Alegre, M. À., & Ferrer, G. (2010). School regimes and education equity: Some insights based on PISA 2006. British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 433–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902989193
Armor, D. J., Marks, G. N., & Malatinszky, A. (2018). The Impact of school SES on student achievement: Evidence from U.S. statewide achievement data. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(4), 613–630. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373718787917
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2017). 4221.0—Schools, Australia, 2017. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4221.0main+features22017
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2017). Assessment framework: NAPLAN online 2017–2018. ACARA. https://www.nap.edu.au/docs/default-source/default-document-library/naplan-assessment-framework.pdf
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2018). NAPLAN achievement in reading, writing, language conventions and numeracy: National report for 2018. ACARA. https://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/national-reports
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2019). Data standards manual: Student background characteristics. ACARA. https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/data-standards-manual-student-background-characteristics
Avvisati, F. (2020). The measure of socio-economic status in PISA: A review and some suggested improvements. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 8(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-020-00086-x
Bankston, C., & Caldas, S. J. (1996). Majority African American schools and social injustice: The influence of de facto segregation on academic achievement. Social Forces, 75(2), 535–555. https://doi.org/10.2307/2580412
Benito, R., Alegre, M. A., & Gonzàlez-Balletbò, I. (2014). School segregation and its effects on educational equality and efficiency in 16 OECD comprehensive school systems. Comparative Education Review, 58(1), 104–134. https://doi.org/10.1086/672011
Bollen, K. A., & Bauldry, S. (2011). Three Cs in measurement models: Causal indicators, composite indicators, and covariates. Psychological Methods, 16(3), 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024448
Bonnor, C., Kidson, P., Piccoli, A., Sahlberg, P., & Wilson, R. (2021). Structural failure: Why Australia keeps falling short of our educational goals. UNSW Gonski Institute. https://www.gie.unsw.edu.au/structural-failure-why-australia-keeps-falling-short-its-educational-goals
Boonen, T., Speybroeck, S., de Bilde, J., Lamote, C., Van Damme, J., & Onghena, P. (2014). Does it matter who your schoolmates are? An investigation of the association between school composition, school processes and mathematics achievement in the early years of primary education. British Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3090
Caldas, S. J., & Bankston, C. (1998). The inequality of separation: Racial composition of schools and academic achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(4), 533–557. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x98034004005
Chesters, J. (2019). Alleviating or exacerbating disadvantage: Does school attended mediate the association between family background and educational attainment? Journal of Education Policy, 34(3), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2018.1488001
Chesters, J., & Daly, A. (2015). The determinants of academic achievement among primary school students: A case study of the Australian Capital Territory. Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 18(1), 131–144.
Chesters, J., & Daly, A. (2017). Do peer effects mediate the association between family socio-economic status and educational achievement? Australian Journal of Social Issues, 52(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.3
Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2005). Effects of resources, inequality, and privilege bias on achievement: Country, school, and student level analyses. American Educational Research Journal, 42(4), 575–603. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312042004575
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, F., & York, R. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (Report No. OE-38001). US Government Printing Office.
Dumay, X., & Dupriez, V. (2008). Does the school composition effect matter? Evidence from Belgian data. British Journal of Educational Studies, 56(4), 440–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2008.00418.x
Dunteman, G. H. (1989). Principal components analysis. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985475
Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. Guilford Press.
Fan, X. (2003). Two approaches for correcting correlation attenuation caused by measurement error: Implications for research practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(6), 915–930. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164403251319
Gollwitzer, M., Christ, O., & Lemmer, G. (2014). Individual differences make a difference: On the use and the psychometric properties of difference scores in social psychology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(7), 673–682. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2042
Gorard, S. (2006). Is there a school mix effect? Educational Review, 58(1), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910500352739
Greenwell, T., & Bonnor, C. (2022). Waiting for Gonski: How Australia failed its schools. University of New South Wales Press.
Hallberg, K., Cook, T. D., Steiner, P. M., & Clark, M. H. (2018). Pretest measures of the study outcome and the elimination of selection bias: Evidence from three within study comparisons. Prevention Science, 19(3), 274–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0732-6
Harker, R., & Tymms, P. (2004). The effects of student composition on school outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1076/sesi.22.214.171.124432
Jencks, C., & Mayer, S. E. (1990). The social consequences of growing up in a poor neighborhood. In L. E. Lynn & M. F. H. McGeary (Eds.), Inner-city poverty in the United States (pp. 111–186). The National Academies Press.
Lafortune, J., Rothstein, J., & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2018). School finance reform and the distribution of student achievement. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 10(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20160567
Lamb, S., & Fullarton, S. (2002). Classroom and school factors affecting mathematics achievement: A comparative study of Australia and the United States using TIMSS. Australian Journal of Education, 46(2), 154–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494410204600205
Larsen, S., Forbes, A. Q., Little, C. W., Alaba, S. H., & Coventry, W. L. (2022). The public-private debate: School sector differences in academic achievement from year 3 to year 9? Australian Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00498-w
Lauder, H., Kounali, D., Robinson, T., & Goldstein, H. (2010). Pupil composition and accountability: An analysis in English primary schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 49(2), 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2010.08.001
Lauen, D. L., & Gaddis, S. M. (2013). Exposure to classroom poverty and test score achievement: Contextual effects or selection? American Journal of Sociology, 118(4), 943–979. https://doi.org/10.1086/668408
Liu, H., Van Damme, J., Gielen, S., & Van Den Noortgate, W. (2015). School processes mediate school compositional effects: Model specification and estimation. British Educational Research Journal, 41, 423–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3147
Lubienski, C., Perry, L. B., Kim, J., & Canbolat, Y. (2021). Market models and segregation: Examining mechanisms of student sorting. Comparative Education, 58(1), 16–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2021.2013043
Lüdtke, O., Marsh, H. W., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2008). The multilevel latent covariate model: A new, more reliable approach to group-level effects in contextual studies. Psychological Methods, 13(3), 203–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012869
Marks, G. N. (2015). Are school-SES effects statistical artefacts? Evidence from longitudinal population data. Oxford Review of Education, 41(1), 122–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1006613
Marks, G. N. (2021). Should value-added school effects models include student- and school-level covariates? Evidence from Australian population assessment data. British Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 181–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3684
Marks, G. N., Cresswell, J., & Ainley, J. (2006). Explaining socioeconomic inequalities in student achievement: The role of home and school factors. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610600587040
Marks, G. N., & O’Connell, M. (2021). Inadequacies in the SES–Achievement model: Evidence from PISA and other studies. Review of Education, 9(3), e3293. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3293
Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., Muthén, B., & Nagengast, B. (2009). Doubly-latent models of school contextual effects: Integrating multilevel and structural equation approaches to control measurement and sampling error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(6), 764–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170903333665
McMillan, J., Beavis, A., & Jones, F. L. (2009). The AUSEI06: A new socioeconomic index for Australia. Journal of Sociology, 45(2), 123–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783309103342
McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Science and mathematics achievement in Australia: The role of school socioeconomic composition in educational equity and effectiveness. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 8, 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9197-4
McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Socioeconomic status, self-efficacy, and mathematics achievement in Australia: A secondary analysis. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 9, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-010-9083-4
Muthén, B. O. (1991). Multilevel factor analysis of class and student achievement components. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(4), 338–354. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1991.tb00363.x
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Improving the measurement of socioeconomic status for the National Assessment of Educational Progress: A theoretical foundation. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/researchcenter/Socioeconomic_Factors.pdf
Opdenakker, M.-C., & Damme, J. (2001). Relationship between school composition and characteristics of school process and their effect on mathematics achievement. British Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 407–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920120071434
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from Pisa 2000. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264102873-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264006416-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow’s world: Volume 1: Analysis. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/19963777
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 results: Overcoming social background: Equity in learning opportunities and outcomes (Volume II). OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264091504-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). PISA 2012 results: Excellence through equity (Volume II): Giving every student the chance to succeed. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264201132-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). PISA 2015 results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2017). PISA 2015 technical report. OECD.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Equity in education: Breaking down barriers to social mobility. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264073234-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume II): Where all students can succeed. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/b5fd1b8f-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). PISA 2018 results (Volume V): Effective policies, successful schools. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/ca768d40-en
Palardy, G. J. (2008). Differential school effects among low, middle, and high social class composition schools: A multiple group, multilevel latent growth curve analysis. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(1), 21–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450801936845
Palardy, G. J. (2013). High school socioeconomic segregation and student attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 50(4), 714–754. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213481240
Palardy, G. J. (2015). High school socioeconomic composition and college choice: Multilevel mediation via organizational habitus, school practices, peer and staff attitudes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(3), 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.965182
Peetsma, T., Van Der Veen, I., Koopman, P., & Van Schooten, E. (2006). Class composition influences on pupils’ cognitive development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(3), 275–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500480114
Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2010). Does the SES of the school matter? An examination of socioeconomic status and student achievement using PISA 2003. Teachers College Record, 112(4), 1137–1162. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811011200401
Perry, L., & McConney, A. (2010). School socio-economic composition and student outcomes in Australia: Implications for educational policy. Australian Journal of Education, 54
(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494411005400106
Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2013). School socioeconomic status and student outcomes in reading and mathematics: A comparison of Australia and Canada. Australian Journal of Education, 57
(2), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944113485836
Pokropek, A. (2015). Phantom effects in multilevel compositional analysis: Problems and solutions. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(4), 677–705. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114553801
Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2011). Alternative methods for assessing mediation in multilevel data: The advantages of multilevel SEM. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(2), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2011.557329
Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15(3), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020141
Rangvid, B. S. (2007). School composition effects in Denmark: Quantile regression evidence from PISA 2000. Empirical Economics, 33(2), 359–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-007-0133-6
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed., Vol. 1). Sage.
Revelle, W. (2021). Package ‘psych’. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/psych/index.html
Rowe, E. (2020). Counting national school enrolment shares in Australia: The political arithmetic of declining public school enrolment. Australian Educational Researcher, 47, 517–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00365-9
Rumberger, R. W., & Palardy, G. J. (2005). Does segregation still matter? The impact of student composition on academic achievement in high school. Teachers College Record, 107(9), 1999–2045.
Scheerens, J., Bosker, R. J., & Creemers, B. P. M. (2001). Time for self-criticism: On the viability of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(1), 131–157. https://doi.org/10.1076/sesi.126.96.36.19964
Sciffer, M. G., Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2022). Does school socioeconomic composition matter more in some countries
than others, and if so, why? Comparative Education, 58(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2021.2013045
Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
Smith, C., Parr, N., & Muhidin, S. (2018). Mapping schools’ NAPLAN results: A spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia. Geographical Research, 57, 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12317
Sofroniou, N., Archer, P., & Weir, S. (2004). An analysis of the association between socioeconomic context, gender, and achievement. The Irish Journal of Education/iris Eireannach an Oideachais, 35, 58–72.
Sui-Chu, E. H., & Willms, J. D. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 69(2), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112802
Televantou, I., Marsh, H. W., Kyriakides, L., Nagengast, B., Fletcher, J., & Malmberg, L.-E. (2015). Phantom effects in school composition research: Consequences of failure to control biases due to measurement error in traditional multilevel models. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(1), 75–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2013.871302
Thrupp, M., Lauder, H., & Robinson, T. (2002). School composition and peer effects. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(5), 483–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-0355(03)00016-8
Van Ewijk, R., & Sleegers, P. (2010). The effect of peer socioeconomic status on student achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 5(2), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.02.001
Warren, D. (2016). Parents’ choices of primary school. In K. Day (Ed.), The longitudinal study of Australian children annual statistical report 2015 (pp. 153–172). Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Willms, J. D. (2010). School composition and contextual effects on student outcomes. Teachers College Record, 112(4), 1008–1037.