Psychological Reporb, 1990, 67, 147-154. O Psychological Reports 1990
SIBLING VARIABLE CORRELATES OF CHILDREN'S ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: FAMILY-GROUP DIFFERENCES KEVIN MARJORIBANKS Universily of Adelnide, Australia ' Summary.-The study examined the proposition that relationships among sibling variables, intellectual ability, and academic achievement vary for children from different family-environment groups. Data were collected from 900 ll-yr.-old Australian children and their parents. In the analysis, the children were classified into four family contexts that were defined conjointly by family social status and parents' academic socialization. Within each family group, regression surfaces were constructed from models that included terms to account for possible linear, interaction, and curviltnear associations among the variables. The results suggested the general proposition that within the family-environment groups, sibling variables were not related to academic achievement at different levels of children's abihty. However, the findings indicated that there were variations to this general proposition. Indeed, there were a number of complex associations between the sibling variables and children's academic achievement in the different family-environment groups.
In the development of a theoretical model to investigate the impact of sibling variables on children's outcomes, Blake (1989) examines relationships among sibsize (the number of children in a family), intellectual abhty, and academic achievement, for children from families of different social status. I t is suggested that one reason why research has underestimated the effect of sibsize on outcome measures is that "the influence of this variable is often incorporated into the over-all influence of family background or 'home' effects. . . . Thus absorbed into family background, the number of siblings serves to overestimate the importance of parental 'SES' and turn attention away from sibsize as an independent influence" (Blake, 1989, p. 49). Blake suggests further that numerous inconsistent, puzzling and anomalous results in sibling research "may be laid to the door of a lack of control for differences in the social status, or crucial other characteristics, of the home or the child" (p. 97). This study is generated from Blake's theoretical framework and exarnines the proposition that relationships among sibling variables, intellectual ability and academic achievement vary for children from different family-environment groups. Sibsize and birth order were chosen as the sibling variables for investigation. Steelman (1985) suggests, for example, that "misunderstandings still arise over the conceptual distinction between these two variables. It is important to note the difference. Sibship-size sets children
'Request reprints from Kevin Marjoribanks, The Vice-Chancellor, University of Adelaide, Australia.
148
K. MARJORIBANKS
from different families apart, while birth order distinguishes siblings within families from each other" (p. 357). For the analysis, children's family environments were defined by social-status indicators and proximal social-psychological variables. Moreover, a further refinement was adopted which suggests that social-status groups are not homogeneous in relation to the experiences provided for children (see Brewer & Haslum, 1986; Buriel & Cardoza, 1988; Dencik, 1989; McCarthy, 1988). As a result, each family-environment group was classified by those social spaces formed by the interaction of the social status and social-psychological dimensions. That is, the children in this investigation were categorized as being members of one of four family-environment groups. These groups were considered to act as underlying contexts in which sibling variables have differential associations with academic achievement at different levels of children's abihty. METHOD Data were collected from 900 Il-yr.-old Australian children and their parents in an investigation of the relations between family environments and children's academic achievement (see Marjoribanks, 1987). The sample was selected to reflect the social status and ethnic distribution of Australian farnilies. During interviews, parents provided descriptions of their occupations and indicated the levels of education they had attained. Occupations were assessed using a 14-point scale that ranks occupations in the Australian context (Broom, Duncan-Jones, Jones, & McDonnell, 1980) while 7-point scales were used to measure educational attainment. I n this latter scale, items ranged from less than elementary school completed to the completion of tertiary education. Principal components analysis showed that the status indicators loaded strongly on a general factor. Family social status was defined, therefore, by an equally weighted composite of parents' occupations and education. Also, for the analysis, Rosen's (1961) social-psychological conceptual framework was adopted to examine parent socialization in relation to the 11-yr.-olds. A schedule, in the form of a semistructured parent-interview inventory, was constructed to assess the interrelated components of parents' achievement training, independence training, achievement-value orientations, and aspirations. Interviewing was conducted in homes by experienced social survey interviewers who attended briefing sessions before and during the data collection. When the scores from the family inventory were factor analyzed, a general factor was generated that had a theta reliability estimate of 0.85. It was decided, therefore, to use one dimension to measure parents' socialization. High scores on the dimension indicated that parents stressed achievement training, encouraged independence, were individualistic, and had high aspirations for their children. Such families were defined as having strong parental achievement socialization. I n contrast, families were labeled as having
FAMILIES: SIBLING CORRELATES OF ACHIEVEMENT
149
weak achievement socialization if parents expressed relatively low achievement training, encouraged dependence, were collectivistic, and had lower aspirations. During the interviews with parents, data were collected on family sibsize and on the birth order of their 11-yr.-old children. The children's intellectual abihty was measured using the Raven's Progressive Matrices. Achievement in mathematics, word knowledge, and word comprehension was assessed by standardized tests devised by the Australian Council for Educational Research. These latter tests, the Class Achievement Test in Mathematics and the Primary Reading Survey Tests, have reliability estimates greater than 0.92. To create as uniform test-taking situations as possible, I administered the testing program w i t h n classrooms with the assistance of one other researcher who was involved in working with elementary school children and teachers.
RESULTS For the analysis, children were classified into four family groups that were defined by the median split of scores on the social status and parent-socialization measures. The median scores for the social status and parent socialization measures were 11 and 59, respectively. Family groups were labeled as middle status/strong academic socialization (144 boys, 143 girls), middle statuslweak academic socialization (49, 50), lower status/strong academic socialization (77, 80), and lower statuslweak academic socialization (179, 178). Within each fady-environment group, relationships among the sibling variables, intellectual ability and academic achievement were examined by plotting regression surfaces generated from hierarchical regression models. I n the models, product terms were included to test for possible interaction effects and squared terms were added to investigate possible curvilinear relationships. Prior research has indicated the presence of interaction and curvilinear associations between sibling variables and measures of children's cognitive performance (see Heer, 1985; Steelman, 1985). That is, the regression models were of the form: Z = constant + aX + bY + cX. Y + dX2+ eYZ,where Z, X, and Y represent measures of academic achievement, intellectual ability, and birth order or sibsize, respectively. I n the analysis, if the addition of interaction or squared terms was not associated with a significant increment in the amount of variance in outcome scores, then the term was deleted from the particular regression model. I n Table 1, the raw regression weights show that in each family group, the sibling variables tended not to be associated with the academic achievement scores. The findings do indicate, however, the possible complexity of relationships among the variables with a number of interaction and curvi-
150
K. MARJORIBANKS TABLE 1
Boys Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order
(Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize Ability x Sibsize (Ability)' (Sibsize)' Multiple R Girls
Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order (Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize (Ability)' Multiple R (continued on nex r page) Note.-M = mathematics, WK = word knowledge, WC = word comprehension. 'Absolute value of regression weight exceeds at least twlce its standard error. tMultiple correlation nonsignificant, all other multiple correlations significant beyond .05 level.
linear terms having significant associations with the outcome measures. Also, the results indicate that the ability and sibling variables combined to have modest to moderate significant relationships with the children's academic performances. From the raw regression weights in Table 1, regression surfaces were plotted to examine further the relationships among the variables. Because space is limited not aU the surfaces are presented. Instead, 16 surfaces that depict the nature of the different associations among the variables have been chosen and presented in two figures. Ability and academic achievement scores for the figures were standardized, with means of 50 and standard deviations of 10. Regression surfaces are graphical representations of the joint relations of two independent variables with an outcome measure. I n these particular surfaces, the horizontal axes represent children's ability and the sibling variables, while the vertical axis represents the children's academic achevement.
FAMILIES: SIBLING CORRELATES O F ACHIEVEMENT
151
TABLE 1 (CONT'D)
RAW REGRESSION WEIGHTSFORMULTIPLEREGESSIONO F ABILITY AND SIBLINGVARIABLES O N ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN EACH FAMILYENVIRONMENT GROUP Abhty and Sibling Variables
Strong Socialization M WK WC
Weak Socialization M WK WC
Lower Status Boys Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order (Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize Ability x Sibsize (Ability)' (Sibsize)' Multiple R Girls Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order (Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize (Ability)' Multiple R Note.-M = mathematics, WK =word knowledge, WC = word comprehension, "Absolute value of regression weight exceeds at least twice its standard error. tMultiple correlation nonsignificant, all other multiple correlations significant beyond .05 level.
The surfaces in Fig. 1 show the estimated relations among intellectual ability, birth order and-mathematics achievement for boys and girls in each family-environment group. I n the two family groups defined by weak parental academic socialization, the shapes of the surfaces are representative of most of the regression models in the study. That is, the surfaces indicate that at each birth order IeveI, intellectual ability has significant associations with children's mathematics achievement. I n contrast, at each value of intellectual ability, there are no significant relationships between birth order and mathematics scores. The regression surface relating to girls in the middle status/strong academic socialization group, reflects the presence of a significant interaction effect between ability, birth order and mathematics performance. At low ability levels, birth order is not related significantly to mathematics scores whereas at high ability increments in birth order are associated with significant decreases in mathematics achievement. For boys in lower status/strong
152
K. MARJORIBANKS
academic sociahzation f a d e s , birth order has a significant positive association with their mathematics performance. That is, at each ability level, increments in birth order are related to increases in achevement. The regression surfaces show also a curvilinear relationship between ability and mathematics for boys in middle statuslstrong academic socialization families, and for girls in lower statuslstrong academic socialization families. That is, the findings for birth order suggest a number of complex family-environment group differences in the relations among intellectual ability, birth order, and children's academic achievement. Middle social status
Birth order
Strona
Weak
I
soc~alization
socialization
Lower soc~alstatus
FIG. 1. Fitted-mathematics achievement scores in relation to inteUectual abiliry and birth boys' surface, - girls' surface) order in each family environment group (--
In Fig. 2 the surfaces show the estimated relations among intellectual abihty, sibsize, and word-comprehension achievement for boys and girls in each family-environment group. The regression surfaces indicate that for girls there are no significant associations between sibsize and word comprehension in any of the family-environment groups. For boys, however, in middle statuslstrong academic socialization families, sibsize has significant negative
FAMILIES: SIBLING CORRELATES O F ACHIEVEMENT Middle sociol stotus
Lower soc~alstatus
FIG.2. Fitted-word comprehension scores in relation to intellectual ability and sibsize in each family environment group (-boys' surface, - girls' surface) associations with the achievement scores. Also, in lower statuslweak academic socialization families, word comprehension has curvilinear associations with boys' ability and sibsize. At each ability level, increases in sibsize from 1 to 3 are related to significant decreases in word comprehension scores. After a sibsize level of 3, however, further decrements are not related to significant changes in the achievement scores. I n contrast, at each sibsize level, increases in ability are related to positively increasing changes in word comprehension.
DISCUSSION The results of the study suggest the general proposition that within family-environmental groups, defined conjointly by social status and social-psychological dimensions, sibling variables are not related to academic achievement at different levels of children's intellectual ability. However, the findings d o indicate that there are variations to this general proposition. Indeed, sibling- variables have a number of complex associations with chddren's achievement in different family-environment groups. That is, the study indicates the difficulty of generalizing about asso-
154
K. MARJORIBANKS
ciations between sibling variables and outcomes, if the relationships are not examined for children from different family-environment -groups. - What is required now are investigations that examine relationships between sibling variables and other outcome measures for children from different familv contexts. In such research, it will be necessary to refine further the measurement of family socialization. Only after such research is completed will it be possible to determine to what extent sibling variables act independently of other family environment variables, to be associated with children's outcomes. REFERENCES BLAKE, J. (1989) Family size and achievement. Berkeley, CA: Univer. of California Press. BREWER,R. I., & HASLUM,M. N. (1986) Ethnicity: the experience of socio-economic disadvantage and educational attainment. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 7, 19-34. BROOM,L., DUNCAN-JONES, I?., JONES,F, L., & MCDONNELL,P. (1980) Investigating social mobiliv. New York: Oxford Univer. Press. BURIEL,R., & CARDOZA, D. (1988) Sociocultural correlates and achievement among three generations of Mexican-American high school seniors. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 177-192. DENCM,L. (1989) Growing up i n the r t - r n o d e y n a r : on the child's situation in the modern family, and on the position of t e f a d y m t e modern welfare state. Acta Sociologica, 32, 155-180. HER, D. M. (1985) Effects of sibling number on child outcome. In R. H. Turner & J. F. Short (Eds.), Annual review of sociology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. Pp. 27-47. MARJORIBANKS, K. (1987) Ability and attitude correlates of academic achievement: family-group differences. lournal of Educational Psychology, 79, 171-178. MCCARTHY, C. (1988) Rethinking liberal and radical perspectives on racial inequality in schooling: making the case for nonsynchrony. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 265-279. ROSEN,B. C. (1961) Family structure and achievement motivation. American Sociological Review, 26, 574-584. STEELMAN, L. C. (1985) A tale of two variables: a review of the intellecrual consequences of sibship size and birth order. Review of Educational Research, 55, 353-386
Accepted July 2, 1990.
SIBLING VARIABLE CORRELATES OF CHILDREN'S ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: FAMILY-GROUP DIFFERENCES KEVIN MARJORIBANKS Universily of Adelnide, Australia ' Summary.-The study examined the proposition that relationships among sibling variables, intellectual ability, and academic achievement vary for children from different family-environment groups. Data were collected from 900 ll-yr.-old Australian children and their parents. In the analysis, the children were classified into four family contexts that were defined conjointly by family social status and parents' academic socialization. Within each family group, regression surfaces were constructed from models that included terms to account for possible linear, interaction, and curviltnear associations among the variables. The results suggested the general proposition that within the family-environment groups, sibling variables were not related to academic achievement at different levels of children's abihty. However, the findings indicated that there were variations to this general proposition. Indeed, there were a number of complex associations between the sibling variables and children's academic achievement in the different family-environment groups.
In the development of a theoretical model to investigate the impact of sibling variables on children's outcomes, Blake (1989) examines relationships among sibsize (the number of children in a family), intellectual abhty, and academic achievement, for children from families of different social status. I t is suggested that one reason why research has underestimated the effect of sibsize on outcome measures is that "the influence of this variable is often incorporated into the over-all influence of family background or 'home' effects. . . . Thus absorbed into family background, the number of siblings serves to overestimate the importance of parental 'SES' and turn attention away from sibsize as an independent influence" (Blake, 1989, p. 49). Blake suggests further that numerous inconsistent, puzzling and anomalous results in sibling research "may be laid to the door of a lack of control for differences in the social status, or crucial other characteristics, of the home or the child" (p. 97). This study is generated from Blake's theoretical framework and exarnines the proposition that relationships among sibling variables, intellectual ability and academic achievement vary for children from different family-environment groups. Sibsize and birth order were chosen as the sibling variables for investigation. Steelman (1985) suggests, for example, that "misunderstandings still arise over the conceptual distinction between these two variables. It is important to note the difference. Sibship-size sets children
'Request reprints from Kevin Marjoribanks, The Vice-Chancellor, University of Adelaide, Australia.
148
K. MARJORIBANKS
from different families apart, while birth order distinguishes siblings within families from each other" (p. 357). For the analysis, children's family environments were defined by social-status indicators and proximal social-psychological variables. Moreover, a further refinement was adopted which suggests that social-status groups are not homogeneous in relation to the experiences provided for children (see Brewer & Haslum, 1986; Buriel & Cardoza, 1988; Dencik, 1989; McCarthy, 1988). As a result, each family-environment group was classified by those social spaces formed by the interaction of the social status and social-psychological dimensions. That is, the children in this investigation were categorized as being members of one of four family-environment groups. These groups were considered to act as underlying contexts in which sibling variables have differential associations with academic achievement at different levels of children's abihty. METHOD Data were collected from 900 Il-yr.-old Australian children and their parents in an investigation of the relations between family environments and children's academic achievement (see Marjoribanks, 1987). The sample was selected to reflect the social status and ethnic distribution of Australian farnilies. During interviews, parents provided descriptions of their occupations and indicated the levels of education they had attained. Occupations were assessed using a 14-point scale that ranks occupations in the Australian context (Broom, Duncan-Jones, Jones, & McDonnell, 1980) while 7-point scales were used to measure educational attainment. I n this latter scale, items ranged from less than elementary school completed to the completion of tertiary education. Principal components analysis showed that the status indicators loaded strongly on a general factor. Family social status was defined, therefore, by an equally weighted composite of parents' occupations and education. Also, for the analysis, Rosen's (1961) social-psychological conceptual framework was adopted to examine parent socialization in relation to the 11-yr.-olds. A schedule, in the form of a semistructured parent-interview inventory, was constructed to assess the interrelated components of parents' achievement training, independence training, achievement-value orientations, and aspirations. Interviewing was conducted in homes by experienced social survey interviewers who attended briefing sessions before and during the data collection. When the scores from the family inventory were factor analyzed, a general factor was generated that had a theta reliability estimate of 0.85. It was decided, therefore, to use one dimension to measure parents' socialization. High scores on the dimension indicated that parents stressed achievement training, encouraged independence, were individualistic, and had high aspirations for their children. Such families were defined as having strong parental achievement socialization. I n contrast, families were labeled as having
FAMILIES: SIBLING CORRELATES OF ACHIEVEMENT
149
weak achievement socialization if parents expressed relatively low achievement training, encouraged dependence, were collectivistic, and had lower aspirations. During the interviews with parents, data were collected on family sibsize and on the birth order of their 11-yr.-old children. The children's intellectual abihty was measured using the Raven's Progressive Matrices. Achievement in mathematics, word knowledge, and word comprehension was assessed by standardized tests devised by the Australian Council for Educational Research. These latter tests, the Class Achievement Test in Mathematics and the Primary Reading Survey Tests, have reliability estimates greater than 0.92. To create as uniform test-taking situations as possible, I administered the testing program w i t h n classrooms with the assistance of one other researcher who was involved in working with elementary school children and teachers.
RESULTS For the analysis, children were classified into four family groups that were defined by the median split of scores on the social status and parent-socialization measures. The median scores for the social status and parent socialization measures were 11 and 59, respectively. Family groups were labeled as middle status/strong academic socialization (144 boys, 143 girls), middle statuslweak academic socialization (49, 50), lower status/strong academic socialization (77, 80), and lower statuslweak academic socialization (179, 178). Within each fady-environment group, relationships among the sibling variables, intellectual ability and academic achievement were examined by plotting regression surfaces generated from hierarchical regression models. I n the models, product terms were included to test for possible interaction effects and squared terms were added to investigate possible curvilinear relationships. Prior research has indicated the presence of interaction and curvilinear associations between sibling variables and measures of children's cognitive performance (see Heer, 1985; Steelman, 1985). That is, the regression models were of the form: Z = constant + aX + bY + cX. Y + dX2+ eYZ,where Z, X, and Y represent measures of academic achievement, intellectual ability, and birth order or sibsize, respectively. I n the analysis, if the addition of interaction or squared terms was not associated with a significant increment in the amount of variance in outcome scores, then the term was deleted from the particular regression model. I n Table 1, the raw regression weights show that in each family group, the sibling variables tended not to be associated with the academic achievement scores. The findings do indicate, however, the possible complexity of relationships among the variables with a number of interaction and curvi-
150
K. MARJORIBANKS TABLE 1
Boys Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order
(Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize Ability x Sibsize (Ability)' (Sibsize)' Multiple R Girls
Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order (Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize (Ability)' Multiple R (continued on nex r page) Note.-M = mathematics, WK = word knowledge, WC = word comprehension. 'Absolute value of regression weight exceeds at least twlce its standard error. tMultiple correlation nonsignificant, all other multiple correlations significant beyond .05 level.
linear terms having significant associations with the outcome measures. Also, the results indicate that the ability and sibling variables combined to have modest to moderate significant relationships with the children's academic performances. From the raw regression weights in Table 1, regression surfaces were plotted to examine further the relationships among the variables. Because space is limited not aU the surfaces are presented. Instead, 16 surfaces that depict the nature of the different associations among the variables have been chosen and presented in two figures. Ability and academic achievement scores for the figures were standardized, with means of 50 and standard deviations of 10. Regression surfaces are graphical representations of the joint relations of two independent variables with an outcome measure. I n these particular surfaces, the horizontal axes represent children's ability and the sibling variables, while the vertical axis represents the children's academic achevement.
FAMILIES: SIBLING CORRELATES O F ACHIEVEMENT
151
TABLE 1 (CONT'D)
RAW REGRESSION WEIGHTSFORMULTIPLEREGESSIONO F ABILITY AND SIBLINGVARIABLES O N ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN EACH FAMILYENVIRONMENT GROUP Abhty and Sibling Variables
Strong Socialization M WK WC
Weak Socialization M WK WC
Lower Status Boys Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order (Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize Ability x Sibsize (Ability)' (Sibsize)' Multiple R Girls Ability Birth Order Ability x Birth Order (Ability)' Multiple R Ability Sibsize (Ability)' Multiple R Note.-M = mathematics, WK =word knowledge, WC = word comprehension, "Absolute value of regression weight exceeds at least twice its standard error. tMultiple correlation nonsignificant, all other multiple correlations significant beyond .05 level.
The surfaces in Fig. 1 show the estimated relations among intellectual ability, birth order and-mathematics achievement for boys and girls in each family-environment group. I n the two family groups defined by weak parental academic socialization, the shapes of the surfaces are representative of most of the regression models in the study. That is, the surfaces indicate that at each birth order IeveI, intellectual ability has significant associations with children's mathematics achievement. I n contrast, at each value of intellectual ability, there are no significant relationships between birth order and mathematics scores. The regression surface relating to girls in the middle status/strong academic socialization group, reflects the presence of a significant interaction effect between ability, birth order and mathematics performance. At low ability levels, birth order is not related significantly to mathematics scores whereas at high ability increments in birth order are associated with significant decreases in mathematics achievement. For boys in lower status/strong
152
K. MARJORIBANKS
academic sociahzation f a d e s , birth order has a significant positive association with their mathematics performance. That is, at each ability level, increments in birth order are related to increases in achevement. The regression surfaces show also a curvilinear relationship between ability and mathematics for boys in middle statuslstrong academic socialization families, and for girls in lower statuslstrong academic socialization families. That is, the findings for birth order suggest a number of complex family-environment group differences in the relations among intellectual ability, birth order, and children's academic achievement. Middle social status
Birth order
Strona
Weak
I
soc~alization
socialization
Lower soc~alstatus
FIG. 1. Fitted-mathematics achievement scores in relation to inteUectual abiliry and birth boys' surface, - girls' surface) order in each family environment group (--
In Fig. 2 the surfaces show the estimated relations among intellectual abihty, sibsize, and word-comprehension achievement for boys and girls in each family-environment group. The regression surfaces indicate that for girls there are no significant associations between sibsize and word comprehension in any of the family-environment groups. For boys, however, in middle statuslstrong academic socialization families, sibsize has significant negative
FAMILIES: SIBLING CORRELATES O F ACHIEVEMENT Middle sociol stotus
Lower soc~alstatus
FIG.2. Fitted-word comprehension scores in relation to intellectual ability and sibsize in each family environment group (-boys' surface, - girls' surface) associations with the achievement scores. Also, in lower statuslweak academic socialization families, word comprehension has curvilinear associations with boys' ability and sibsize. At each ability level, increases in sibsize from 1 to 3 are related to significant decreases in word comprehension scores. After a sibsize level of 3, however, further decrements are not related to significant changes in the achievement scores. I n contrast, at each sibsize level, increases in ability are related to positively increasing changes in word comprehension.
DISCUSSION The results of the study suggest the general proposition that within family-environmental groups, defined conjointly by social status and social-psychological dimensions, sibling variables are not related to academic achievement at different levels of children's intellectual ability. However, the findings d o indicate that there are variations to this general proposition. Indeed, sibling- variables have a number of complex associations with chddren's achievement in different family-environment groups. That is, the study indicates the difficulty of generalizing about asso-
154
K. MARJORIBANKS
ciations between sibling variables and outcomes, if the relationships are not examined for children from different family-environment -groups. - What is required now are investigations that examine relationships between sibling variables and other outcome measures for children from different familv contexts. In such research, it will be necessary to refine further the measurement of family socialization. Only after such research is completed will it be possible to determine to what extent sibling variables act independently of other family environment variables, to be associated with children's outcomes. REFERENCES BLAKE, J. (1989) Family size and achievement. Berkeley, CA: Univer. of California Press. BREWER,R. I., & HASLUM,M. N. (1986) Ethnicity: the experience of socio-economic disadvantage and educational attainment. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 7, 19-34. BROOM,L., DUNCAN-JONES, I?., JONES,F, L., & MCDONNELL,P. (1980) Investigating social mobiliv. New York: Oxford Univer. Press. BURIEL,R., & CARDOZA, D. (1988) Sociocultural correlates and achievement among three generations of Mexican-American high school seniors. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 177-192. DENCM,L. (1989) Growing up i n the r t - r n o d e y n a r : on the child's situation in the modern family, and on the position of t e f a d y m t e modern welfare state. Acta Sociologica, 32, 155-180. HER, D. M. (1985) Effects of sibling number on child outcome. In R. H. Turner & J. F. Short (Eds.), Annual review of sociology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. Pp. 27-47. MARJORIBANKS, K. (1987) Ability and attitude correlates of academic achievement: family-group differences. lournal of Educational Psychology, 79, 171-178. MCCARTHY, C. (1988) Rethinking liberal and radical perspectives on racial inequality in schooling: making the case for nonsynchrony. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 265-279. ROSEN,B. C. (1961) Family structure and achievement motivation. American Sociological Review, 26, 574-584. STEELMAN, L. C. (1985) A tale of two variables: a review of the intellecrual consequences of sibship size and birth order. Review of Educational Research, 55, 353-386
Accepted July 2, 1990.
