Gender differences between teachers’ assessments and test based assessments. Evidence from Spain

References

• AGAEVE. (2012). Evaluación diagnóstica 2011-2012. Informe de resultados. Agencia Andaluza de Evaluación Educativa Conserjería de Educación Junta de Andalucía.
   Google Scholar
• Angelo C. & Reis A. B. (2021). Gender gaps in different grading systems. Education Economics 29(1) 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2020.1853681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borghans L. Golsteyn B. H. Heckman J. J. & Humphries J. E. (2016). What grades and achievement tests measure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113(47) 13354–13359. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1601135113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brackett M. A. Floman J. L. Ashton-James C. Cherkasskiy L. & Salovey P. (2013). The influence of teacher emotion on grading practices: A preliminary look at the evaluation of student writing. Teachers & Teaching 19(6) 634–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.827453
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breda T. & Napp C. (2019). Girls’ comparative advantage in reading can largely explain the gender gap in math-related fields. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116(31) 15435–15440. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1905779116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brookhart S. M. Guskey T. R. Bowers A. J. McMillan J. H. Smith J. K. Smith L. F. Stevens M. T. & Welsh M. E. (2016). A century of grading research: Meaning and value in the most common educational measure. Review of Educational Research 86(4) 803–848. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316672069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess S. & Greaves E. (2013). Test scores subjective assessment and stereotyping of ethnic minorities. Journal of Labor Economics 31(3) 535–576. https://doi.org/10.1086/669340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calsamiglia C. & Loviglio A. (2019). Grading on a curve: When having good peers is not good. Economics of Education Review 73 101916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2019.101916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell T. (2015). Stereotyped at seven? Biases in teacher judgement of pupils’ ability and attainment. Journal of Social Policy 44(3) 517–547. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279415000227
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castellano K. E. Rabe-Hesketh S. & Skrondal A. (2014). Composition context and endogeneity in school and teacher comparisons. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 39(5) 333–367. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614547576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke P. Crawford C. Steele F. & Vignoles A. (2015). Revisiting fixed-and random-effects models: Some considerations for policy-relevant education research. Education Economics 23(3) 259–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2013.855705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. McCabe L. Michelli N. M. & Pickeral T. (2009). School climate: Research policy practice and teacher education. Teachers College Record 111(1) 180–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810911100108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copur-Gencturk Y. Cimpian J. R. Lubienski S. T. & Thacker I. (2020). Teachers’ bias against the mathematical ability of female Black and Hispanic students. Educational Researcher 49(1) 30–43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19890577
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornwell C., Mustard D. B. & Van Parys J. (2003). Noncognitive skills and the gender disparities in test scores and teacher assessments: Evidence from primary school. Journal of Human Resources 48(1) 236–264. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2013.0002
   Google Scholar
• Diamond R. & Persson P. (2016). The long-term consequences of teacher discretion in grading of high-stakes tests ( (No. w22207)). National Bureau of Economic Research.
   Google Scholar
• Duckworth A. L. Quinn P. D. & Tsukayama E. (2012). What No Child Left Behind leaves behind: The roles of IQ and self-control in predicting standardized achievement test scores and report card grades. Journal of Educational Psychology 104(2) 439. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026280
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwert F. & Winship C. (2014). Endogenous selection bias: The problem of conditioning on a collider variable. Annual Review of Sociology 40(1) 31–53. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043455
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falch T. & Naper L. R. (2013). Educational evaluation schemes and gender gaps in student achievement. Economics of Education Review 36 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flore P. C. & Wicherts J. M. (2015). Does stereotype threat influence performance of girls in stereotyped domains? A meta-analysis. Journal of School Psychology 53(1) 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2014.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek E. A. Kain J. F. Markman J. M. & Rivkin S. G. (2003). Does peer ability affect student achievement? Journal of Applied Econometrics 18(5) 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek E. A. & Woessmann L. (2012). Do better schools lead to more growth? Cognitive skills economic outcomes and causation. Journal of Economic Growth 17(4) 267–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-012-9081-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay P. J. & Macdonald D. (2008). (Mis) appropriations of criteria and standards‐referenced assessment in a performance‐based subject. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy & Practice 15(2) 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940802164184
   Google Scholar
• Hinnerich B. T. Höglin E. & Johannesson M. (2011). Are boys discriminated in Swedish high schools? Economics of Education Review 30(4) 682–690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyde J. S. Lindberg S. M. Linn M. C. Ellis A. B. & Williams C. C. (2008). Diversity. Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science 321(5888) 494–495. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1160364
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jerrim J. Lopez-Agudo L. A. Marcenaro-Gutierrez O. D. & Shure N. (2017). What happens when econometrics and psychometrics collide? An example using the PISA data. Economics of Education Review 61 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalogrides D. & Loeb S. (2013). Different teachers different peers: The magnitude of student sorting within schools. Educational Researcher 42(6) 304–316. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13495087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiss D. (2018). How do ability peer effects operate? Evidence on one transmission channel. Education Economics 26(3) 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2017.1418840
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kricorian K. Seu M. Lopez D. Ureta E. & Equils O. (2020). Factors influencing participation of underrepresented students in STEM fields: Matched mentors and mindsets. International Journal of STEM Education 7(1) 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00219-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lauermann F. Meißner A. & Steinmayr R. (2020). Relative importance of intelligence and ability self-concept in predicting test performance and school grades in the math and language arts domains. Journal of Educational Psychology 112(2) 364. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laukaityte I. & Wiberg M. (2017). Using plausible values in secondary analysis in large-scale assessments. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods 46(22) 11341–11357. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2016.1267764
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavy V. (2008). Do gender stereotypes reduce girls’ or boys’ human capital outcomes? Evidence from a natural experiment. Journal of Public Economics 92(10–11) 2083–2105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavy V. Paserman M. D. & Schlosser A. (2012). Inside the black box of ability peer effects: Evidence from variation in the proportion of low achievers in the classroom. The Economic Journal 122(559) 208–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2011.02463.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavy V. & Sand E. (2018). On the origins of gender gaps in human capital: Short-and long-term consequences of teachers’ biases. Journal of Public Economics 167 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazear E. P. (2001). Educational production. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(3) 777–803. https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530152466232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lievore I. & Triventi M. (2022). Do teacher and classroom characteristics affect the way in which girls and boys are graded? A multilevel analysis of student–teacher matched data. British Journal of Sociology of Education 44(1) 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2022.2122942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindahl E. (2016). Are teacher assessments biased?–evidence from Sweden. Education Economics 24(2) 224–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2015.1014882
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Looney J. W. (2009) “Assessment and Innovation in Education” OECD Education Working Papers No. 24 OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/222814543073
   Google Scholar
• Malouff J. (2008). Bias in grading. College Teaching 56(3) 191–192. https://doi.org/10.3200/ctch.56.3.191-192
   Google Scholar
• Malouff J. M. Emmerton A. J. & Schutte N. S. (2013). The risk of a halo bias as a reason to keep students anonymous during grading. Teaching of Psychology 40(3) 233–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628313487425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malouff J. M. & Thorsteinsson E. B. (2016). Bias in grading: A meta-analysis of experimental research findings. Australian Journal of Education 60(3) 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116664618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcenaro-Gutierrez O. D. & Lopez-Agudo L. A. (2017). The influence of the gap between parental and their children’s expectations on children’s academic attainment. Child Indicators Research 10(1) 57‐80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-015-9361-z
   Google Scholar
• Marsh H. W. & Martin A. J. (2011). Academic self‐concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology 81(1) 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910X503501
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McConnell A. R. & Leibold J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test discriminatory behavior and explicit measures of racial attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 37(5) 435–442. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1470
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMillan J. H. (2001). Secondary teachers’ classroom assessment and grading practices. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice 20(1) 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2001.tb00055.x
   Google Scholar
• McNeish D. & Kelley K. (2018). Fixed effects models versus mixed effects models for clustered data: Reviewing the approaches disentangling the differences and making recommendations. Psychological Methods 24(1) 20. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000182
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mora T. & Oreopoulos P. (2011). Peer effects on high school aspirations: Evidence from a sample of close and not-so-close friends. Economics of Education Review 30(4) 575–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan C. & Watson A. (2002). The interpretative nature of teachers’ assessment of students’ mathematics: Issues for equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 78–110. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.33.2.0078
   Google Scholar
• Morris A. (2011) “Student Standardised Testing: Current Practices in OECD Countries and a Literature Review” OECD Education Working Papers No. 65 OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5kg3rp9qbnr6-en
   Google Scholar
• Mostafa T. (2019) “Why don’t more girls choose to pursue a science career?” PISA in Focus No. 93 OECD Publishing https://doi.org/10.1787/02bd2b68-en.
   Google Scholar
• Mullis I. V. S. Martin M. O. Foy P. Kelly D. L. & Fishbein B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 International Results in Mathematics and Science. Retrieved from Boston College TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website: https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/international-results/
   Google Scholar
• Murray J. (2009). The wider social benefits of higher education: What do we know about them? Australian Journal of Education 53(3) 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494410905300303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordlander E. & Stensöta H. O. (2014). Grades–for better or worse? the interplay of school performance and subjective well-being among boys and girls. Child Indicators Research 7(4) 861–879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-014-9233-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/51/43023606.pdf
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2015). The ABC of gender equality in education: Aptitude behaviour confidence. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264229945-en
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2018). Education policy outlook: Spain available at: www.oecd.org/education/policyoutlook.htm
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume II): Where all students can succeed. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b5fd1b8f-en
   Google Scholar
• Pekkarinen T. (2015). Gender differences in behaviour under competitive pressure: Evidence on omission patterns in university entrance examinations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 115 94–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieto-Latorre C. Marcenaro-Gutierrez O. D. & Vignoles A. (2021). School segregation in public and semiprivate primary schools in Andalusia. British Journal of Educational Studies 69(2) 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2020.1795078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rangvid B. S. (2015). Systematic differences across evaluation schemes and educational choice. Economics of Education Review 48 41–55. 10.1016/j.econedurev. 2015.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves D. J. Boyle W. F. & Christie T. (2001). The relationship between teacher assessments and pupil attainments in standard test tasks at Key Stage 2 1996–98. British Educational Research Journal 27(2) 141–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920120037108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riegle-Crumb C. & Humphries M. (2012). Exploring bias in math teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability by gender and race/ethnicity. Gender & Society 26(2) 290–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211434614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy A. Guay F. & Valois P. (2015). The big-fish–little-pond effect on academic self-concept: The moderating role of differentiated instruction and individual achievement. Learning and Individual Differences 42 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.07.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutkowski L. Rutkowski D. & Liaw Y. L. (2019). The existence and impact of floor effects for low-performing PISA participants. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy & Practice 26(6) 643–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1577219
   Google Scholar
• Schleicher A. (2019). PISA 2018: Insights and Interpretations. OECD Publishing available at https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20 Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schmader T. (2002). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38(2) 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1500
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider M. & Preckel F. (2017). Variables associated with achievement in higher education: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin 143(6) 565. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000098
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer S. J. Steele C. M. & Quinn D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35(1) 4–28. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinath B. Eckert C. & Steinmayr R. (2014). Gender differences in school success: What are the roles of students’ intelligence personality and motivation? Educational Research 56(2) 230–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2014.898917
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terrier C. (2020). Boys lag behind: How teachers’ gender biases affect student achievement. Economics of Education Review 77 101981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2020.101981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Bavel J. Schwartz C. R. & Esteve A. (2018). The reversal of the gender gap in education and its consequences for family life. Annual Review of Sociology 44(1) 341–360. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041215
   Google Scholar
• Van Houtte M. (2004). Why boys achieve less at school than girls: The difference between boys’ and girls’ academic culture. Educational Studies 30(2) 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569032000159804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vardardottir A. (2013). Peer effects and academic achievement: A regression discontinuity approach. Economics of Education Review 36 108–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.06.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voyer, D., & Voyer, S. D. (2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: a meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 1174. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036620
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warrington M. Younger M. & Williams J. (2000). Student attitudes image and the gender gap. British Educational Research Journal 26(3) 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920050030914
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wentzel K. R. Battle A. Russell S. L. & Looney L. B. (2010). Social supports from teachers and peers as predictors of academic and social motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology 35(3) 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willingham W. W. Pollack J. M. & Lewis C. (2002). Grades and test scores: Accounting for observed differences. Journal of Educational Measurement 39(1) 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2002.tb01133.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu M. (2005). The role of plausible values in large-scale surveys. Studies in Educational Evaluation 31(2–3) 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.05.005
   Google Scholar
• Wu M. (2010). Measurement sampling and equating errors in large‐scale assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice 29(4) 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2010.00190.x
   Google Scholar
• Zamarro G. (2021). Motivación académica habilidades no cognitivas y brecha de género en matemáticas y en ciencias. El caso de España. Fundación Ramón Areces. https://www.fundacionareces.es/recursos/doc/portal/2018/03/20/monografia-gema-zamarro-web.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zullig K. J. Koopman T. M. Patton J. M. & Ubbes V. A. (2010). School Climate: Historical Review Instrument Development and School Assessment. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 28(2) 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282909344205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar