-
Title
-
Shadow Education
-
Author
-
Byun, Soo‐Yong
-
Baker, David P.
-
Research Area
-
Social Institutions
-
Topic
-
Educational Institutions
-
Abstract
-
Over the past few decades shadow education has expanded worldwide and become a multi‐billion dollar global service‐industry offering many different and costly tutoring services from after‐school classes to a host of on‐line options. While much remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide expansion of shadow education is now a substantial topic in the sociology of education. This essay briefly describes the foundational research on shadow education; outlines the cutting‐edge research on shadow education effects; and discusses key issues for future research. This essay concludes that shadow education becomes more normative to the point of being a partner institution to formal education itself and as an educational phenomenon it will continue to be a topic of study and policy analysis.
-
Related Essays
-
Learning Across the Life Course (Sociology), Jutta Allmendinger and Marcel Helbig
-
Economics of Early Education (Economics), W. Steven Barnett
-
Returns to Education in Different Labor Market Contexts (Sociology), Klaus Schöemann and Rolf Becker
-
Enduring Effects of Education (Sociology), Matthew Curry and Jennie E. Brand
-
Social Class and Parental Investment in Children (Sociology), Anne H. Gauthier
-
Evaluating and Rewarding Teachers (Educ), Cassandra Hart
-
Educational Testing: Measuring and Remedying Achievement Gaps (Educ), Jaekyung Lee
-
Gender Inequality in Educational Attainment (Sociology), Anne McDaniel and Claudia Buchmann
-
Rationalization of Higher Education (Sociology), Tressie McMillan Cottom and Gaye Tuchman
-
Education in an Open Informational World (Educ), Marlene Scardamalia and Carl Bereiter
-
Higher Education: A Field in Ferment (Sociology), W. Richard Scott
-
Impact of Limited Education on Employment Prospects in Advanced Economies (Sociology), Heike Solga
-
Institutional Contexts for Socioeconomic Effects on Schooling Outcomes (Sociology), Herman G. van de Werfhorst
-
Identifier
-
etrds0301
-
extracted text
-
Shadow Education
SOO-YONG BYUN and DAVID P. BAKER
Abstract
Over the past few decades shadow education has expanded worldwide and become
a multi-billion dollar global service-industry offering many different and costly
tutoring services from after-school classes to a host of on-line options. While much
remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide
expansion of shadow education is now a substantial topic in the sociology of education. This essay briefly describes the foundational research on shadow education;
outlines the cutting-edge research on shadow education effects; and discusses key
issues for future research. This essay concludes that shadow education becomes
more normative to the point of being a partner institution to formal education itself
and as an educational phenomenon it will continue to be a topic of study and policy
analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Shadow education—private supplementary tutoring or coaching aimed to
provide additional help to students outside of school mainly to prepare for
examinations—has long been practiced as individual tutoring on an informal
basis especially in many East Asian societies including Hong Kong, Taiwan,
Japan, and South Korea. In just a few decades, however, it has expanded
worldwide and become a multi-billion dollar global service industry offering
many different and costly tutoring services from after-school classes to a host
of online options. While much remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide expansion of shadow education is now a
substantial topic in the sociology of education and routinely causes concern
among educational policymakers owing largely to its implication for educational quality and equality. This is because shadow education, a privately
purchased service, covers subjects taught in the mainstream education and
thus is a potential source of educational advantage gained through private
funds of families. Further, some educators consider shadow education to be a
corruption of the education process itself, as for example when students who
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
participate in shadow education tend to pay less attention in the classroom.
Ironically, despite a growing body of research, it is still unclear whether and
how shadow education affects the mainstream education and educational
outcomes. Yet, if shadow education does indeed make a difference in educational outcomes, many educators and sociologists believe that these practices
could contribute to maintaining or exacerbating educational inequality by
mediating the relationship between family background and children’s educational outcomes. As an educational phenomenon, shadow education will
continue to be a topic of study and policy analysis.
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
DEFINITION
In an early study of educational stratification in Japanese society, Stevenson and Baker (1992) coined the sociological and educational term shadow
education in the early 1990s to denote the strong connection between the mainstream education system and widespread out-of-school learning activities.
Later Mark Bray brought this term to the attention of educational policymakers by documenting the growth in shadow education worldwide, and
in the process developed a detailed, and now standard, definition of which
learning activities can be considered shadow education:
Supplement. Shadow education is supplementary in nature because it
addresses subjects already covered in school.
Market. Shadow education is provided in exchange for a fee as opposed to
unpaid tutoring provided by families or community members or extra
tutoring provided by school teachers as part of their professional commitments and responsibilities.
Academic. Shadow education covers academic subjects including languages mathematics and other examinable subjects but excludes
musical artistic or sporting skills that are learned primarily for pleasure
and/or for a more rounded form of personal development.
PREVALENCE AND DETERMINANTS
While research on shadow education documents the worldwide growth
of shadow education in national systems of education, there remains
cross-national variation in the extent to which families purchase shadow
education. Several scholars have speculated on conditions under which
extensive shadow education can be observed. First, many attribute extensive
shadow education to such conditions as the use of high-stakes examinations
and the tight linkage between the educational outcomes in early adulthood
Shadow Education
3
and future occupations or general social status. However, this explanation of
the origin of shadow education is not fully supported by empirical evidence
because research indicates that the use of the high-stakes examinations is not
significantly associated with the degree of student participation in shadow
education.
Other researchers suggest that a nation’s quality of public education affects
the prevalence shadow education. For example, if parents and their children
are dissatisfied with the mainstream education because of poor quality of
instruction and teachers, they may rely on shadow education to supplement
low-quality instructions. In addition, teachers’ low salaries and low morale
may combine to lead teachers to be involved in shadow education by
becoming teachers in shadow education institutes. Some research found
evidence supporting this theoretical explanation emphasizing the role of the
quality of the mainstream in the causes of shadow education by showing that
lower public educational expenditures are associated with more extensive
shadow education. However, this theoretical model neither receives strong
empirical support nor helps explain why shadow education is expanded
worldwide.
Finally, other scholars observe that shadow education is spreading worldwide because it is now part of an extensive culture of formal education.
The worldwide use of shadow education is motivated by the dominant
logic of educational expansion in all its forms. As considerable participation in formal education and academic success is a taken-for-granted
and dominant part of social and occupational status attainment, shadow
education becomes more prevalent as an accepted and expected cultural
aspect of education, now practiced even up through higher education.
Yet, given that shadow education is not fully prevalence in all national
mass education systems, how far significant institutionalization of these
activities will continue into the future is an open question. Understanding
the origins and future path of shadow education is an issue ripe for new
research.
THE IMPACT OF SHADOW EDUCATION
Another key scientific and policy question regarding shadow education is
whether these activities actually improve educational outcomes, and if significant variation in costs of different services also corresponds to increased
advantage. Overwhelmingly parents, students, and providers of shadow
education strongly believe both to be the case, but until recently, there has
been little systematic evidence. While much current research is focusing
on the educational effects of shadow education, so far reported results
are contradictory, as some studies find strong positive effects, whereas
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
other find only modest and even trivial effects. Furthermore, a few studies
report an adverse effect of shadow education on academic achievement.
In addition, there is virtually no evidence on whether more costly services
are more effective. This mixed evidence has been attributed to various
factors including the broad divergence in the operational definitions of
shadow education variables, the choice of dependent variables, and the type
of statistical models employed, but to date, there is not a clear definitive
conclusions about the effects of shadow education on educational outcomes,
and much remains to be investigated. In addition, there is not much evidence
of even an association between high national use of shadow education and
national means on international tests.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
A major limitation on determining the exact nature and magnitude of the
effect of shadow education on outcomes is a lack of experimental design
or statistical methodologies that closely approximate such a design. As
with the evaluation of other on-going educational activities, selection
effects—non-random assignment to treatment, or in this case who uses
shadow education—have not yet been adequately addressed. For example,
a growing body of literature in a wide range of societies consistently
documents that students from higher socioeconomic status (SES) families
are more likely than those from lower SES families to use shadow education.
These and other preexisting differences between students who use shadow
education and students who do not can produce selection effects that make it
difficult to identify a causal link between shadow education and educational
outcomes. The inclusion of control variables in regression analyses is the
most common approach to reducing selection bias, but this is often not very
effective.
Recent cutting-edge research on shadow education, however, use more
sophisticated and rigorous models to estimate the causal effect of shadow
education, including instrument variables and propensity scores matching,
which are more appropriate to draw a causal inference than the traditional
regression analyses. The few studies that used innovative methods to
address these selection issues suggest that shadow education have some
positive effects on academic achievement. In addition, this more recent
research on has begun to examine heterogeneity in the effects of shadow
education across the main different forms these activities take. Shadow
education services come in many forms (e.g., one-on-one academic tutoring,
cram schools, correspondence courses, and Internet tutoring services), yet
almost all studies so far have focused only on the effects of participation
versus nonparticipation in shadow education, lumping together all kinds
Shadow Education
5
often without even a measure of the amount of services purchased. This
misses, for example, possible consequences of the fact that some students
receive shadow education in a face-to-face (one-to-one or one-to-group)
mode or in large classes (cram school), whereas other students rely on
correspondence courses via mails or, increasingly, via the Internet. With
such variety in shadow education services, it is reasonable to expect
that effectiveness may vary, depending on the type and amount used.
Moreover indeed, emerging research that examined differential effects of
shadow education suggests that preparatory cram school made a small
difference in achievement gains in math, whereas individual tutoring,
correspondence courses, and on-line tutoring services made little difference.
Together, the findings from cutting-edge research in this area increasingly
help us better understand nuanced differences in the effects of shadow
education.
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
The education establishment in many part of the world is just beginning
to appreciate shadow education as an important dimension of the modern
schooling process. Although shadow education issues have been widely
investigated in recent years, its origin, factors increasing demand, and
possible influences on students’ future education and their educational
systems are not fully known. In fact, except for in a few nations with a
long history of political issues about shadow education (e.g. South Korea
and Japan), only recently have these educational services drawn increased
research and policy attention across many nations and multilateral education
agencies. Only now are we beginning to understand shadow education as
an important dimension of parental involvement and as a modern schooling
process. More research is needed to produce systematic knowledge about
the various ways in which shadow education might influence educational
outcomes and educational processes.
Furthermore, future research on shadow education should look at the possible impact that shadow education has on the operations and policy formation
in national systems of public education. As some national education systems
embrace shadow education as a normative part of the education system,
we do not know much about the potential impact that these services will
have on other policy issues. For example, in the United States, supplementary tutoring services are provided to children in schools that failed to meet
a minimum level of progress as part of the No Child Left Behind. Another
example is that the government of South Korea, which once had banned all
types of shadow education, now innovatively provides free lectures aimed
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
at tutoring for in-school tests via the nation’s Educational Broadcasting System. These recent examples of the transformation and institutionalization of
shadow education into customized learning services within mainstream education systems are but a few research avenues open to understanding the
dynamic nature of shadow education and its evolving relationship to formal
education.
Future shadow education research will require higher-quality data and
greater methodological rigor to produce the kinds of findings that can
inform educational policy. This is because, as noted, shadow education
varies not only in modes but also in quality, duration, and intensity. Studies
of shadow education effects will also need to use longitudinal data and
rigorous methods to address the selection effects issue. Experimental design,
for example, where a group of students are randomly assigned to a particular
type of shadow education or a control group, is the best methodology to
determine whether there is a causal link between shadow education and
educational outcomes.
It is clear from the current documentation of its use and prevalence that
these educational services are growing worldwide. Perhaps, it is most
insightful to consider the phenomenon of growing shadow education from
the perspective of formal education as a social institution that can influence
significant portions of modern culture. As formal education has expanded
and become more central in postindustrial society, occupations and adult
social status are created anew, along with emerging privileged qualities
of knowledge, expanded concept of human development and capacities,
new approaches to work, more types of experts and elaborated educated
social statuses, and even a new concept of society itself. Not only are people
trained and credentialed through schooling, they also are thought to have
enhanced cognitive skills that are essential to their overall functioning.
These educated individuals are placed into a society that is itself changed by
the ideas of what enhanced cognitive skills and widespread education can
do for all aspects of society. This educational revolution has brought about a
robust culture of education.
Therefore, the practice of shadow education spreads worldwide because of
the power of the culture of education. Shadow education is not as just a narrow supplement to learning or as only a form of family-financed educational
opportunity. Instead, there is a symbiotic relationship between the robust culture of education and shadow education; as the former intensifies, the logic
of the later expands and heads toward a universal practice. Shadow education goes along with the expansion of formal education to younger children
and longer into adulthood in many nations. This institutional development
of shadow education and it potential to change formal education is perhaps
the most pressing key issue for future research.
Shadow Education
7
SUMMARY
Shadow education is developed into a robust social institution along with
the institutional development of education in general. It may continue to
create educational inequalities and undermine some formal schooling processes, but it is unlikely to be banned or fall into disuse as its connection to the
main social institution of formal education has become too strong. The best
prediction is that shadow education will continue to move along with education expansion, and in the process transform the later as well. Most shadow
education is private business, so market forces assist in its spread, but the
businesses do this along the same institutional logic of mass education. These
services are now publically recognized and discussed, and the companies
continue to expand services for larger arrays of clients’ educational needs. All
the while though, shadow education becomes more normative to the point
of being a partner institution to formal education itself.
FURTHER READING
Baker, D. P., Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Wiseman, A. W. (2001). Worldwide
shadow education: Outside-school learning, institutional quality of schooling, and
cross-national mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 1–17.
Baker, D. P., & LeTendre, G. K. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World
culture and the future of schooling. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Baker, D. P., & Mori, I. (2010). The origin of universal shadow education: What the
supplemental education phenomenon tells us about the postmodern institution of
education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11, 36.
Bray, M. (1999). The shadow education system: Private tutoring and its implications
for planners. Fundamentals of Educational Planning No.61, Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0018/001802/180205e.pdf. Retrieved on November 12, 2012.
Bray, M. (2009). Confronting the shadow education system: What government policies for
what private tutoring? Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning.
Buchmann, C., Condron, D., & Roscigno, V. (2010). Shadow education, American
style: Test preparation, the SAT, and college enrollment. Social Forces, 89, 435–461.
Byun, S., & Park, H. (2012). The academic success of East Asian American youth: The
role of shadow education. Sociology of Education, 85, 40–60.
Kuan, P. (2011). Effects of cram schooling on mathematics performance: Evidence
from junior high students in Taiwan. Comparative Education Review, 55(3), 342–368.
Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1992). Shadow education and allocation in formal schooling: Transition to university in Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 97,
1639–1657.
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
USEFUL LINK
http://www.fe.hku.hk/cerc/SIG/SE-SIG.htm.
SOO-YONG BYUN SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Soo-yong Byun is Assistant Professor of Educational Theory and Policy and
Research Affiliate in the Population Research Institution at the Pennsylvania
State University. His interests are cross-national research on education, sociology of education, social stratification, and educational policy analysis. His
research has appeared in Sociology of Education, American Educational Research
Journal, and Review of Higher Education.
Soo-yong Byun’s web site: https://sites.google.com/site/
sooyongbyunshomepage/
Soo-yong Byun’s curriculum vitae: http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/
faculty-cvs/szb14.pdf.
DAVID P. BAKER SHORT BIOGRAPHY
David P. Baker is Professor of Education and Sociology, and is a research
scientist at the Center for the Study of Higher Education and the Population Research Institute at the Pennsylvania State University, where he
directs a research program on the worldwide education revolution’s impact
on global development and postindustrial society. David Baker’s website:
http://davidbakerresearchproject.wordpress.com/. David Baker’s curriculum vitae: http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/faculty-cvs/dpb4.pdf
RELATED ESSAYS
Learning Across the Life Course (Sociology), Jutta Allmendinger and Marcel
Helbig
Economics of Early Education (Economics), W. Steven Barnett
Returns to Education in Different Labor Market Contexts (Sociology), Klaus
Schöemann and Rolf Becker
Enduring Effects of Education (Sociology), Matthew Curry and Jennie E.
Brand
Social Class and Parental Investment in Children (Sociology), Anne H.
Gauthier
Evaluating and Rewarding Teachers (Educ), Cassandra Hart
Educational Testing: Measuring and Remedying Achievement Gaps (Educ),
Jaekyung Lee
Shadow Education
9
Gender Inequality in Educational Attainment (Sociology), Anne McDaniel
and Claudia Buchmann
Rationalization of Higher Education (Sociology), Tressie McMillan Cottom
and Gaye Tuchman
Education in an Open Informational World (Educ), Marlene Scardamalia
and Carl Bereiter
Higher Education: A Field in Ferment (Sociology), W. Richard Scott
Impact of Limited Education on Employment Prospects in Advanced
Economies (Sociology), Heike Solga
Institutional Contexts for Socioeconomic Effects on Schooling Outcomes
(Sociology), Herman G. van de Werfhorst
-
Shadow Education
SOO-YONG BYUN and DAVID P. BAKER
Abstract
Over the past few decades shadow education has expanded worldwide and become
a multi-billion dollar global service-industry offering many different and costly
tutoring services from after-school classes to a host of on-line options. While much
remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide
expansion of shadow education is now a substantial topic in the sociology of education. This essay briefly describes the foundational research on shadow education;
outlines the cutting-edge research on shadow education effects; and discusses key
issues for future research. This essay concludes that shadow education becomes
more normative to the point of being a partner institution to formal education itself
and as an educational phenomenon it will continue to be a topic of study and policy
analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Shadow education—private supplementary tutoring or coaching aimed to
provide additional help to students outside of school mainly to prepare for
examinations—has long been practiced as individual tutoring on an informal
basis especially in many East Asian societies including Hong Kong, Taiwan,
Japan, and South Korea. In just a few decades, however, it has expanded
worldwide and become a multi-billion dollar global service industry offering
many different and costly tutoring services from after-school classes to a host
of online options. While much remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide expansion of shadow education is now a
substantial topic in the sociology of education and routinely causes concern
among educational policymakers owing largely to its implication for educational quality and equality. This is because shadow education, a privately
purchased service, covers subjects taught in the mainstream education and
thus is a potential source of educational advantage gained through private
funds of families. Further, some educators consider shadow education to be a
corruption of the education process itself, as for example when students who
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
participate in shadow education tend to pay less attention in the classroom.
Ironically, despite a growing body of research, it is still unclear whether and
how shadow education affects the mainstream education and educational
outcomes. Yet, if shadow education does indeed make a difference in educational outcomes, many educators and sociologists believe that these practices
could contribute to maintaining or exacerbating educational inequality by
mediating the relationship between family background and children’s educational outcomes. As an educational phenomenon, shadow education will
continue to be a topic of study and policy analysis.
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
DEFINITION
In an early study of educational stratification in Japanese society, Stevenson and Baker (1992) coined the sociological and educational term shadow
education in the early 1990s to denote the strong connection between the mainstream education system and widespread out-of-school learning activities.
Later Mark Bray brought this term to the attention of educational policymakers by documenting the growth in shadow education worldwide, and
in the process developed a detailed, and now standard, definition of which
learning activities can be considered shadow education:
Supplement. Shadow education is supplementary in nature because it
addresses subjects already covered in school.
Market. Shadow education is provided in exchange for a fee as opposed to
unpaid tutoring provided by families or community members or extra
tutoring provided by school teachers as part of their professional commitments and responsibilities.
Academic. Shadow education covers academic subjects including languages mathematics and other examinable subjects but excludes
musical artistic or sporting skills that are learned primarily for pleasure
and/or for a more rounded form of personal development.
PREVALENCE AND DETERMINANTS
While research on shadow education documents the worldwide growth
of shadow education in national systems of education, there remains
cross-national variation in the extent to which families purchase shadow
education. Several scholars have speculated on conditions under which
extensive shadow education can be observed. First, many attribute extensive
shadow education to such conditions as the use of high-stakes examinations
and the tight linkage between the educational outcomes in early adulthood
Shadow Education
3
and future occupations or general social status. However, this explanation of
the origin of shadow education is not fully supported by empirical evidence
because research indicates that the use of the high-stakes examinations is not
significantly associated with the degree of student participation in shadow
education.
Other researchers suggest that a nation’s quality of public education affects
the prevalence shadow education. For example, if parents and their children
are dissatisfied with the mainstream education because of poor quality of
instruction and teachers, they may rely on shadow education to supplement
low-quality instructions. In addition, teachers’ low salaries and low morale
may combine to lead teachers to be involved in shadow education by
becoming teachers in shadow education institutes. Some research found
evidence supporting this theoretical explanation emphasizing the role of the
quality of the mainstream in the causes of shadow education by showing that
lower public educational expenditures are associated with more extensive
shadow education. However, this theoretical model neither receives strong
empirical support nor helps explain why shadow education is expanded
worldwide.
Finally, other scholars observe that shadow education is spreading worldwide because it is now part of an extensive culture of formal education.
The worldwide use of shadow education is motivated by the dominant
logic of educational expansion in all its forms. As considerable participation in formal education and academic success is a taken-for-granted
and dominant part of social and occupational status attainment, shadow
education becomes more prevalent as an accepted and expected cultural
aspect of education, now practiced even up through higher education.
Yet, given that shadow education is not fully prevalence in all national
mass education systems, how far significant institutionalization of these
activities will continue into the future is an open question. Understanding
the origins and future path of shadow education is an issue ripe for new
research.
THE IMPACT OF SHADOW EDUCATION
Another key scientific and policy question regarding shadow education is
whether these activities actually improve educational outcomes, and if significant variation in costs of different services also corresponds to increased
advantage. Overwhelmingly parents, students, and providers of shadow
education strongly believe both to be the case, but until recently, there has
been little systematic evidence. While much current research is focusing
on the educational effects of shadow education, so far reported results
are contradictory, as some studies find strong positive effects, whereas
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
other find only modest and even trivial effects. Furthermore, a few studies
report an adverse effect of shadow education on academic achievement.
In addition, there is virtually no evidence on whether more costly services
are more effective. This mixed evidence has been attributed to various
factors including the broad divergence in the operational definitions of
shadow education variables, the choice of dependent variables, and the type
of statistical models employed, but to date, there is not a clear definitive
conclusions about the effects of shadow education on educational outcomes,
and much remains to be investigated. In addition, there is not much evidence
of even an association between high national use of shadow education and
national means on international tests.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
A major limitation on determining the exact nature and magnitude of the
effect of shadow education on outcomes is a lack of experimental design
or statistical methodologies that closely approximate such a design. As
with the evaluation of other on-going educational activities, selection
effects—non-random assignment to treatment, or in this case who uses
shadow education—have not yet been adequately addressed. For example,
a growing body of literature in a wide range of societies consistently
documents that students from higher socioeconomic status (SES) families
are more likely than those from lower SES families to use shadow education.
These and other preexisting differences between students who use shadow
education and students who do not can produce selection effects that make it
difficult to identify a causal link between shadow education and educational
outcomes. The inclusion of control variables in regression analyses is the
most common approach to reducing selection bias, but this is often not very
effective.
Recent cutting-edge research on shadow education, however, use more
sophisticated and rigorous models to estimate the causal effect of shadow
education, including instrument variables and propensity scores matching,
which are more appropriate to draw a causal inference than the traditional
regression analyses. The few studies that used innovative methods to
address these selection issues suggest that shadow education have some
positive effects on academic achievement. In addition, this more recent
research on has begun to examine heterogeneity in the effects of shadow
education across the main different forms these activities take. Shadow
education services come in many forms (e.g., one-on-one academic tutoring,
cram schools, correspondence courses, and Internet tutoring services), yet
almost all studies so far have focused only on the effects of participation
versus nonparticipation in shadow education, lumping together all kinds
Shadow Education
5
often without even a measure of the amount of services purchased. This
misses, for example, possible consequences of the fact that some students
receive shadow education in a face-to-face (one-to-one or one-to-group)
mode or in large classes (cram school), whereas other students rely on
correspondence courses via mails or, increasingly, via the Internet. With
such variety in shadow education services, it is reasonable to expect
that effectiveness may vary, depending on the type and amount used.
Moreover indeed, emerging research that examined differential effects of
shadow education suggests that preparatory cram school made a small
difference in achievement gains in math, whereas individual tutoring,
correspondence courses, and on-line tutoring services made little difference.
Together, the findings from cutting-edge research in this area increasingly
help us better understand nuanced differences in the effects of shadow
education.
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
The education establishment in many part of the world is just beginning
to appreciate shadow education as an important dimension of the modern
schooling process. Although shadow education issues have been widely
investigated in recent years, its origin, factors increasing demand, and
possible influences on students’ future education and their educational
systems are not fully known. In fact, except for in a few nations with a
long history of political issues about shadow education (e.g. South Korea
and Japan), only recently have these educational services drawn increased
research and policy attention across many nations and multilateral education
agencies. Only now are we beginning to understand shadow education as
an important dimension of parental involvement and as a modern schooling
process. More research is needed to produce systematic knowledge about
the various ways in which shadow education might influence educational
outcomes and educational processes.
Furthermore, future research on shadow education should look at the possible impact that shadow education has on the operations and policy formation
in national systems of public education. As some national education systems
embrace shadow education as a normative part of the education system,
we do not know much about the potential impact that these services will
have on other policy issues. For example, in the United States, supplementary tutoring services are provided to children in schools that failed to meet
a minimum level of progress as part of the No Child Left Behind. Another
example is that the government of South Korea, which once had banned all
types of shadow education, now innovatively provides free lectures aimed
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
at tutoring for in-school tests via the nation’s Educational Broadcasting System. These recent examples of the transformation and institutionalization of
shadow education into customized learning services within mainstream education systems are but a few research avenues open to understanding the
dynamic nature of shadow education and its evolving relationship to formal
education.
Future shadow education research will require higher-quality data and
greater methodological rigor to produce the kinds of findings that can
inform educational policy. This is because, as noted, shadow education
varies not only in modes but also in quality, duration, and intensity. Studies
of shadow education effects will also need to use longitudinal data and
rigorous methods to address the selection effects issue. Experimental design,
for example, where a group of students are randomly assigned to a particular
type of shadow education or a control group, is the best methodology to
determine whether there is a causal link between shadow education and
educational outcomes.
It is clear from the current documentation of its use and prevalence that
these educational services are growing worldwide. Perhaps, it is most
insightful to consider the phenomenon of growing shadow education from
the perspective of formal education as a social institution that can influence
significant portions of modern culture. As formal education has expanded
and become more central in postindustrial society, occupations and adult
social status are created anew, along with emerging privileged qualities
of knowledge, expanded concept of human development and capacities,
new approaches to work, more types of experts and elaborated educated
social statuses, and even a new concept of society itself. Not only are people
trained and credentialed through schooling, they also are thought to have
enhanced cognitive skills that are essential to their overall functioning.
These educated individuals are placed into a society that is itself changed by
the ideas of what enhanced cognitive skills and widespread education can
do for all aspects of society. This educational revolution has brought about a
robust culture of education.
Therefore, the practice of shadow education spreads worldwide because of
the power of the culture of education. Shadow education is not as just a narrow supplement to learning or as only a form of family-financed educational
opportunity. Instead, there is a symbiotic relationship between the robust culture of education and shadow education; as the former intensifies, the logic
of the later expands and heads toward a universal practice. Shadow education goes along with the expansion of formal education to younger children
and longer into adulthood in many nations. This institutional development
of shadow education and it potential to change formal education is perhaps
the most pressing key issue for future research.
Shadow Education
7
SUMMARY
Shadow education is developed into a robust social institution along with
the institutional development of education in general. It may continue to
create educational inequalities and undermine some formal schooling processes, but it is unlikely to be banned or fall into disuse as its connection to the
main social institution of formal education has become too strong. The best
prediction is that shadow education will continue to move along with education expansion, and in the process transform the later as well. Most shadow
education is private business, so market forces assist in its spread, but the
businesses do this along the same institutional logic of mass education. These
services are now publically recognized and discussed, and the companies
continue to expand services for larger arrays of clients’ educational needs. All
the while though, shadow education becomes more normative to the point
of being a partner institution to formal education itself.
FURTHER READING
Baker, D. P., Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Wiseman, A. W. (2001). Worldwide
shadow education: Outside-school learning, institutional quality of schooling, and
cross-national mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 1–17.
Baker, D. P., & LeTendre, G. K. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World
culture and the future of schooling. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Baker, D. P., & Mori, I. (2010). The origin of universal shadow education: What the
supplemental education phenomenon tells us about the postmodern institution of
education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11, 36.
Bray, M. (1999). The shadow education system: Private tutoring and its implications
for planners. Fundamentals of Educational Planning No.61, Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0018/001802/180205e.pdf. Retrieved on November 12, 2012.
Bray, M. (2009). Confronting the shadow education system: What government policies for
what private tutoring? Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning.
Buchmann, C., Condron, D., & Roscigno, V. (2010). Shadow education, American
style: Test preparation, the SAT, and college enrollment. Social Forces, 89, 435–461.
Byun, S., & Park, H. (2012). The academic success of East Asian American youth: The
role of shadow education. Sociology of Education, 85, 40–60.
Kuan, P. (2011). Effects of cram schooling on mathematics performance: Evidence
from junior high students in Taiwan. Comparative Education Review, 55(3), 342–368.
Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1992). Shadow education and allocation in formal schooling: Transition to university in Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 97,
1639–1657.
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
USEFUL LINK
http://www.fe.hku.hk/cerc/SIG/SE-SIG.htm.
SOO-YONG BYUN SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Soo-yong Byun is Assistant Professor of Educational Theory and Policy and
Research Affiliate in the Population Research Institution at the Pennsylvania
State University. His interests are cross-national research on education, sociology of education, social stratification, and educational policy analysis. His
research has appeared in Sociology of Education, American Educational Research
Journal, and Review of Higher Education.
Soo-yong Byun’s web site: https://sites.google.com/site/
sooyongbyunshomepage/
Soo-yong Byun’s curriculum vitae: http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/
faculty-cvs/szb14.pdf.
DAVID P. BAKER SHORT BIOGRAPHY
David P. Baker is Professor of Education and Sociology, and is a research
scientist at the Center for the Study of Higher Education and the Population Research Institute at the Pennsylvania State University, where he
directs a research program on the worldwide education revolution’s impact
on global development and postindustrial society. David Baker’s website:
http://davidbakerresearchproject.wordpress.com/. David Baker’s curriculum vitae: http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/faculty-cvs/dpb4.pdf
RELATED ESSAYS
Learning Across the Life Course (Sociology), Jutta Allmendinger and Marcel
Helbig
Economics of Early Education (Economics), W. Steven Barnett
Returns to Education in Different Labor Market Contexts (Sociology), Klaus
Schöemann and Rolf Becker
Enduring Effects of Education (Sociology), Matthew Curry and Jennie E.
Brand
Social Class and Parental Investment in Children (Sociology), Anne H.
Gauthier
Evaluating and Rewarding Teachers (Educ), Cassandra Hart
Educational Testing: Measuring and Remedying Achievement Gaps (Educ),
Jaekyung Lee
Shadow Education
9
Gender Inequality in Educational Attainment (Sociology), Anne McDaniel
and Claudia Buchmann
Rationalization of Higher Education (Sociology), Tressie McMillan Cottom
and Gaye Tuchman
Education in an Open Informational World (Educ), Marlene Scardamalia
and Carl Bereiter
Higher Education: A Field in Ferment (Sociology), W. Richard Scott
Impact of Limited Education on Employment Prospects in Advanced
Economies (Sociology), Heike Solga
Institutional Contexts for Socioeconomic Effects on Schooling Outcomes
(Sociology), Herman G. van de Werfhorst
Shadow Education
SOO-YONG BYUN and DAVID P. BAKER
Abstract
Over the past few decades shadow education has expanded worldwide and become
a multi-billion dollar global service-industry offering many different and costly
tutoring services from after-school classes to a host of on-line options. While much
remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide
expansion of shadow education is now a substantial topic in the sociology of education. This essay briefly describes the foundational research on shadow education;
outlines the cutting-edge research on shadow education effects; and discusses key
issues for future research. This essay concludes that shadow education becomes
more normative to the point of being a partner institution to formal education itself
and as an educational phenomenon it will continue to be a topic of study and policy
analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Shadow education—private supplementary tutoring or coaching aimed to
provide additional help to students outside of school mainly to prepare for
examinations—has long been practiced as individual tutoring on an informal
basis especially in many East Asian societies including Hong Kong, Taiwan,
Japan, and South Korea. In just a few decades, however, it has expanded
worldwide and become a multi-billion dollar global service industry offering
many different and costly tutoring services from after-school classes to a host
of online options. While much remains to be explored as to why this transformation is occurring, the worldwide expansion of shadow education is now a
substantial topic in the sociology of education and routinely causes concern
among educational policymakers owing largely to its implication for educational quality and equality. This is because shadow education, a privately
purchased service, covers subjects taught in the mainstream education and
thus is a potential source of educational advantage gained through private
funds of families. Further, some educators consider shadow education to be a
corruption of the education process itself, as for example when students who
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
participate in shadow education tend to pay less attention in the classroom.
Ironically, despite a growing body of research, it is still unclear whether and
how shadow education affects the mainstream education and educational
outcomes. Yet, if shadow education does indeed make a difference in educational outcomes, many educators and sociologists believe that these practices
could contribute to maintaining or exacerbating educational inequality by
mediating the relationship between family background and children’s educational outcomes. As an educational phenomenon, shadow education will
continue to be a topic of study and policy analysis.
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
DEFINITION
In an early study of educational stratification in Japanese society, Stevenson and Baker (1992) coined the sociological and educational term shadow
education in the early 1990s to denote the strong connection between the mainstream education system and widespread out-of-school learning activities.
Later Mark Bray brought this term to the attention of educational policymakers by documenting the growth in shadow education worldwide, and
in the process developed a detailed, and now standard, definition of which
learning activities can be considered shadow education:
Supplement. Shadow education is supplementary in nature because it
addresses subjects already covered in school.
Market. Shadow education is provided in exchange for a fee as opposed to
unpaid tutoring provided by families or community members or extra
tutoring provided by school teachers as part of their professional commitments and responsibilities.
Academic. Shadow education covers academic subjects including languages mathematics and other examinable subjects but excludes
musical artistic or sporting skills that are learned primarily for pleasure
and/or for a more rounded form of personal development.
PREVALENCE AND DETERMINANTS
While research on shadow education documents the worldwide growth
of shadow education in national systems of education, there remains
cross-national variation in the extent to which families purchase shadow
education. Several scholars have speculated on conditions under which
extensive shadow education can be observed. First, many attribute extensive
shadow education to such conditions as the use of high-stakes examinations
and the tight linkage between the educational outcomes in early adulthood
Shadow Education
3
and future occupations or general social status. However, this explanation of
the origin of shadow education is not fully supported by empirical evidence
because research indicates that the use of the high-stakes examinations is not
significantly associated with the degree of student participation in shadow
education.
Other researchers suggest that a nation’s quality of public education affects
the prevalence shadow education. For example, if parents and their children
are dissatisfied with the mainstream education because of poor quality of
instruction and teachers, they may rely on shadow education to supplement
low-quality instructions. In addition, teachers’ low salaries and low morale
may combine to lead teachers to be involved in shadow education by
becoming teachers in shadow education institutes. Some research found
evidence supporting this theoretical explanation emphasizing the role of the
quality of the mainstream in the causes of shadow education by showing that
lower public educational expenditures are associated with more extensive
shadow education. However, this theoretical model neither receives strong
empirical support nor helps explain why shadow education is expanded
worldwide.
Finally, other scholars observe that shadow education is spreading worldwide because it is now part of an extensive culture of formal education.
The worldwide use of shadow education is motivated by the dominant
logic of educational expansion in all its forms. As considerable participation in formal education and academic success is a taken-for-granted
and dominant part of social and occupational status attainment, shadow
education becomes more prevalent as an accepted and expected cultural
aspect of education, now practiced even up through higher education.
Yet, given that shadow education is not fully prevalence in all national
mass education systems, how far significant institutionalization of these
activities will continue into the future is an open question. Understanding
the origins and future path of shadow education is an issue ripe for new
research.
THE IMPACT OF SHADOW EDUCATION
Another key scientific and policy question regarding shadow education is
whether these activities actually improve educational outcomes, and if significant variation in costs of different services also corresponds to increased
advantage. Overwhelmingly parents, students, and providers of shadow
education strongly believe both to be the case, but until recently, there has
been little systematic evidence. While much current research is focusing
on the educational effects of shadow education, so far reported results
are contradictory, as some studies find strong positive effects, whereas
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
other find only modest and even trivial effects. Furthermore, a few studies
report an adverse effect of shadow education on academic achievement.
In addition, there is virtually no evidence on whether more costly services
are more effective. This mixed evidence has been attributed to various
factors including the broad divergence in the operational definitions of
shadow education variables, the choice of dependent variables, and the type
of statistical models employed, but to date, there is not a clear definitive
conclusions about the effects of shadow education on educational outcomes,
and much remains to be investigated. In addition, there is not much evidence
of even an association between high national use of shadow education and
national means on international tests.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
A major limitation on determining the exact nature and magnitude of the
effect of shadow education on outcomes is a lack of experimental design
or statistical methodologies that closely approximate such a design. As
with the evaluation of other on-going educational activities, selection
effects—non-random assignment to treatment, or in this case who uses
shadow education—have not yet been adequately addressed. For example,
a growing body of literature in a wide range of societies consistently
documents that students from higher socioeconomic status (SES) families
are more likely than those from lower SES families to use shadow education.
These and other preexisting differences between students who use shadow
education and students who do not can produce selection effects that make it
difficult to identify a causal link between shadow education and educational
outcomes. The inclusion of control variables in regression analyses is the
most common approach to reducing selection bias, but this is often not very
effective.
Recent cutting-edge research on shadow education, however, use more
sophisticated and rigorous models to estimate the causal effect of shadow
education, including instrument variables and propensity scores matching,
which are more appropriate to draw a causal inference than the traditional
regression analyses. The few studies that used innovative methods to
address these selection issues suggest that shadow education have some
positive effects on academic achievement. In addition, this more recent
research on has begun to examine heterogeneity in the effects of shadow
education across the main different forms these activities take. Shadow
education services come in many forms (e.g., one-on-one academic tutoring,
cram schools, correspondence courses, and Internet tutoring services), yet
almost all studies so far have focused only on the effects of participation
versus nonparticipation in shadow education, lumping together all kinds
Shadow Education
5
often without even a measure of the amount of services purchased. This
misses, for example, possible consequences of the fact that some students
receive shadow education in a face-to-face (one-to-one or one-to-group)
mode or in large classes (cram school), whereas other students rely on
correspondence courses via mails or, increasingly, via the Internet. With
such variety in shadow education services, it is reasonable to expect
that effectiveness may vary, depending on the type and amount used.
Moreover indeed, emerging research that examined differential effects of
shadow education suggests that preparatory cram school made a small
difference in achievement gains in math, whereas individual tutoring,
correspondence courses, and on-line tutoring services made little difference.
Together, the findings from cutting-edge research in this area increasingly
help us better understand nuanced differences in the effects of shadow
education.
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
The education establishment in many part of the world is just beginning
to appreciate shadow education as an important dimension of the modern
schooling process. Although shadow education issues have been widely
investigated in recent years, its origin, factors increasing demand, and
possible influences on students’ future education and their educational
systems are not fully known. In fact, except for in a few nations with a
long history of political issues about shadow education (e.g. South Korea
and Japan), only recently have these educational services drawn increased
research and policy attention across many nations and multilateral education
agencies. Only now are we beginning to understand shadow education as
an important dimension of parental involvement and as a modern schooling
process. More research is needed to produce systematic knowledge about
the various ways in which shadow education might influence educational
outcomes and educational processes.
Furthermore, future research on shadow education should look at the possible impact that shadow education has on the operations and policy formation
in national systems of public education. As some national education systems
embrace shadow education as a normative part of the education system,
we do not know much about the potential impact that these services will
have on other policy issues. For example, in the United States, supplementary tutoring services are provided to children in schools that failed to meet
a minimum level of progress as part of the No Child Left Behind. Another
example is that the government of South Korea, which once had banned all
types of shadow education, now innovatively provides free lectures aimed
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
at tutoring for in-school tests via the nation’s Educational Broadcasting System. These recent examples of the transformation and institutionalization of
shadow education into customized learning services within mainstream education systems are but a few research avenues open to understanding the
dynamic nature of shadow education and its evolving relationship to formal
education.
Future shadow education research will require higher-quality data and
greater methodological rigor to produce the kinds of findings that can
inform educational policy. This is because, as noted, shadow education
varies not only in modes but also in quality, duration, and intensity. Studies
of shadow education effects will also need to use longitudinal data and
rigorous methods to address the selection effects issue. Experimental design,
for example, where a group of students are randomly assigned to a particular
type of shadow education or a control group, is the best methodology to
determine whether there is a causal link between shadow education and
educational outcomes.
It is clear from the current documentation of its use and prevalence that
these educational services are growing worldwide. Perhaps, it is most
insightful to consider the phenomenon of growing shadow education from
the perspective of formal education as a social institution that can influence
significant portions of modern culture. As formal education has expanded
and become more central in postindustrial society, occupations and adult
social status are created anew, along with emerging privileged qualities
of knowledge, expanded concept of human development and capacities,
new approaches to work, more types of experts and elaborated educated
social statuses, and even a new concept of society itself. Not only are people
trained and credentialed through schooling, they also are thought to have
enhanced cognitive skills that are essential to their overall functioning.
These educated individuals are placed into a society that is itself changed by
the ideas of what enhanced cognitive skills and widespread education can
do for all aspects of society. This educational revolution has brought about a
robust culture of education.
Therefore, the practice of shadow education spreads worldwide because of
the power of the culture of education. Shadow education is not as just a narrow supplement to learning or as only a form of family-financed educational
opportunity. Instead, there is a symbiotic relationship between the robust culture of education and shadow education; as the former intensifies, the logic
of the later expands and heads toward a universal practice. Shadow education goes along with the expansion of formal education to younger children
and longer into adulthood in many nations. This institutional development
of shadow education and it potential to change formal education is perhaps
the most pressing key issue for future research.
Shadow Education
7
SUMMARY
Shadow education is developed into a robust social institution along with
the institutional development of education in general. It may continue to
create educational inequalities and undermine some formal schooling processes, but it is unlikely to be banned or fall into disuse as its connection to the
main social institution of formal education has become too strong. The best
prediction is that shadow education will continue to move along with education expansion, and in the process transform the later as well. Most shadow
education is private business, so market forces assist in its spread, but the
businesses do this along the same institutional logic of mass education. These
services are now publically recognized and discussed, and the companies
continue to expand services for larger arrays of clients’ educational needs. All
the while though, shadow education becomes more normative to the point
of being a partner institution to formal education itself.
FURTHER READING
Baker, D. P., Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Wiseman, A. W. (2001). Worldwide
shadow education: Outside-school learning, institutional quality of schooling, and
cross-national mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 1–17.
Baker, D. P., & LeTendre, G. K. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World
culture and the future of schooling. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Baker, D. P., & Mori, I. (2010). The origin of universal shadow education: What the
supplemental education phenomenon tells us about the postmodern institution of
education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11, 36.
Bray, M. (1999). The shadow education system: Private tutoring and its implications
for planners. Fundamentals of Educational Planning No.61, Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0018/001802/180205e.pdf. Retrieved on November 12, 2012.
Bray, M. (2009). Confronting the shadow education system: What government policies for
what private tutoring? Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning.
Buchmann, C., Condron, D., & Roscigno, V. (2010). Shadow education, American
style: Test preparation, the SAT, and college enrollment. Social Forces, 89, 435–461.
Byun, S., & Park, H. (2012). The academic success of East Asian American youth: The
role of shadow education. Sociology of Education, 85, 40–60.
Kuan, P. (2011). Effects of cram schooling on mathematics performance: Evidence
from junior high students in Taiwan. Comparative Education Review, 55(3), 342–368.
Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1992). Shadow education and allocation in formal schooling: Transition to university in Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 97,
1639–1657.
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
USEFUL LINK
http://www.fe.hku.hk/cerc/SIG/SE-SIG.htm.
SOO-YONG BYUN SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Soo-yong Byun is Assistant Professor of Educational Theory and Policy and
Research Affiliate in the Population Research Institution at the Pennsylvania
State University. His interests are cross-national research on education, sociology of education, social stratification, and educational policy analysis. His
research has appeared in Sociology of Education, American Educational Research
Journal, and Review of Higher Education.
Soo-yong Byun’s web site: https://sites.google.com/site/
sooyongbyunshomepage/
Soo-yong Byun’s curriculum vitae: http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/
faculty-cvs/szb14.pdf.
DAVID P. BAKER SHORT BIOGRAPHY
David P. Baker is Professor of Education and Sociology, and is a research
scientist at the Center for the Study of Higher Education and the Population Research Institute at the Pennsylvania State University, where he
directs a research program on the worldwide education revolution’s impact
on global development and postindustrial society. David Baker’s website:
http://davidbakerresearchproject.wordpress.com/. David Baker’s curriculum vitae: http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/faculty-cvs/dpb4.pdf
RELATED ESSAYS
Learning Across the Life Course (Sociology), Jutta Allmendinger and Marcel
Helbig
Economics of Early Education (Economics), W. Steven Barnett
Returns to Education in Different Labor Market Contexts (Sociology), Klaus
Schöemann and Rolf Becker
Enduring Effects of Education (Sociology), Matthew Curry and Jennie E.
Brand
Social Class and Parental Investment in Children (Sociology), Anne H.
Gauthier
Evaluating and Rewarding Teachers (Educ), Cassandra Hart
Educational Testing: Measuring and Remedying Achievement Gaps (Educ),
Jaekyung Lee
Shadow Education
9
Gender Inequality in Educational Attainment (Sociology), Anne McDaniel
and Claudia Buchmann
Rationalization of Higher Education (Sociology), Tressie McMillan Cottom
and Gaye Tuchman
Education in an Open Informational World (Educ), Marlene Scardamalia
and Carl Bereiter
Higher Education: A Field in Ferment (Sociology), W. Richard Scott
Impact of Limited Education on Employment Prospects in Advanced
Economies (Sociology), Heike Solga
Institutional Contexts for Socioeconomic Effects on Schooling Outcomes
(Sociology), Herman G. van de Werfhorst
Shadow Education