Immigrant optimism or immigrant pragmatism? Linguistic capital, orientation towards science and occupational expectations of adolescent immigrants

Sikora, Joanna; Pokropek, Artur

doi:10.1186/s40536-021-00101-9

Large-scale Assessments in Education

An IERI – International Educational Research Institute Journal

Table 5 Total, direct and indirect effects of immigrant status on occupational expectations (ISEI scores16-90)

From: Immigrant optimism or immigrant pragmatism? Linguistic capital, orientation towards science and occupational expectations of adolescent immigrants

	1. Immigrant (total effect)		2. Immigrant (direct effect) Path C in Fig. 1b		3. Immigrant (indirect effect)		4. Indirect effect due to instrumental motivation		5. Indirect effect due to enjoyment of science		6. Instrumental motivation to study science Path D in Fig. 1b		7. Enjoyment of science Path E in Fig. 1b		8. % total effect explained	9. % total effect explained in PISA 2006
	Coeff	SE	Coeff	SE	Coeff	SE	Coeff	SE	Coeff	SE	Coeff	SE	Coeff	SE	%	%
Australia	7.14	0.51	6.60	0.50	0.54	0.10	0.25	0.06	0.29	0.06	1.67	0.21	1.37	0.21	8%	16%
Austria	9.24	0.84	8.90	0.84	0.34	0.11	0.03	0.04	0.31	0.12	0.30	0.29	0.88	0.33	4%	4%
Belgium	7.81	0.93	7.19	0.94	0.62	0.14	0.07	0.07	0.55	0.14	0.36	0.34	1.87	0.38	8%	24%
Canada	8.74	0.44	8.00	0.44	0.74	0.10	0.39	0.06	0.35	0.06	2.07	0.20	1.58	0.17	8%	16%
Denmark	14.31	0.88	13.83	0.91	0.48	0.18	0.14	0.11	0.34	0.14	0.48	0.37	0.91	0.34	3%	8%
France	11.29	0.80	10.56	0.83	0.73	0.16	0.24	0.09	0.49	0.16	0.89	0.32	1.65	0.39	6%	7%
Germany	10.59	0.92	10.45	0.92	0.14	0.08	0.00	0.02	0.14	0.08	0.06	0.44	0.74	0.40	0%	3%
Great Britain	7.67	0.68	6.78	0.70	0.89	0.14	0.59	0.11	0.30	0.11	2.20	0.27	0.86	0.32	12%	10%
Greece	− 0.47	1.06	− 0.69	1.07	0.23	0.08	0.00	0.04	0.23	0.08	0.01	0.31	1.27	0.33	na	na
Ireland	6.30	0.75	6.01	0.73	0.29	0.10	0.01	0.03	0.28	0.09	0.69	0.29	1.33	0.32	5%	30%
Israel	− 0.79	0.68	− 0.48	0.66	− 0.31	0.18	− 0.19	0.10	− 0.12	0.10	1.95	0.23	1.98	0.25	na	1%
Luxembourg	3.64	0.58	3.57	0.58	0.07	0.04	0.00	0.01	0.07	0.04	0.03	0.29	0.71	0.28	2%	8%
Netherlands	13.93	1.27	13.92	1.28	0.01	0.11	0.00	0.05	0.01	0.12	0.01	0.29	0.02	0.31	0%	7%
New Zealand	7.54	0.63	6.72	0.63	0.82	0.16	0.42	0.10	0.40	0.14	1.66	0.37	1.13	0.36	11%	23%
Norway	11.83	0.92	10.68	0.94	1.15	0.18	0.50	0.12	0.65	0.15	1.78	0.31	1.45	0.25	10%	20%
Spain	6.27	0.76	5.90	0.75	0.37	0.10	0.18	0.07	0.19	0.08	1.37	0.23	0.55	0.23	6%	30%
Sweden	15.21	0.78	13.92	0.78	1.29	0.21	0.17	0.11	1.12	0.19	0.56	0.33	2.01	0.28	8%	23%
Switzerland	8.23	0.75	7.91	0.75	0.33	0.10	0.02	0.03	0.31	0.09	0.70	0.37	1.87	0.31	4%	6%
United States	5.81	0.66	5.32	0.66	0.49	0.09	0.31	0.07	0.19	0.06	1.66	0.27	1.21	0.27	8%	14%

Paths C, D, E from Fig. 1b. Control variables not reported to conserve space ^A. Estimates with BRR weights. PISA 2015 unless otherwise indicated
Coefficients in bold are significantly different from zero at p = 0.05, Coeff denotes unstandardized coefficients, SE denotes standard errors
^A The full model estimating direct effects of immigrant status and Table 5 analyses for 2006 are in Appendices S1 and S2 respectively. Estimates for control variables in the total effect models for 2015 are in Additional file 1: Appendix S1

Back to article page