Learning with 'stronger peers' yields no boost

Dec 11, 2013
Students don't necessarily perform better just because they're surrounded by higher-achieving classmates, finds a study co-authored by Scott Imberman of Michigan State University. Credit: Michigan State University

A new study contradicts the popular theory that students perform better when surrounded by higher achieving classmates.

Michigan State University's Scott Imberman and colleagues found that marginal in a middle school gifted and talented program – despite learning alongside the "best and brightest" – performed no better on national tests than a similar group of students who didn't qualify for the program.

"This paper is part of a growing body of literature suggesting that just because you have stronger peers doesn't necessarily mean you are going to perform better," said Imberman, associate professor of economics and education.

Gifted and talented programs have grown in popularity, with more than 3 million students now enrolled nationwide. The study, in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, provides an important first step in understanding the effects of gifted and talented programs on students.

Using a sample of more than 14,000 fifth-graders in an urban school district, Imberman, Sa Bui of Cornell University and Steven Craig of the University of Houston analyzed the students' in math, science, reading, social studies and language arts.

The study targeted a group of students who qualified for a gifted and talented program by barely meeting a certain threshold based on past academic performance. Their test scores were compared to the students who just missed meeting the threshold – in other words, students who were very similar academically.

Imberman said the marginal students in the gifted and talented program showed no improvement in test scores over the non-qualifying students in any of the five subjects.

The study also looked at gifted and talented students who were picked in a lottery for a "magnet" program, which emphasizes a more intensive, specialized curriculum. The researchers compared of the magnet students who won the lottery to the gifted and talented students who lost the lottery and found no significant difference in four of the five subjects: math, reading, social studies and language arts. The magnet students did show improvement in science.

Explore further: Claims about the decline of the West are 'exaggerated'

Related Stories

Bilingual education has spillover effect

Sep 10, 2013

Bilingual education programs have a substantial spillover effect on the students they're not designed for, according to a groundbreaking study co-authored by a Michigan State University scholar.

Recommended for you

Claims about the decline of the West are 'exaggerated'

2 hours ago

A new paper by Oxford researchers argues that some countries in Western Europe, and the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand now have birth rates that are now relatively close to replacement, that the underlying trend in ...

Inoculating against science denial

13 hours ago

Science denial has real, societal consequences. Denial of the link between HIV and AIDS led to more than 330,000 premature deaths in South Africa. Denial of the link between smoking and cancer has caused ...

Public boarding school—the way to solve educational ills?

Apr 25, 2015

Buffalo's chronically struggling school system is considering an idea gaining momentum in other cities: public boarding schools that put round-the-clock attention on students and away from such daunting problems as poverty, ...

User comments : 0

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.