How Schools Affect Student Well-Being: A Cross-Cultural Approach in 35 OECD Countries
Metadatos
Afficher la notice complèteEditorial
Frontiers Media SA
Materia
Well-being School effectiveness PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) Science Hierarchical linear model
Date
2020-03-25Referencia bibliográfica
Govorova E, Benítez I and Muñiz J (2020) How Schools Affect Student Well-Being: A Cross-Cultural Approach in 35 OECD Countries. Front. Psychol. 11:431. [doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00431]
Patrocinador
Spain Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities PSI2017-85724-P; 2E Estudios, Evaluaciones e Investigacion, S.LRésumé
A common approach for measuring the effectiveness of an education system or a school
is the estimation of the impact that school interventions have on students’ academic
performance. However, the latest trends aim to extend the focus beyond students’
acquisition of knowledge and skills, and to consider aspects such as well-being in the
academic context. For this reason, the 2015 edition of the international assessment
system Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) incorporated a new tool
aimed at evaluating the socio-emotional variables related to the well-being of students. It
is based on a definition focused on the five dimensions proposed in the PISA theoretical
framework: cognitive, psychological, social, physical, and material. The main purpose
of this study is to identify the well-being components that significantly affect student
academic performance and to estimate the magnitude of school effects on the wellbeing
of students in OECD countries, the school effect being understood as the ability of
schools to increase subjective student well-being. To achieve this goal, we analyzed the
responses of 248,620 students from 35 OECD countries to PISA 2015 questionnaires.
Specifically, we considered non-cognitive variables in the questionnaires and student
performance in science. The results indicated that the cognitive well-being dimension,
composed of enjoyment of science, self-efficacy, and instrumental motivation, as well as
test anxiety all had a consistent relationship with student performance across countries.
In addition, the school effect, estimated through a two-level hierarchical linear model, in
terms of student well-being was systematically low. While the school effect accounted
for approximately 25% of the variance in the results for the cognitive dimension, only
5–9% of variance in well-being indicators was attributable to it. This suggests that the
influence of school on student welfare is weak, and the effect is similar across countries.
The present study contributes to the general discussion currently underway about the
definition of well-being and the connection between well-being and achievement. The
results highlighted two complementary concerns: there is a clear need to promote socioemotional
education in schools, and it is important to develop a rigorous framework for
well-being assessment. The implications of the results and proposals for future studies
are discussed.