OLS Regression Coefficients and SEs of SES
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
OLS Regression Coefficients and SEs of SES
The Association Between Music and Achievement
Music indeed appears to matter. Tables 3 and 4 report regression esti- mates of math and reading achievement for
childhood and adolescent sam- ples. The first equation, our baseline model, introduces measures of family SES and
structure, race and gender, and controls for educational items and prior achievement (eighth grade for adolescents;
kindergarten for children).
TABLE 3
OLS Regression Coefficients and SEs of SES, Family Structure, Race, Gender, Music Involvement, Cultural Capital, and
Prior Achievement on Mathematic
IRT Scores for Children (C) and Adolescents (A)
Model 1 Model 2
C A C A
SES 1.02 n n n 5.24 n n n 0.99 n n n 5.05 n n n
(0.13) (0.15) (0.13) (0.15) Single parent �0.33 �1.60 n n n �0.31 �1.46 n n n
(0.24) (0.23) (0.24) (0.24) Neither parent �1.13 n n �2.90 n n n �1.15 n �2.73 n n n
(0.51) (0.75) (0.50) (0.83) Number of siblings �0.02 �0.25 n n n �0.02 �0.15 n
(0.08) (0.07) (0.08) (0.07) Black �0.18 �2.06 n n n �0.21 �2.02 n n n
(0.31) (0.37) (0.31) (0.39) Hispanic �0.88 n n �0.55 �0.92 n n �0.46
(0.30) (0.35) (0.30) (0.37) Asian �0.23 0.11 �0.27 0.15
(0.65) (0.43) (0.65) (0.44) Female �0.13 �1.00 n n n �0.16 �01.30 n n n
(0.17) (0.21) (0.17) (0.22) Music in school — — 1.82 n n n 0.35
(0.44) (0.22) Music outside school — — �0.47 0.44
(0.29) (0.26) Parents attend concerts — — 0.35 n �0.05
(0.18) (0.24) Amount of music coursework — — — 0.50 n n n
(0.07) More than 50 books 0.89 n n n 2.00 n n n 0.83 n n n 1.83 n n n
(0.19) (0.36) (0.21) (0.38) Prior achievement 0.73 n n n 0.06 n n n 0.73 n n n 0.05 n n n
(0.01) (0.01) (0.01) Constant 22.94 48.49 21.19 48.64
(0.40) (0.73) (0.57) (0.76) R
2 0.60 0.23 0.60 0.23
npo0.05; n npo0.01; n n npo0.001, two-tailed test.
The Impact of Music on Childhood and Adolescent Achievement 15
All background indicators act as one would expect, and in statistically sig- nificant ways, for both reading and math.
Notable is the strong effect of SES even with controls from prior achievement. It is clearly the case that SES, and the advantages/disadvantages it affords, is not purely influential by shaping baseline achievement levels; rather, its impact
persists into the schooling years.
TABLE 4
OLS Regression Coefficients and SEs of SES, Family Structure, Race, Gender, Music Involvement, Cultural Capital, and Prior Achievement on Reading
IRT Scores for Children (C) and Adolescents (A)
Model 1 Model 2
C A C A
SES 1.56 n n n 4.20 n n n 1.56 n n n 4.19 n n n
(0.20) (0.15) (0.20) (0.16) Single parent �0.76 n �0.54 n �0.73 n �0.68 n n
(0.36) (0.24) (0.38) (0.25) Neither parent �2.48 n n �2.75 n n n �2.48 n n �2.38 n n
(0.78) (0.78) (0.78) (0.86) Number of siblings �0.31 n n �0.19 n n �0.33 n n �0.14 n
(0.12) (0.07) (0.12) (0.07) Black �1.33 n n �1.34 n n n �1.32 n n �1.37 n n n
(0.47) (0.38) (0.47) (0.40) Hispanic �0.39 �0.18 �0.43 0.17
(0.48) (0.36) (0.48) (0.38) Asian 1.97 n �0.30 1.87 �0.25
(0.95) (0.44) (0.95) (0.45) Female 1.02 n n n 2.38 n n n 1.01 n n n 2.30 n n n
(0.24) (0.21) (0.26) (0.22) Music in school — — 2.12 n n 0.70 n n
(0.68) (0.23) Music outside school — — �0.44 0.62 n n
(0.44) (0.27) Parents attend concerts — — 0.10 �0.02
(0.27) (0.24) Amount of music coursework — — — 0.44 n n n
(0.08) More than 50 books 1.20 n n n 2.12 n n n 1.16 n n n 1.75 n n n
(0.32) (0.37) (0.33) (0.39) Prior achievement 0.86 n n 0.04 n n n 0.86 n n n 0.03 n n
(0.01) (0.01) (0.01) Constant 27.23 46.61 51.01 46.80
(0.57) (0.75) (0.89) (0.78) R
2 0.57 0.16 0.58 0.16
npo0.05; n npo0.01; n n npo0.001, two-tailed test.
16 Social Science Quarterly
African-American students remain disadvantaged in terms of both math and reading achievement in these models, while the disadvantage for His- panic students only exists for childhood math. Asian adolescents do not differ significantly from white adolescents with prior achievement included in the models. Among younger Asian children, however, we find an ad- vantage in reading. Females generally exhibit lower math achievement than do their male
counterparts, but significantly higher reading achievement. As expected, household educational items have a positive
effect for both age groups and for both achievement outcomes.
Equation (2) introduces our indicators of music involvement. For reading achievement, music involvement within school
positively predicts achieve- ment for both adolescent and small children. It may be the case that there is generally
greater variation in reading ability among small children, and that active involvement of children in music contributes in
some way to the garnering of early reading skills. Music participation outside of school is positively associated with
reading achievement for adolescents. This effect remains even when in-school music is controlled. However, parental music involvement is not significantly associated with reading achievement. Even more notable is that these effects
emerge even when other household educational items and especially prior achievement are accounted for. Math
performance is associated with music participation in school and parental attendance at concerts for young children,
and a robust effect unfolds when music participation has occurred recently in adolescents.
The results thus far suggest unique and robust associations between achievement and music—effects that are not
strictly tied to very early cog- nitive development but that, rather, take place during the early and later schooling years. All
three forms of music involvement matter for adolescents and this holds true for reading and less so math achievement.
For small children, the clear benefit of music involvement on math achievement is found in school and parental music
participation, but not in outside of school participation. For reading, music in school translates into higher overall
reading achievement. Again, we would stress that younger children are nearly universally placed in music classes
whereas adolescents choose to participate and few families choose music lessons outside of school for young children.
Does music involvement add to our understanding of academic achieve- ment? The answer is both yes and no. On the
one hand, music clearly matters for achievement in statistically meaningful ways as denoted in the findings just
presented. The reader will note, however, that the overall vari- ance explained changes little across equations as music
indicators are added. This suggests to us that music is meaningful not as a predictor of achieve- ment in and of itself,
but rather as a mediator, to some degree, of family background and student status, thus supporting arguments and
theorizing pertaining to cultural capital. Music, for example, might influence dispo- sition or habits of mind. Our earlier
modeling in Table 2 established the
The Impact of Music on Childhood and Adolescent Achievement 17
ways music involvement varies systematically as a function of social class, race/ethnicity, and, to a lesser extent,
gender. Those patterns, combined with changes in coefficient magnitudes for SES, race/ethnicity, and gender across
equations of Tables 3 and 4, strongly support this possibility, as do sup- plemental analyses that, due to space
constrains, are not reported in the tables. Comparing the coefficients for SES across Equations (1) and (2), without the
interaction terms, we see a decline of approximately 3 percent for math, less so for reading. Similar, albeit small,
declines can be seen for measures of race/ethnicity and gender.
Conclusion
Prior research has attempted to measure the impact of music involvement on student achievement. Limitations in
research designs, however, have left many questions unanswered. In this article, we have attempted to overcome some
prior limitations by examining three dimensions of music involvement and variations by student status, by controlling for prior achievement, thus isolating potential effects, and by comparing such effects across unique samples of small
children and adolescents. Only a randomized design experimental study can capture causality; yet our analyses
demonstrate in a relatively rigorous fashion a robust relationship between music participation and achievement—a
relationship that emerges particularly when music participation is conceptualized and measured broadly. Most children
are probably involved in classical music and we do not have measures of countercultural or pop music nor do we know
how many students are in bands outside school. We would expect to see more robust findings if participation could be
more precisely calibrated.
Notably, we found evidence of social class variation in within-school music involvement in adolescents but not in early
childhood. The effects of class on parental music involvement were strong and consistent for both samples. We believe
that this pattern is at least partially a function of resource inequalities, which, if anything, only exacerbate social class
differ- ences in how children’s leisure time is structured (Lareau, 2003). As a mediator of educational outcomes, music
involvement holds significance for both math and reading achievement. Music participation generally increases achievement levels, although gains are not distributed equally among all students. A white student advantage exists in
music involvement during early childhood and the high school years. As noted above, there is certainly a social class
bias in these processes.
Admittedly, our data and analyses are limited in their ability to measure and capture the quality and duration of children’s
and adolescents’ partic- ipation. Although our study captured the influence of music involvement and different types of
involvement in a manner unique to the literature, future data-collection efforts and analyses should consider quality and
du-
18 Social Science Quarterly
ration. Moreover, to gauge the relevant microinteractional processes that are involved would arguably require more in-
depth, perhaps case-specific, analyses of what music participation means for families and social groups of varying
statuses. Music involvement is a form of cultural capital that seems to provide cognitive and social tools that help students successfully navigate the educational terrain. Clearly, more work on this topic is warranted. Our analyses are
but an important starting point.
OLS Regression Coefficients and SEs of SES
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow