Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Oct 26.
Published in final edited form as: AJS. 2008 May;113(6):1645–1696. doi: 10.1086/587153

TABLE 2.

Effect of Social Contexts on Advancement in Math between the 1994–95 and 1995–96 School Years, by Gender

Girlsa
Boysb
Independent Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
Human capital:
 College aspirations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .262**
(.091)
.257**
(.097)
.332***
(.069)
.330***
(.075)
 Parents’ disappointment over no
  college . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
−.312***
(.094)
−.314**
(.096)
−.240*
(.113)
−.251*
(.120)
 Own level of math in 1994–95 . . . . −.315***
(.056)
−.406***
(.058)
−.198***
(.059)
−.251***
(.066)
Peer mean levels of math (1994–95):
 Friends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .035
(.023)
.032
(.024)
.028
(.038)
.031
(.037)
 Coursemates—girls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . −.001
(.060)
−.011
(.067)
 Coursemates—boys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133
(.109)
.074
(.113)
 Local position—girls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .245***
(.074)
.243**
(.077)
 Local position—girls × own level
  of math in 1994–95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
−.135***
(.031)
 Local position—boys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .019
(.109)
−.007
(.115)
 Local position—boys × own level
  of math in 1994–95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
−.077*
(.031)
 School—girls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .393*
(.198)
.455*
(.201)
 School—girls × own level
  of math in 1994–95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
−.105*
(.046)
 School—boys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .201
(.206)
.346
(.230)
 School—boys × own level of
  math in 1994–95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
−.159***
(.046)
Prior educational experiences:
 Ever been retained . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . −.527**
(.164)
−.513**
(.171)
−1.124***
(.261)
−1.138***
(.267)
 Math grades for 1994–95 . . . . . . . . . . . .843***
(.089)
.871***
(.090)
.868***
(.081)
.911***
(.086)
 Grade level in fall 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . −.493**
(.156)
−.342*
(.162)
−.242
(.207)
−.096
(.222)
Background:
 Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . −.109
(.317)
−.134
(.366)
−.313
(.278)
−.376
(.282)
 Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . −.138
(.233)
−.163
(.234)
.073
(.297)
.025
(.303)
 Parent had some college . . . . . . . . . . . . −.138
(.172)
−.113
(.187)
−.171
(.218)
−.167
(.222)
Intercept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.565***
(.156)
1.763***
(.161)
1.460***
(.168)
1.658***
(.179)

Notes.—Models use multiple imputationto account formissing data. Numbers in parentheses are standard errors.

a

N = 1,973.

b

N = 1,533.

*

P ≤ .05.

**

P ≤ .01.

***

P ≤ .001.