in the school system are reduced and risk influences are magnified for migrant students.

Keywords

Youth delinquency Offending Migrant Native Tracking School system 

References

  1. Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2016). What schools need to know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ansalone, G. (2003). Poverty, tracking, and the social construction of failure: International perspectives on tracking. Journal of Children and Poverty, 9(1), 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(6), 1086–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berends, M. (1995). Educational stratification and students’ social bonding to school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 16(3), 327–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgna, C., & Contini, D. (2014). Migrant achievement penalties in Western Europe: Do educational systems matter? European Sociological Review, 30(5), 670–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brunello, G., & Checchi, D. (2007). Does school tracking affect equality of opportunity? New international evidence. Economic Policy, 22(52), 782–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crosnoe, R. (2002). High school curriculum track and adolescent association with delinquent friends. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17(2), 143–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crosnoe, R. (2009). Low-income students and the socioeconomic composition of public high schools. American Sociological Review, 74(5), 709–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crul, M. (2013). Snakes and ladders in educational systems: Access to higher education for second-generation Turks in Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(9), 1383–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Demanet, J., & Van Houtte, M. (2012). School belonging and school misconduct: The differing role of teacher and peer attachment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(4), 499–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dronkers, J., & de Heus, M. (2012). The educational performance of children of immigrants in sixteen OECD countries, CReAM discussion paper series 1210. London, UK: Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM), Department of Economics, University College London.Google Scholar
  12. Dronkers, J., Van Der Velden, R., & Dunne, A. (2012). Why are migrant students better off in certain types of educational systems or schools than in others? European Educational Research Journal, 11(1), 11–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2011). Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 225–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Egli, N. M., Lucia, S., & Berchtold, A. (2012). Integrated vs. differentiated school systems and their impact on delinquency. European Journal of Criminology, 9(3), 245–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ennett, S. T., & Bauman, K. E. (1993). Peer group structure and adolescent cigarette smoking: A social network analysis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 34(3), 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Entorf, H., & Lauk, M. (2008). Peer effects, social multipliers and migrants at school: An international comparison. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 34(4), 633–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ford, J. A., & Schroeder, R. D. (2010). Higher education and criminal offending over the life course. Sociological Spectrum, 31(1), 32–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gamoran, A., & Berends, M. (1987). The effects of stratification in secondary schools: Synthesis of survey and ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 57(4), 415–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gottfredson, G. D., Gottfredson, D. C., Payne, A. A., & Gottfredson, N. C. (2005). School climate predictors of school disorder: Results from a national study of delinquency prevention in schools. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42(4), 412–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Griga, D., & Hadjar, A. (2014). Migrant background and higher education participation in Europe: The effect of the educational systems. European Sociological Review, 30(3), 275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hanushek, E. A., & Wößmann, L. (2006). Does educational tracking affect performance and inequality? Differences- in-differences evidence across countries. The Economic Journal, 116(510), C63–C76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67(3), 451–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Henry, K. L., Knight, K. E., & Thornberry, T. P. (2012). School disengagement as a predictor of dropout, delinquency, and problem substance use during adolescence and early adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(2), 156–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hoffmann, J. P., Erickson, L. D., & Spence, K. R. (2013). Modeling the association between academic achievement and delinquency: An application of interactional theory. Criminology, 51(3), 629–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ireson, J., & Hallam, S. (2009). Academic self-concepts in adolescence: Relations with achievement and ability grouping in schools. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Junger-Tas, J., Marshall, I. H., Enzmann, D., Killias, M., Steketee, M., & Gruszczynska, B. (2012). The many faces of youth crime. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mood, C. (2010). Logistic regression: Why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Müller, C. M., & Hofmann, V. (2016). Does being assigned to a low school track negatively affect psychological adjustment? A longitudinal study in the first year of secondary school. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 27(2), 95–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Müller, C. M., Hofmann, V., Fleischli, J., & Studer, F. (2016). Effects of classroom composition on the development of antisocial behavior in lower secondary school. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26, 345–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 results: What makes schools successful?: Resources, policies and practices (Vol. IV). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  32. OECD. (2015). Immigrant students at school: Easing the journey towards integration. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Payne, A. A. (2008). A multilevel analysis of the relationships among communal school organization, student bonding, and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 45(4), 429–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pfeffer, F. T. (2015). Equality and quality in education. A comparative study of 19 countries. Social Science Research, 51, 350–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. PISA. (2012). OECD programme for international student assessment (PISA). Retrieved from https://pisa2012.acer.edu.au/downloads.php
  36. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, 36(4), 717–731.Google Scholar
  37. Rumberger, R. W., & Palardy, G. J. (2005). Does segregation still matter? The impact of student composition on academic achievement in high school. Teachers College Record, 107(9), 1999.Google Scholar
  38. Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Savolainen, J., Hughes, L. A., Hurtig, T. M., Ebeling, H., & Taanila, A. M. (2013). Does vocational schooling facilitate criminal offending? A study of educational tracking in Finland. European Journal of Criminology, 10(5), 606–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  41. Stewart, E. A. (2003). School social bonds, school climate, and school misbehavior: A multilevel analysis. Justice Quarterly, 20(3), 575–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van de Werfhorst, H. G., & Mijs, J. J. B. (2010). Achievement inequality and the institutional structure of educational systems: A comparative perspective. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 407–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Van Houtte, M. (2016). Lower-track students’ sense of academic futility: Selection or effect? Journal of Sociology, 52(4), 874–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Van Houtte, M., & Stevens, P. A. J. (2008). Sense of futility: The missing link between track position and self-reported school misconduct. Youth & Society, 40(2), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118x08316251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vieluf, S., Hochweber, J., Klieme, E., & Kunter, M. (2015). Who has a good relationship with the teachers? A comparison of comprehensive education systems with education systems using between-school tracking. Oxford Review of Education, 41(1), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wiatrowski, M. D., Hansell, S., Massey, C. R., & Wilson, D. L. (1982). Curriculum tracking and delinquency. American Sociological Review, 47(1), 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Verwey-Jonker InstituteUtrechtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural ScienceErasmus UniversityRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations