ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS' EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES: THE EFFECTS OF PARTICIPATION ON ACHIEVEMENT AND TEACHERS' EVALUATIONS

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 09 October 2014, At: 23:12Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Sociological Spectrum: Mid-South Sociological AssociationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usls20

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLSTUDENTS' EXTRACURRICULARACTIVITIES: THE EFFECTSOF PARTICIPATION ONACHIEVEMENT AND TEACHERS'EVALUATIONSSusan A. Dumais aa Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge,Louisiana, USAPublished online: 16 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: Susan A. Dumais (2006) ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS'EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES: THE EFFECTS OF PARTICIPATION ON ACHIEVEMENT ANDTEACHERS' EVALUATIONS, Sociological Spectrum: Mid-South Sociological Association,26:2, 117-147, DOI: 10.1080/02732170500444593

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02732170500444593

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usls20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/02732170500444593

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02732170500444593

losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ EXTRACURRICULARACTIVITIES: THE EFFECTS OF PARTICIPATION ONACHIEVEMENT AND TEACHERS’ EVALUATIONS

Susan A. Dumais

Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA

I use data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study to examine boththe number and the types of extracurricular activities in which elementaryschool students participate and find significant differences in partici-pation patterns by gender, race, and class. The number of activities inwhich students participate during kindergarten and first grade affectstheir gains in reading achievement test scores between first and thirdgrade and third grade teachers’ evaluations of mathematics skills, butdoes not affect gains in math achievement test scores or teachers’ evalua-tions of language arts skills. Dance lessons, athletic activities, and artlessons, in particular, affect one or more of the dependent variables. Withone exception, interactions of extracurricular activities with socio-economic status show that less-privileged children benefit more from parti-cipation in activities than do more-privileged children, providing evidenceagainst Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital and social reproduction.

Within the sociology of education, parents are known to play a majorrole in their children’s educational experiences and outcomes: every-thing from students’ track placement to students’ college aspirationscan be affected by parental involvement. Recently, research hasfocused on social class differences in child-rearing practices (Lareau2002; Lareau 2003; Chin and Phillips 2004). These studies have foundthat parents from higher socioeconomic status (SES) backgroundsare more likely to involve their elementary school-aged children ina variety of scheduled activities than lower-SES parents. Lareau(2003) calls this phenomenon ‘‘concerted cultivation,’’ and argues

I am grateful for the comments of Mariano Sana and the anonymous reviewers.

Address correspondence to Susan A. Dumais, Department of Sociology, Louisiana State

University, 126 Stubbs Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

Sociological Spectrum, 26: 117–147, 2006

Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 0273-2173 print/1521-0707 online

DOI: 10.1080/02732170500444593

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

that exposure to a variety of activities provides higher-SES studentswith skills which then help them navigate the educational system totheir advantage. In contrast, children from lower SES backgrounds,who are often allowed to spend their free time as they choose, donot gain these educational advantages.

These recent studies on young children’s extracurricular activitieshave been qualitative in nature, focusing on only a few dozen childrenat a time. In the present study, I address two major unresolved issuesthat have been generated by this past research. First, using data fromthe Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, a nationally representativedata set which follows students from kindergarten through fifthgrade, I determine whether the past qualitative findings about socialclass and children’s extracurricular activities can be generalized toa larger population of elementary school students in America.Secondly, I examine whether participation in extracurricular activitieshas measurable effects on specific educational outcomes; these out-comes have not been examined in the past qualitative studies onelementary school students.

The present study thus examines students’ participation in extra-curricular activities during the kindergarten and first grade years,examining variations by gender, race, and SES. I examine the effectsof participation on academic outcomes in two subjects—languagearts and math—and consider both the students’ gains in achievementtest scores and the teachers’ evaluations of the students’ abilities.Overall, the findings do not support the argument that participationin activities serves as a cultural resource that only benefits membersof the privileged classes; instead, participation in activities has posi-tive effects on all students—and on lower-SES students in parti-cular—and can lead to higher achievement levels in reading andhigher teacher evaluations in math.

PREVIOUS LITERATURE

Theoretical Background

The idea that social class differences exist in child rearing appeared inthe work of Kohn (1969); one of the main theorists to apply this ideato the sociology of education was Bourdieu, who is credited with thecreation of the term cultural capital. Bourdieu (1973, p. 80) definescultural capital as ‘‘linguistic and cultural competence and thatrelationship of familiarity with culture which can only be producedby family upbringing when it transmits the dominant culture.’’ Chil-dren born into privileged families are exposed to certain language

118 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

styles and tastes and develop a broad appreciation for culture by thetime they enter the educational system. These styles, tastes, anddispositions serve as a form of capital that children can convert intoacademic rewards.

The concept of cultural capital figures largely in Bourdieu’s (1973,1984, 1997) theory of social reproduction, which states that thesociety’s class structure is reproduced via the educational systemand the way that cultural capital functions within it. Bourdieu arguedthat the French school system, which on the surface appears to bemeritocratic, actually favors those students who possess cultural capi-tal and display an appreciation for their nation’s dominant culture.These children may receive more attention from teachers, bettergrades, and more encouragement to pursue higher education thanstudents from more modest backgrounds. The students possessingcultural capital are thus more likely to go to college and to secureprestigious occupations, thus reproducing the social structure of theprevious generation.

Academic success, then, is partially contingent on the transmissionof cultural capital that takes place in the home (Bourdieu 1984). Chil-dren with more cultural capital—children from the more privilegedsocial classes—are able to communicate better with teachers (whothemselves have an appreciation for culture) and master the coursematerial more quickly than those students lacking cultural capital.

It is possible to accumulate cultural capital in the school environ-ment as children from all social classes learn about the society’sdominant culture and tastes. However, the potential to accumulatecultural capital at school depends upon the amount of cultural capitalthe student already possesses. Bourdieu (1997, p. 49) argued that theaccumulation of cultural capital ‘‘starts at the outset, withoutdelay . . . only for the offspring of families endowed with strongcultural capital.’’ Therefore, students from working- and lower-classbackgrounds start out behind middle- and upper-class students intheir possession of cultural capital and continue to lag behindbecause it is more difficult for them to acquire via the school system.Bourdieu also argued that cultural capital acquired at school wouldappear more stilted and less natural than the cultural capital acquiredat home.

Bourdieu believed that these differences in possession of culturalcapital accumulate over time, so that students from less-privilegedbackgrounds have less and less chance of succeeding educationallyas they proceed through school. Students lacking cultural capital willbe less likely to pursue education beyond high school, while studentshigh in cultural capital will go on to attend elite universities. Students

Elementary School Students’ Activities 119

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

from lower social class backgrounds thus remain in their originalposition in the social structure and elites continue in their position.

Empirical Research on Cultural Participation

Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital was directed toward the Frencheducational system, but researchers worldwide have studied theconcept of cultural capital and its effects on students’ educationaloutcomes. The quantitative research on cultural capital has tendedto measure students’ levels of cultural capital by focusing on the higharts activities in which students participate, while educational out-comes have been measured as grades, achievement test scores, and=orthe highest level of education attained. The findings from thisresearch have been mixed; while some studies find support forBourdieu’s argument that students from higher SES backgroundsparticipate in cultural activities that give them educational advan-tages, others find that cultural participation does not have aneffect on educational outcomes. Katsillis and Rubinson (1990), forexample, studied cultural participation among high school studentsin Greece and found that, while there were social class differencesin cultural participation rates (with students from higher class back-grounds being more likely to participate in high culture), partici-pation had no direct or indirect effects on students’ grades. Stillother studies find that participation may result in educational advan-tages for students from less privileged backgrounds, a finding thatconflicts with Bourdieu’s theory of social reproduction, which statesthat there should be greater advantages for students from higherstatus backgrounds.

Some of the earliest studies of the effects of cultural capital in theUnited States were done by DiMaggio and Mohr (DiMaggio 1982;DiMaggio and Mohr 1985). Using a large dataset of high schoolstudents from 1960, DiMaggio (1982) found that cultural activitieshad a significant effect on students’ grades, even after controllingfor ability and fathers’ education. Using the same data set, DiMaggioand Mohr (1985) found that cultural activities had significant effectson several educational outcomes (educational attainment, collegeattendance, and college completion). However, in contrast to thesocial reproduction model that was proposed by Bourdieu, DiMaggio(1982) found mixed results in the United States: while returns tocultural capital were greatest for females from high status families,providing support for the social reproduction model, the returnsto cultural capital were also greatest for males from low statusfamilies.

120 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

DiMaggio (1982, p. 190) argued that his findings for malesprovided support for a cultural mobility model in the United States:‘‘Active participation in prestigious status cultures may be a practicaland useful strategy for low status students who aspire towardsupward social mobility.’’ In other words, children from lower-statusbackgrounds who participate in cultural activities may receive greaterrewards for their participation than students from high-statusbackgrounds, because their participation makes them stand out fromtheir other, low-status peers and helps them fit into the high-statusgroup. At the same time, some students from high-status back-grounds may choose not to participate in high-status cultural activi-ties, taking their cultural resources for granted and instead opting tobecome involved in more lowbrow pursuits.

Kalmijn and Kraaykamp (1996) also found support for a culturalmobility model in the United States, although, they focused on par-ents’, rather than children’s, cultural activities and focused on racial,rather than social class, differences. They used data from the Surveysof Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA) to show that over thetwentieth century Blacks have increased their cultural capital at afaster rate than whites. They found that, for both Blacks and whites,more exposure to cultural capital is associated with higher levels ofschooling and concluded that cultural capital may serve as a routeto upward mobility for Blacks in the United States.

Aschaffenburg and Maas (1997) also used data from the SPPA,but had very different findings than those of Kalmijn and Kraay-kamp. Aschaffenburg and Maas (1997) used the SPPA data to showthat cultural participation, particularly taking lessons in arts activi-ties, positively affected educational transitions (going to high school,completing high school, moving from high school to college, andcompleting college). They found that children from more privilegedbackgrounds did not benefit more from cultural participation thanless privileged children when considering the transition into highschool or from attending high school to graduating, but that therewas an advantage for more privileged children who participated incultural activities when considering the transition from high schoolto college. In particular, they found that participating in a culturalclass before age 12, and between ages 12 and 17, had larger positiveeffects on the likelihood of beginning college for children whose par-ents had some college (or more) than for children whose parents onlyhad a high school diploma. Their findings thus added support toBourdieu’s social reproduction model, which argues that it is the chil-dren from higher-status families who receive the greatest academicbenefit for their participation in cultural activities, which in turn leads


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

to the reproduction of the social stratification structure as these chil-dren go on to college and high status occupations.

Roscigno and Ainsworth-Darnell (1999) used data from theNational Education Longitudinal Study to study how cultural trips,cultural classes, and household educational resources (such as adictionary and an encyclopedia) affected grades and achievement testscores. They found that all three forms of cultural capital positivelyaffected both outcomes and that the returns for cultural trips andeducational resources were less for Black and low-SES students, thanfor white and high-SES students. These findings again support thesocial reproduction model by showing that those individuals whoalready hold privilege in society (whites and high-SES students)receive greater benefits for their participation in cultural activities,thus securing their place in the social structure, while Blacks andlower-SES individuals are unable to achieve mobility through theuse of these activities.

The mixed findings from cultural capital research in the UnitedStates have led some researchers to wonder whether the concept ofcultural capital is appropriate to apply to the American schoolsystem. In particular, the narrow focus of cultural capital researchon high arts activities has received some criticism (Kingston 2001).Most researchers agree that there is not the same strong, class-basedculture in the United States as there is in France, where Bourdieuconducted his research. For example, a number of studies on tastein art (Peterson and Simkus 1992; Halle 1993) have found that a min-ority of upper-class people has preferences for abstract art, classicalmusic, or opera, while their favorite forms of culture tend to be more‘‘lowbrow,’’ such as country music or landscape paintings. Further-more, American schoolteachers tend to have lower-middle classstatus, as opposed to the higher status they hold in France; while theyare disproportionately represented in arts audiences (DiMaggio andUseem 1978), not all of them participate in the arts and they maynot value cultural capital to the degree that Bourdieu argues.

The question arises, then, as to whether there is an elite culture thatis shared by members of the upper class and widely recognized by allAmericans as the dominant culture and whether participation in theseelite activities truly benefits students’ educational outcomes. Becauseof these issues, researchers in the United States have begun to expandthe definition of cultural capital to include activities and knowledgebeyond those classified as high culture. Below, I examine some ofthe research that expands the definition of cultural capital andfocuses on a group that has not received much attention in quantitat-ive research: elementary school-aged children.

122 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Expanding the Definition of Cultural Capital

In an ethnographic study comparing two elementary schools, onemiddle-class and one working-class, Lareau (2000, p. 177) expandsthe definition of cultural capital from knowledge of the high arts toclass-based cultural resources: ‘‘. . . parents were not drawing on highstatus cultural resources—such as taste in classical music orimpressionist art—but they were drawing on cultural resources linkedto social class.’’ For example, Lareau (2000) found that middle-classparents were more likely to have informal ties to educators and ties toother parents in the community. Middle-class parents used theseresources to learn what happened in one classroom compared toanother; based on this information, they requested that their childrenbe moved to a classroom with a teacher who was more favorablyreviewed by the people in their networks. Working-class parents, incontrast, tended to have fewer ties with educators and tended tospend time with relatives rather than other parents in their com-munity, providing them with less information about their children’sschool experiences. The access to these types of networks may alsobe limited by race, as Lareau and Horvat (1999, p. 49) found in theirqualitative study of parent-school relationships: ‘‘Although middle-class black families still benefit from their class position (and interactwith schools in different ways than their less-privileged counterparts),they still face an institutional setting that implicitly (and invisibly)privileges white families.’’

Furthermore, recent ethnographic research has shown that otherkinds of extracurricular activities, beyond those that fall into therealm of high art, can serve as cultural resources in children’s schoolexperiences. Lareau (2002, 2003) found that middle-class childrenwere likely to have a variety of activities, including sports, scheduledfor them after school, while working-class children had moreunscheduled time. Lareau concluded that by participating in theseactivities and frequently interacting with adults, middle-class childrenlearned how to manage interactions to their advantage both insideand outside of school. Cultural capital, therefore, arose from interact-ing with adults and growing a sense of entitlement, rather than fromparticipating in activities that were considered high art. Chin andPhillips (2004) found similar social class differences in children’ssummer activities, although they disagreed with Lareau’s contentionthat working-class parents believe children’s development unfoldsspontaneously; instead, they found that working-class parents oftenfaced financial and time obstacles that prevented them from involvingtheir children in many activities.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

These qualitative studies explore the idea that in the United States,it is not just participation in music and dance lessons that serve ascapital, providing benefits to students as they negotiate their waythrough the educational system. Participation in other kinds ofstructured activities, such as sports or Girl Scouts, may be just asbeneficial. Unfortunately, because these studies have been qualitativein nature, it is difficult to assess the degree to which extracurricularactivities directly affect educational outcomes in a generalizable way.The recent availability of a data set, the Early Childhood LongitudinalStudy, which follows children from the onset of their education,provides a new opportunity for quantitative analyses of the earlyeffects of extracurricular activities on students’ educational outcomes.

ANALYSES

Analytic Strategy

The analyses that follow address several questions regarding extra-curricular participation, educational outcomes, and social reproduc-tions. First, I establish whether there are social class differences inparticipation rates in extracurricular activities. Past research impliesthat there should be significantly different participation rates bystudents from different SES levels, particularly with regard to higharts activities.

Second, I establish whether there is a relationship between extra-curricular participation and educational outcomes and what thenature of that relationship is. While much of the cultural capitalresearch (Bourdieu 1973; DiMaggio 1982) argues that cultural capitalserves as a signal to teachers that students are knowledgeable andshould be rewarded, other research makes the argument that partici-pation in cultural activities has a direct effect on students’ abilitylevels, leading to higher levels of achievement (Schellenberg 2004).These are two very different arguments, with the first implying sys-tematic inequalities in schools and the second implying actual gainsin learning. In the analyses that follow, I include both gains inachievement test scores and teachers’ subjective rankings of students’skills (in language arts and in mathematics) as dependent variables.

Third, by including interaction terms for SES and extracurricularactivities, I establish whether elementary school students’ culturalcapital operates according to the cultural reproduction model, wherehigher-SES students benefit more from their participation, or accord-ing to the cultural mobility model, where lower-SES students receivegreater benefits for extracurricular activities.

124 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Finally, by conducting analyses that include each type of extra-curricular activity separately, as well as analyses that include the totalnumber of activities in which students participate, I establish whetherin the United States it is participation in high arts activities, partici-pation in other activities such as sports and clubs, or merely partici-pating in extracurricular activities in general that leads to educationalbenefits.

Data1

Data are from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, KindergartenClass of 1998–1999 (ECLS-K), Kindergarten-Third Grade Longitudi-nal Public-Use Data File. The ECLS-K, collected by the U.S. Depart-ment of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics, followsa nationally-representative cohort of children from kindergartenthrough fifth grade; currently, data from kindergarten, first grade, andthird grade are available.2 The ECLS-K began in 1998–1999 when thechildren were in kindergarten; using a dual-frame, multistage sample,information was gathered approximately on 22,000 children in 1,000kindergarten programs across the United States.

The ECLS-K contains child assessments as well as data fromparents, teachers, and school administrators. The children’s cognitiveskills in reading, mathematics, and general knowledge (i.e., scienceand social studies) were measured in untimed one-on-one assessments,conducted at the children’s schools by trained assessors. Informationfrom parents, including social background information, involvementwith their children’s schooling, and their child’s developmental historywas gathered from Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing.Teachers completed self-administered questionnaires, providing infor-mation about their own backgrounds, their classroom practices,and individual evaluations for each sampled child on a number ofcognitive and noncognitive dimensions.

To be included in the Kindergarten-Third Grade LongitudinalData File, students could fall into one of two groups. First, studentswere included if there was a parent interview or child assessment inthe spring of 1999 (kindergarten year) as well as at least once during

1Information on the data comes from the ECLS-K Base Year User’s Manual, the ECLS-K

First Grade User’s Manual, and the ECLS-K Third Grade User’s Manual, all of which are avail-

able on the ECLS-K Kindergarten-Third Grade Public-Use Data File CD-ROM. More infor-

mation about the study in general can be found at the study’s website, http:==nces.ed.gov=ecls.2Because the third grade sample was not freshened, the third grade data is representative of

students who were in kindergarten in 1998–1999 or in first grade in 1999–2000, but not of third

grade students nationally.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

the first grade year. Second, students were included if there was achild assessment or parent interview available from the spring ofthird grade and also from the spring of first grade (as well as anyearlier time periods). The sample size of the Kindergarten-ThirdGrade Longitudinal Data File is 17,401 students.

Data for the present analyses are from the Spring 1999 (kinder-garten), Spring 2000 (first grade), and Spring 2002 (third grade)Questionnaires for Parents and Teachers and from the direct childassessments. For these analyses, only students in public schoolsthroughout the time period are included; the differences betweenpublic and private schools with regard to children’s participation inactivities are an important area for future research, but beyond thescope of the present study.3 Additionally, minority groups other thanblacks and Hispanics were too small in number for meaningful analy-ses to be conducted and so they were dropped from the sample.4 Thedeletion of nonpublic school students, the minority groups describedabove, and students who were missing data (either from not beingsurveyed during one of the three time periods under study, or fromlacking a value on one of the key variables studied) brings the presentsample size to 5,696. The findings from this study can be generalizedto students who were in kindergarten in public schools during the1998–1999 school year in the United States.

A list of all the variables, with their means and standard devia-tions, is provided in the Appendix. There are four dependent vari-ables in this study; two focus on reading and language arts andtwo focus on mathematics. The two dependent variables related toreading and language arts are gains in reading test scores betweenfirst and third grades (average 39.9, standard deviation 14.8), andthird grade teachers’ ratings of students’ language arts skills. Thereading test scores used in these analyses are item response theory(IRT) scores; although the questions asked of students in first andthird grades are not identical, IRT scoring allows longitudinal

3The response rate for public schools in Fall 1999 was 70%. Within these schools, the

response rate for student assessments was 90%, the parent interview response rate was

84%, and the teacher response rate (for evaluations of students) was 91%; thus, the overall

response rates were 63% for student assessments, 59% for parent interviews, and 64% for

teacher evaluations. In Spring 1999, the overall response rates were 65% for child assessments,

61% for parent interviews, and 64% for teacher evaluations. Of the children sampled in

the base year, 95% had child assessments, 86% had parent interviews, and 85% had teacher

evaluations in Spring 2000 (first grade), and in Spring 2002 (third grade) 99% had child

assessments, 87% had parent interviews, and 79% had teacher evaluations.4The analyses were also conducted with all of the minority groups included, and the results

did not differ significantly from the results presented here.

126 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

measurement of gain in achievement over time. The language artsrating variable (mean 3.10, standard deviation 1.01) is based on thequestion: ‘‘Overall, how would you rate this child’s academic skillsin each of the following areas, compared to other children of the samegrade level?’’ The answer ranged from 1 to 5, with 1 being ‘‘far belowaverage’’ and 5 being ‘‘far above average.’’

The third dependent variable is the gain in math test scores betweenfirst and third grades (average 29.93, standard deviation 11.12); likethe reading test scores, the math scores are IRT scores. The finaldependent variable is the teacher’s rating of students’ mathematicsskills (average 3.15, standard deviation .91), based on the same ques-tion posed above to teachers with regard to language arts skills.

The independent control variables include dummy variables forfemale, black, and Hispanic, a variable for SES, and students’ kinder-garten reading test scores. The SES variable is a composite reflectingthe SES of the household in Spring 1999 and consisting of mother’sand father’s education, mother’s and father’s occupational prestige,and household income. SES is the average of these five measures,each of which was standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standarddeviation of 1. A hot deck imputation methodology was used toimpute for missing values of all components of the SES. In hot deckimputation, the value reported by a respondent for a particular itemis given or ‘‘donated’’ to a ‘‘similar’’ person who failed to respond tothat question.

The independent variables of interest are participation in extracur-ricular activities during kindergarten and first grade. In both kinder-garten and first grade, parents were asked: ‘‘Outside of school hours,has {CHILD} ever participated in. . .’’ with the following activitieslisted: dance lessons; organized athletic activities, such as basketballor gymnastics; organized clubs, such as Boy Scouts; music lessons;art classes or lessons; and organized performing arts programs.Parents’ responses were ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’; in the following analyses,‘‘yes’’ is coded as 1 and ‘‘no’’ is coded as 0. Unfortunately, becausethe parents were only asked if the child had ever participated in theactivity, it is not possible to distinguish between students who parti-cipated in activities during kindergarten only and those who tooklong-term lessons throughout kindergarten and first grade. Forexample, a parent who answers that his or her child had ever takendance lessons in kindergarten, and who again responds ‘‘yes’’ in firstgrade, could be referring to lessons that the student only took inkindergarten. Therefore, in the analyses that follow, a student receivesa score of 1 for any activity where the parent responds ‘‘yes’’ in eitherkindergarten, first grade, or both. Activities are studied separately


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

as well as in a single variable counting the total number of activitiesin which a student participates (ranging from 0 to 6).

Results5

Overall, 78.4% of children in the sample participated in one or moreactivities during the kindergarten year and=or during first grade.Table 1 presents the percentages of participation by SES, race, andgender. The top section of the table focuses on SES differences.6

The activity that is most common for all children, regardless of

5Because of the nature of the data, the survey tabulation (svytab) and survey regression

(svyreg) commands were used in Stata, with the stratum c245pstr, the primary sampling unit

c245ppsu, and the weight c245pw0.

Table 1. Percentage of students who participated in activities during

kindergarten and/or first grade

Music

lessons

Dance

lessons

Performing

arts

Art

lessons Athletics Clubs

Any one

activity

SES Quintilea

Lowest 3.9 7.3 17.4 5.7 32.7 18.6 53.6

2 7.1 13.4 19.2 8.6 53.8 27.6 70.7

3 10.4 20.8 25.7 13.1 66.5 37.2 82.0

4 13.5 26.8 30.0 16.1 76.0 44.6 89.7

Highest 22.6 36.9 40.3 25.0 87.1 51.5 96.7

Raceb

White 12.1 23.8 26.3 14.8 73.2 41.5 85.2

Black 10.7 11.9 34.6 12.3 41.9 26.5 68.5

Hispanic 8.2 17.5 16.5 9.1 44.5 21.8 61.8

Genderc

Male 9.3 4.0 17.7 11.6 69.7 32.7 79.6

Female 13.1 37.6 34.7 15.3 56.2 38.6 77.2

aSES differences for each activity were significant at p < .001 (based on the design-

corrected Pearson chi-square statistic for independence calculated for each activity, comparing

the SES quintiles).bRacial differences for every activity except music lessons and art lessons were significant at

p < .001; for music and art lessons, the difference was significant at p < .05.cGender differences for each activity except art lessons were significant at p < .001; gender

differences for art lessons were significant at p < .01. There was no significant difference

between males and females for the ‘‘any one activity’’ category.

N ¼ 5696.

Source: ECLS-K Longitudinal Kindergarten-Third Grade Public-Use Child File.

6 For the lowest SES quintile the median education level was a high school diploma and the

median income was $12,000, for the third SES quintile the median education level was some

college and the median income was $40,000, and for the highest SES quintile the median edu-

cation level was some graduate school and the median income was $80,000.

128 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

SES, race, or gender, is athletics; even so, the participation rates forthis activity vary widely. Eighty-seven percent of children in the high-est SES quintile participated in athletics during kindergarten and=orfirst grade, compared to 33% of children in the lowest SES quintile;indeed, this activity has the largest percentage point differencebetween the lowest and highest SES quintiles (54 percentage points).The least popular activities were music lessons and art lessons; 4%and 6%, respectively, of students in the lowest SES quintile partici-pated in each of these activities during kindergarten and first grade,and a quarter or less of children in the highest SES quintile did so.For every type of activity, the children in the lowest SES quintile havethe lowest participation rate and the children in the highest SES quin-tile have the highest participation rate; as SES increases, so does thelikelihood of participation. The final column of the table presents thepercentage of children who participated in any one activity duringkindergarten and=or first grade; 54% of students in the lowest SESquintile did so, compared to 97% of the students in the highestSES quintile. The majority of young children in the United States,then, are being exposed to organized activities during their early yearsin elementary school.

Turning to racial differences, Table 1 shows that whites are morelikely than Blacks or Hispanics to participate in every activity exceptperforming arts; black children have a higher participation rate forthis activity than do white children. Athletic activities are the mostpopular extracurricular activity for children from all three racial=ethnic groups, but even so, there are large gaps in participationbetween the groups: the white rate of participation is 31 percentagepoints higher than the black rate, and 28 percentage points higherthan the rate for Hispanics. Eighty-five percent of white childrenparticipated in an activity during kindergarten and first grade,compared to 69% of black children and 62% of Hispanic children.

The bottom of Table 1 shows gender differences in participation.While there is not a significant difference in the percentage of malesand females who have participated in an activity (more than three-quar-ters of both males and females have done so), there are significant dif-ferences in the specific types of activities in which girls and boysparticipate. Girls are far more likely to have taken dance lessons duringkindergarten and=or first grade (38%, compared to 4% of boys), andthey are also much more likely to have been in performing arts classes(35%, compared to 18% of boys). In contrast, boys are more likely tohave participated in athletic activities (70%, compared to 56% of girls).

Of the three stratifying factors, SES appears to play the biggestrole in participation in extracurricular activities. This finding concurs


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

with Lareau’s (2002, 2003) research, where she found that middle-class black and white children had more in common with regard toafter-school activities than did middle-class and working-class chil-dren. While middle-class children of both races had highly-scheduledlives, black and white children from less privileged backgrounds hadonly one or two scheduled activities at most and were given thefreedom to play with friends or to watch television. The averagehours of television viewed by children in the ELCS-K illustrate theselifestyle differences: on average, during the kindergarten and firstgrade years, children in the lowest SES quintile watched 8.6 hoursof television per week, while students in the third quintile watched7.3 hours and those in the highest quintile watched only 6.0 hours.

In the next table, I examine how participation in activities, by itselfand in combination with stratifying factors, may affect children’s edu-cational outcomes. Table 2 presents OLS regression results for modelspredicting gains in reading scores between first and third grades.Model 1 includes the control variables. Females have significantlyhigher gains than males, blacks have significantly lower gains thanwhites, and higher-SES students have higher gains than lower-SESstudents. In this model and in all subsequent models, the children’sreading test score from kindergarten has a negative effect on the gainsthey achieve between first and third grade.

Table 2. Effects of total number of activities on gains in reading scores

between first and third grades

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

SES 2.612�� (.363) 2.155�� (.391) 2.208�� (.389) 2.182�� (.384)

Female 1.419�� (.420) 1.072� (.424) 1.167�� (.424) 1.074�� (.408)

Black �5.813�� (.727) �5.724�� (.730) �5.686�� (.735) �6.015�� (.710)

Hispanic �1.666 (.864) �1.384 (.840) �1.312 (.829) �1.268 (.835)

Kindergarten reading

test score

�.345�� (.019) �.353�� (.019) �.353�� (.019) �.355�� (.019)

Number of activities .735�� (.165) .805�� (.162) 1.176�� (.262)

Activities �SES �.447� (.196) �.563�� (.203)

Activities �Female �.221 (.330)

Activities �Black �1.019� (.426)

Activities �Hispanic �.171 (.496)

Constant 53.790�� (.856) 52.953�� (.921) 54.116�� (.894) 54.291�� (.875)

R-squared .0974 .1012 .1022 .1034

Standard errors are in parentheses.�p < .05; ��p < .01; ��p < .001.

N ¼ 5696.


130 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

In Model 2, the variable for the number of activities is added, andis found to have a significant effect. For each activity in which astudent participates, his or her gain in reading test score increasesby .735 points. While this result is statistically significant, the actualeffect—an increase of .735 on a dependent variable with a standarddeviation of 14.8—is not large. The introduction of this variable intothe model increases the variance explained only slightly, from .097 to.101. However, the introduction of this variable into the model doesdecrease the effect of SES (from 2.612 in Model 1 to 2.155 in Model2). This finding provides support for Bourdieu’s theory of culturalcapital and social reproduction, by showing that part of the advan-tage of SES works through cultural activities.

In Models 3 and 4, I consider the interaction of the number ofactivities with the stratifying factors of gender, race, and SES.7 Model3 shows that in contrast to what Bourdieu’s social reproductiontheory would predict, students from higher-SES backgrounds actuallybenefit less from their participation in activities than students fromlower-SES backgrounds. This finding—that lower-SES childrenbenefit more from participation—supports DiMaggio’s (1982) cul-tural mobility model. The way the interaction works is shown inFigure 1, which presents the regression lines for students who are in

7In this and all subsequent analyses, the continuous variables that were interacted were

centered prior to the interaction. In other words, in Model 3, the variable for socioeconomic

status was centered, as was the variable for number of activities; the interaction term is the

product of these two centered variables.

Figure 1. Effects of activities on reading gains for different levels of SES.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

the first, 50th, and 99th percentiles for socioeconomic status, and theeffects that each additional activity has on their gains in readingscores.

Model 4 includes the interactions for number of activities withgender and race, in addition to the variables included in previousmodels. The interaction of activities and SES continues to have anegative effect on gains in reading scores, and the interaction ofactivities and being black also has a negative effect; that is, blackstudents have lower gains in their reading test scores than whitestudents, even when they participate in the same number of activities.

Overall, then, this table shows that participating in activities isrelated to increased gains in reading achievement test scores, withthe gains being larger for students from lower-SES backgrounds thanfrom higher SES backgrounds.

Table 3 presents the OLS regression results for models predictingthird grade teachers’ evaluations of students’ language arts skills, asthey compare to other students in the same class. Model 1, withthe control variables, shows that SES, being female, and being Hispa-nic (versus being white) all have positive effects on teachers’ evalua-tions, as does a student’s reading test score from the kindergartenyear; being black has a negative effect. Even within relatively homo-geneous classroom settings, then, background factors have an impacton teachers’ evaluations. In Model 2, the variable for the number of

Table 3. Effects of total number of activities on third grade teachers’ ratings

of language arts skills


SES .173�� (.021) .163�� (.023) .165�� (.023) .165�� (.023)

Female .163�� (.028) .155�� (.031) .158�� (.031) .158�� (.030)

Black �.183�� (.047) �.181�� (.047) �.180�� (.047) �.172�� (.046)

Hispanic .082� (.039) .088� (.039) .090� (.038) .041 (.041)


test score

.039�� (.001) .039�� (.001) .039�� (.001) .039�� (.001)

Number of activities .016 (.017) .018 (.018) .028 (.018)

Activities �SES �.012 (.012) �.022 (.012)

Activities �Female .009 (.021)

Activities �Black �.002 (.026)

Activities �Hispanic �.101�� (.035)

Constant 1.544�� (.066) 1.526�� (.068) 1.538�� (.068) 1.539�� (.065)

R-squared .3173 .3176 .3178 .3199


N ¼ 5696.


132 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

activities in which a student participates is included, and does nothave a significant effect on the dependent variable. The increase inR-squared that results from the addition of this variable is minis-cule—from .3173 to .3176. The noneffect of participation in activitiesis contrary to what Bourdieu would expect; this finding implies thatrather than rating students based on their cultural capital (i.e., theirextracurricular activities), teachers focus on other factors, such as stu-dents’ past achievement, when rating their language arts skills. How-ever, all of the student background characteristics (gender, race, andsocioeconomic status) continue to have significant effects, which indi-cates that teachers evaluate students not just on their achievementtest scores, but also by their place in society. In other words, the find-ing that cultural capital does not have an effect on teachers’ languagearts evaluations does not necessarily mean that schools are egali-tarian institutions.

Models 3 and 4 include interaction terms for the number of activitieswith gender, race, and SES. In Model 3, the number of cultural activi-ties continues to have no significant effect on teachers’ evaluations,and the interaction of number of activities with SES also has no effect.In Model 4, the interaction of number of activities with Hispanic isfound to have a significant but negative effect; that is, a student of His-panic origin who participates in activities will receive lower teacherevaluations than a white student. However, the variable for the num-ber of activities itself still remains insignificant. Overall, the inclusionof the variable for number of activities and for the interactions doesnot help to explain the variance in teachers’ evaluations by very muchat all; from the first to the fourth model, the R-squared increases onlyfrom .3173 to .3199.

Tables 2 and 3 showed that the number of activities in which astudent participates has an effect on their gains in reading test scoresbetween first and third grades, but does not affect teachers’ evalua-tions of language arts skills. In the next two tables, I examine eachextracurricular activity separately to determine if certain kinds ofextracurricular participation are more beneficial for educationaloutcomes than others. For example, in the United States, wheresports are an extremely popular activity and high culture is less com-mon, perhaps students who participate in athletics receive academicbenefits that students who participate in art lessons do not.

Table 4 examines the effect of different activities on gains in read-ing test scores. Model 1, with the control variables, is identical toModel 1 in Table 2. In Model 2, the extracurricular activities areincluded. Three activities are found to have significant positive effectson gains in reading test scores: dance lessons, athletic activities, and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

participation in clubs. The inclusion of extracurricular activities inthe model reduces the effect of being female on gains in reading testscores, rendering the variable insignificant. Moreover, the inclusionof the activities reduces the coefficient for SES from 2.612 to 2.044,indicating that part of the SES advantage is realized through partici-pation in extracurricular activities—as Bourdieu’s cultural capitalargument posits.

In Model 3, I include interaction terms for each of the activitieswith socioeconomic status. Social reproduction theory would predictthat higher-SES students who participate in activities benefit morethan lower-SES students; in contrast, social mobility theory wouldpredict that lower-SES students benefit more from participation thanhigher-SES students (DiMaggio 1982). While most of the activities inModel 3 do not have a significant interaction with SES, the one vari-able that does, music lessons, has a negative sign, implying supportfor social mobility theory. In other words, lower-SES students who

Table 4. Effects of activities on gains in reading scores between first and

third grades

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

SES 2.612�� (.363) 2.044�� (.396) 2.547�� (.590)

Female 1.419�� (.420) .920 (.480) .993� (.476)

Black �5.813�� (.727) �5.212�� (.769) �5.275�� (.775)

Hispanic �1.666 (.864) �1.262 (.870) �1.300 (.857)


test score

�.345�� (.019) �.351�� (.019) �.394�� (.019)

Music lessons .010 (.805) .719 (.867)

Dance lessons 2.295�� (.641) 2.482�� (.709)

Performing arts �.880 (.711) �.824 (.761)

Art lessons .544 (.545) .750 (.605)

Athletics 1.379� (.581) 1.309� (.573)

Clubs 1.122� (.523) .937 (.512)

Music �SES �1.699� (.860)

Dance �SES �.576 (.858)

Performing arts �SES �.690 (.727)

Art �SES �.808 (.940)

Athletics �SES �.175 (.814)

Clubs �SES .912 (.668)

Constant 53.790�� (.856) 52.478�� (.988) 52.237�� (.975)

R-squared .0974 .1044 .1067


N ¼ 5696.


134 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

take music lessons have larger gains in their reading test scores thanhigher-SES students who take music lessons. Dance lessons andathletic participation continue to have significant positive effects asindividual activities, although these effects are rather small: 2.5 units(dance lessons) and 1.3 units (athletics) on a dependent variable witha standard deviation of 15. It appears that sports activities as well ashigh culture activities (dance) can positively affect students’ achieve-ment, as measured by gains in reading test scores.

Finally, Table 5 presents the OLS regression results for modelspredicting teachers’ evaluations of students’ language arts skills.Model 1 is identical to Model 1 of Table 3. In Model 2, the extracur-ricular activities are included in the analysis, but none of the activitiesis found to have an effect, and the R-squared increases only from .317to .319. It appears that teachers’ evaluations of students’ languageand literacy skills are not affected either by specific types of extracur-ricular activities, or by a certain number of extracurricular activities

Table 5. Effects of activities on third grade teachers’ ratings of students’

language arts skills


SES .173�� (.021) .161�� (.022) .157�� (.029)

Female .163�� (.028) .150�� (.034) .150�� (.034)

Black � .183�� (.047) � .177�� (.048) � .177�� (.048)

Hispanic .082� (.039) .087� (.038) .087� (.038)


test score

.039�� (.001) .039�� (.001) .039�� (.001)

Music lessons � .046 (.039) � .033 (.045)

Dance lessons .051 (.040) .047 (.044)

Performing arts .018 (.038) .008 (.040)

Art lessons .072 (.043) .116� (.046)

Athletics .042 (.032) .041 (.031)

Clubs � .039 (.037) � .035 (.040)

Music �SES � .040 (.053)

Dance �SES .007 (.044)

Performing arts �SES .036 (.042)

Art �SES � .134�� (.046)

Athletics �SES .039 (.040)

Clubs �SES � .021 (.049)

Constant 1.544�� (.066) 1.520�� (.066) 1.493�� (.065)

R-squared .3173 .3190 .3205


N ¼ 5696.



Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

(as shown in Table 3). The direction and significance of all the controlvariables remain the same as they were in Model 1, indicating thatSES, gender, and race all affect teachers’ evaluations of language artsskills, even when controlling for past test scores. In Model 4, theinteractions with SES are included along with the extracurricularactivities. One activity, art lessons, has a positive effect on teachers’evaluations, and the interaction of art lessons and SES has a negativeeffect, indicating that the benefit from participating in art lessons (asit affects teachers’ language arts evaluations) is greater for lower-SESthan higher-SES children. This finding, like the results of Tables 2and 4, lends support to the social mobility model; less privilegedstudents receive greater benefits from participation than do moreprivileged students. No other activity or interaction term besidesart lessons has an effect on teachers’ evaluations.

The previous tables focused on gains in reading test scores and onteachers’ evaluations of students’ language arts skills; it was foundthat the total number of activities, as well as the specific activitiesof dance lessons and athletics, had positive effects on gains in readingtest scores. Additionally, the number of activities interacted with SESso that students from lower-SES backgrounds enjoyed more of anadvantage in reading gains for their participation in activities. Teach-er’s evaluations were not affected by the total number of activities,although Hispanic students who participated in activities receivedlower teacher evaluations than white students; the specific activityto affect teachers’ evaluations was art lessons, which interactedwith SES to provide an advantage to students from lower-SESbackgrounds.

The next several tables consider the effects of extracurricular par-ticipation on student outcomes in mathematics; in particular, I exam-ine the gains in math test scores between first and third grades, andthird grade teachers’ evaluations of students’ mathematics skills. InTable 6, gains in test scores are examined. Model 1, with the controlvariables, shows that students from higher-SES backgrounds experi-ence greater gains in math scores than students from lower-SES back-grounds, while females and African-American students experiencelower gains than males and whites, respectively. The students’ scoreon the kindergarten math test is unrelated to their gains between firstand third grades.

In Model 2, the total number of activities is added, and is notfound to have an effect on students’ gains in math test scores. Thisfinding differs from the finding for reading test scores, where eachadditional activity raised the students’ gain by .735 points. WhenSES is interacted with the number of activities in Model 3, no effects

136 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

are found. Again, this finding differs from the results of theregression on gains in reading test scores, where the number of activi-ties and SES interacted to the benefit of lower-SES students. Finally,in Model 4, interactions are added for total number of activities withfemale, black, and Hispanic, and again, no effects are found. Thefinal model is only a very slight improvement over the first modelin terms of variance explained (from .0353 to .0367). It does notappear that participation in extracurricular activities has any measur-able effect on students’ gains in math scores.

Table 7 examines the effects of extracurricular activities onteachers’ evaluations of students’ mathematics skills. In Model 1,socioeconomic status, Hispanic status, and the student’s math testscore in kindergarten all have positive effects on teachers’ ratingsof students’ math skills, while being black has a negative effect.The number of activities variable, presented in Model 2, is not foundto have a significant effect on teachers’ evaluations and only increasesthe R-squared slightly (from .3198 in Model 1 to .3203 in Model 2).When the interaction of SES and number of activities is added inModel 3, there are still no major changes from the previous models.It is not until Model 4—which includes interactions for female, black,and Hispanic with the number of activities—that an effect appearsfor activities. In this final model, participating in an activity raises

Table 6. Effects of total number of activities on gains in math scores between

first and third grades


SES 1.179�� (.335) 1.087�� (.360) 1.124�� (.365) 1.121�� (.364)

Female �1.739�� (.324) �1.814�� (.319) �1.749�� (.333) �1.773�� (.339)

Black �3.774�� (.710) �3.764�� (.714) �3.739�� (.716) �3.769�� (.690)

Hispanic .746 (.742) .800 (.726) .849 (.727) .681 (.745)

Kindergarten math

test score

.006 (.021) .004 (.021) .004 (.021) .003 (.021)

Number of activities .150 (.147) .198 (.150) .331 (.238)

Activities �SES �.305 (.181) �.355 (.186)

Activities �Female �.060 (.237)


Activities �Hispanic �.389 (.374)

Constant 31.202�� (.856) 31.042�� (.784) 31.263�� (.734) 31.312�� (.735)

R-squared .0353 .0356 .0364 .0367


N ¼ 5696.



Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

a teacher’s evaluation of a student’s math score by .038. This is a verymodest effect, given that the standard deviation for this variable is.913. The interaction of SES and number of activities is negative,as it was in Table 2 (which examined the effects of activities onstudents’ reading gains); in other words, the benefit for participatingin activities is greater for students from lower-SES backgrounds thanfor students from higher-SES backgrounds. Additionally, the interac-tion of Hispanic and number of activities is negative. This indicatesthat Hispanic students who participate in activities receive lowerreturns for their participation than white students. The dummy vari-able for Hispanic status becomes insignificant in this model. In thisfinal model, the background characteristics of SES and being blackcontinue to influence teachers’ evaluations.

The patterns for the effects of cultural activities on educationaloutcomes thus appear to be different for math than they do for read-ing and language arts. The number of cultural activities was found toincrease students’ gains in reading test scores, with the gains beinghigher for students from lower-SES backgrounds. For gains in mathtest scores, the number of activities in which students participated didnot have an effect, either by itself or when interacted with SES.In contrast, teachers’ evaluations of students’ math skills were posi-tively affected by the number of activities in which the students

Table 7. Effects of total number of activities on third grade teachers’ ratings

of mathematics skills


SES .100�� (.019) .089�� (.021) .091�� (.022) .090�� (.022)

Female �.040 (.027) �.049 (.030) �.047 (.029) �.049 (.027)

Black �.118�� (.044) �.117�� (.043) �.116�� (.043) �.115�� (.042)

Hispanic .113� (.052) .120� (.050) .122� (.049) .077 (.040)

Kindergarten math

test score

.043�� (.001) .043�� (.001) .043�� (.001) .043�� (.001)

Number of activities .017 (.014) .019 (.015) .038� (.018)

Activities �SES �.012 (.012) �.023� (.011)

Activities �Female .001 (.022)


Activities �Hispanic �.099� (.039)

Constant 1.805�� (.050) 1.787�� (.052) 1.810�� (.052) 1.815�� (.049)

R-squared .3198 .3203 .3205 .3228


N ¼ 5696.


138 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

participated, again with students from lower-SES backgroundsreceiving more of a benefit for their participation. Teachers’ evalua-tions of students’ language arts skills, however, were not affected bythe number of activities.

In Table 8, I consider the effects of particular extracurricularactivities on students’ gains in math test scores between first and thirdgrades. Model 1 in Table 8, with the control variables, is identical toModel 1 in Table 6. In Model 2, the individual activities are intro-duced. The only activity found to have a significant effect is dancelessons; on average, students who take dance lessons experience a1.276 point gain in their math test scores between first and thirdgrades. In Model 3, each of the activities is interacted with SES tosee if there is support for a cultural reproduction or cultural mobilitymodel. No evidence is found for either model, as none of the interac-tions is found to have a significant effect, in either direction, on gainsin math test scores. Dance lessons continue as the only activity tohave a significant effect on students’ gains in math scores. Dance

Table 8. Effects of activities on gains in math scores between first and third

grades


SES 1.179�� (.335) 1.015�� (.364) 1.368� (.633)

Female �1.739�� (.324) �1.939�� (.343) �1.893�� (.345)

Black �3.774�� (.710) �3.499�� (.697) �3.541�� (.687)

Hispanic .746 (.742) .806 (.736) .792 (.729)

Kindergarten math test score .006 (.021) .004 (.021) .005 (.021)

Music lessons �.213 (.708) .265 (.834)

Dance lessons 1.276� (.500) 1.375� (.527)

Performing arts �.850 (.450) �.793 (.476)

Art lessons .679 (.587) .798 (.669)

Athletics .595 (.390) .545 (.394)

Clubs �.254 (.426) �.317 (.451)

Music �SES �1.118 (.839)

Dance �SES �.255 (.514)

Performing arts �SES �.595 (.584)

Art �SES �.489 (.622)

Athletics �SES .050 (.598)

Clubs �SES .263 (.535)

Constant 31.202�� (.747) 30.901�� (.793) 30.783�� (.790)

R-squared .0353 .0384 .0400


N ¼ 5696.



Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

lessons were also found to have a significant effect on students’ gainsin reading scores, as shown previously in Table 4.

Finally, in Table 9, I examine the effects of individual activities onteachers’ evaluations of students’ mathematics ability. Model 1 isidentical to Model 1 in Table 7. In Model 2, participation in athleticsis found to have a positive effect on teachers’ evaluations; no otheractivities are found to have an effect. Model 3 includes interactionterms for each of the activities with SES; when these interaction termsare included, the SES variable itself decreases from .087 to .062 and isno longer statistically significant. Like the findings in Tables 2 and 4,this drop in SES shows that part of the benefit of SES works throughparticipating in activities. However, the activities found to be signifi-cant here (in contrast to Bourdieu’s theory) are not all highbrow.Participation in athletics continues to have a significant positiveeffect, and the interaction of athletics and SES is positive, indicatingthat higher-SES students who participate in athletics receive higherevaluations from their teachers for their math skills than do lower-SES students who participate in athletics. In contrast to the finding

Table 9. Effects of activities on third grade teachers’ ratings of students’

mathematics skills


SES .100�� (.019) .087�� (.021) .062 (.034)

Female �.040 (.027) �.050 (.033) �.048 (.033)

Black �.118�� (.044) �.109� (.044) �.110� (.044)

Hispanic .113� (.052) .122� (.050) .119� (.050)

Kindergarten math test score .043�� (.001) .043�� (.001) .043�� (.001)

Music lessons �.041 (.032) �.009 (.036)

Dance lessons .051 (.038) .062 (.039)

Performing arts .013 (.033) .006 (.036)

Art lessons .052 (.038) .077 (.042)

Athletics .057� (.028) .060� (.028)

Clubs �.030 (.032) �.030 (.033)

Music �SES �.090� (.038)

Dance �SES �.050 (.039)

Performing arts �SES .035 (.041)

Art �SES �.081 (.042)

Athletics �SES .072� (.033)

Clubs �SES .001 (.034)

Constant 1.805�� (.050) 1.773�� (.055) 1.750�� (.055)

R-squared .3198 .3218 .3236


N ¼ 5696.


140 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

for athletics, the interaction of music lessons and SES has a negativeeffect, meaning that lower-SES students who take music lessonsreceive higher evaluations from their teachers for their math skillsthan do higher-SES students. Overall, the final model explains32.4% of the variance in teachers’ evaluations, only a slight improve-ment of Model 1 (which explained approximately 32.0% of thevariance).

The table which focused on teachers’ ratings of language arts skillsshowed that art lessons had a significant positive effect on teachers’ratings, particularly for students from lower-SES backgrounds. Formath skills, the findings are more mixed, with athletics beingbeneficial to higher-SES students and music lessons being beneficialto lower-SES students.

DISCUSSION

In contrast to the implications of Bourdieu’s theory, I do not findconsistent strong effects for participating in high cultural extra-curricular activities, nor do I find that participation is more beneficialfor students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. The main find-ings from this study are that the number of extra-curricular activitiesin which one participates has an effect for gains in reading test scoresand for teachers’ evaluations of students’ math skills and that thereturns for participation are, for the most part, greater for studentsfrom lower-SES backgrounds. At the same time, SES and being blackwere both found to influence teachers’ evaluations of students innearly all of the models, with higher-SES students getting higherevaluations than lower-SES students, and black students gettinglower evaluations than whites, even when all students had the sameachievement test scores. It would be inaccurate to say, then, thatinequality does not exist in the American school system.

It should be noted that the overall findings from the analyses werequite modest. For example, each activity in which a child participatesraises the gain in reading score by 1.176 (or approximately 1=15 of astandard deviation) and teachers’ math evaluations by .038 (orapproximately 1=25 of a standard deviation).

The findings from the analyses support both of the argumentsabout how cultural capital functions to affect educational outcomes.The number of extracurricular activities was found to increase gainsin students’ reading test scores, supporting the argument that culturalcapital affects actual skill levels. However, the number of extracur-ricular activities was also found to affect teachers’ evaluations ofstudents’ mathematics ability, supporting the argument that teachers


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

perpetuate inequalities by favoring students who have culturalcapital. Teachers’ evaluations of students’ language and literacy skillsand students’ gains in math test scores were not affected by the num-ber of activities in which students participated; the only specificactivity to have an effect on the evaluations was art lessons. Artlessons operated under the social mobility model with teachers givinghigher ratings to lower-SES students who took lessons than to moreprivileged students who took lessons. Dance lessons were the onlyactivity to affect gains in math scores and this activity did not interactwith SES in any meaningful way. It is not clear why the number ofactivities affected gains in reading test scores but not for math testscores, or why the number of activities affected teachers’ evaluationsof math but not their evaluations of reading. It is possible that par-ents who involve their children in a number of activities are also morelikely to spend time reading to them, which in turn could build uptheir reading skills. There is less clarity in why teachers’ evaluationsin math are affected, but not teachers’ evaluations in language arts.

More broadly, further research is necessary to determine thespecific causal mechanisms that link participation to educational out-comes (in this case, gains in reading scores and higher teacher evalua-tions of mathematics skills). There appear to be at least fourpossibilities for explaining the findings here: enhanced student skills,parental involvement, social networks at the adult level, and peercultures.

Students who participate in multiple activities may develop cogni-tive and psychological skills that would help them to do well onachievement tests and in the classroom. For example, in the presentstudy, dance lessons were found to have a positive effect both on gainsin student reading tests and on teachers’ evaluations of math skills.The volume Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student Academicand Social Development (Deasy 2002), reviews the literature onparticipation in several different arts activities and various academicoutcomes. In the review of literature on dance lessons, seven studiesare discussed; the studies find that dance improves students’ creativethinking skills and that movement (dance) can reinforce cognitiveskill development. In other words, the skills that students learn fromparticipating in dance can then transfer over to other activities. Otherqualities, such as self-confidence and diligence, may also transfer fromextracurricular activities into the classroom.

Parents who involve their children in extracurricular activities mayalso spend time investing in their children in other ways, such as read-ing with them at home, making sure they know what is going on inthe classroom, and staying in contact with the student’s teacher.

142 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Parents who do not involve their children in activities may not havethe money, time, or other resources available to make the same kindsof investments in their children that highly-involved parents do.

Additionally, parents who involve their children in activities mayget to know parents who would not otherwise be in their socialcircles. In talking with these other parents, they may learn aboutother cultural classes in which to enroll their children, different par-enting styles and strategies, or tips for navigating the educational sys-tem. All of this information can then serve to help the student succeedin school. Lareau (2003) finds that both black and white middle classparents involve their children in extracurricular activities, but doesnot explore whether the networks generated for white middle classparents differ from those of blacks; this topic should be consideredin future research.

At the child’s level, peer groups play an important role in the social-ization process. Another possibility to explain the link betweenactivities and academic success, then, is that children who parti-cipate in activities are exposed to children from more privilegedbackgrounds. Through this exposure, children may learn new com-munication styles and obtain cultural capital. Corsaro and Eder(1990, p. 201) describe the process of producing peer culture as inter-pretive: ‘‘. . . (C)hildren become a part of adult culture and contributeto its reproduction through their negotiations with adults and theircreative production of a series of peer cultures with other children.’’Children may desire to be like their peers and do what they are doing,and in this way they may learn skills that they would not have learnedotherwise. A related argument is made by Lareau (2003), who statesthat students who participate in several extracurricular activitiesdevelop communications skills that help them in their interactionsand negotiations with teachers, resulting in higher teacher evaluations.

The ECLS-K data, unfortunately, lack the information necessaryto be able to sort through the possible causal linkages describedabove. To determine which of the mechanisms are at work, futurestudies will need to collect data about how much time parents spendwith their children and what they do during this time together. Datashould also be collected on the friendships made by both children andtheir parents, determining in what contexts the friends are known,what kind of influence the friends have on the survey respondents,and how the friends compare to the respondents in their place inthe social structure. Finally, the data provided about extracurricularactivities need to be much more detailed in future studies, providinginformation about how much time is spent on each activity and whatis actually accomplished during the activities’ meetings.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

The specific activities that influenced gains in reading scores andteachers’ math evaluations in the final models were dance lessons,music lessons, and athletics. Dance lessons were far more likely tobe taken by girls than by boys and only a small percentage of allchildren took music lessons, but a majority of students in everygender, race, and SES category except the lowest SES quintile parti-cipated in sports. A majority of American children, then, currentlyhave the opportunity to gain in their reading achievement test scoresand their evaluations of math performance through their partici-pation in athletics.

In all of the analyses, the increase in variance explained by includ-ing the extracurricular activities was minimal, implying that theseactivities in and of themselves are not a major factor in explainingvariance in educational outcomes. Considering other forms ofparental involvement along with children’s participation in extra-curricular activities is an important next step for research in this area.Additionally, an important area for future research is the cumulativeeffect of participation in activities; that is, how much greater is thebenefit for students who participate in long-term lessons than forstudents who participate only once or sporadically? Past research(Aschaffenburg and Maas 1997; Dumais 2002) has examined thesedifferences among adolescents, but the effects on elementary schoolchildren remain unknown. A final wave of the ECLS-K data willbe released within the next few years, focusing on the students whenthey are in fifth grade, thus allowing researchers to examine thecumulative effects of participating in activities during the elementaryschool years.

Gender and racial background were included as control variablesin the analyses, but future research on early childhood activities mustconsider these stratifying factors more directly. Gender and race havebeen addressed in past quantitative research on adolescents andcultural capital, but not in research on young children. Additionally,other types of after school activities, such as time spent exercising orworking on computers, should be considered in addition to the struc-tured extracurricular activities that were discussed here.

Finally, a distinction may need to be made between the possessionof cultural capital and the activation of cultural capital to receivebenefits in the school system (Lareau 2000). Certainly, cultural capi-tal can be seen as an integral part of an individual and may be drawnon unconsciously, particularly in the case of children. However,Lareau has argued that possession of cultural capital is not enough:‘‘individuals must activate capital in social environments, and theyvary in the skills they have to do so’’ (Lareau and Horvat 1999,

144 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

P. 50). In other words, although students may have culturalresources, if they do not use them to their advantage, then they areno better off than students who are lacking cultural capital. Qualitat-ive research has examined the microlevel interactions where childrenand their parents activate their cultural resources to gain advantagesin schools (Lareau 2000, 2003). Ideally, future research will combinequalitative studies of the activation of cultural capital with quantitat-ive, generalizable analyses of the conversion of cultural capital intoeducational rewards.

Participating in extracurricular activities can have modest effectson children’s gains in reading scores and on teachers’ evaluationsof mathematics skills. Moreover, children from lower socioeconomicbackgrounds reap greater benefits from participating in activitiesthan do children from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. It doesnot appear, then, that American schools necessarily function in thesame way that Bourdieu argued French schools do, with teachersprivileging students from wealthy backgrounds for their culturalresources, while poorer students did gain any benefits if they partici-pated in high status activities. Participation in activities in the UnitedStates appears to interact with SES in a way that largely favorsstudents from lower-class backgrounds. Making extracurricularactivities widely available to children from all backgrounds, andencouraging parents to get their children involved in these activities,may well help students as they pursue their language arts and math-ematics studies at school.

REFERENCES

Aschaffenburg, Karen and Ineke Maas. 1997. ‘‘Cultural and Educational Careers.’’

American Sociological Review 62:573–587.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1973. ‘‘Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction.’’ Pp. 71–

112 in Knowledge, Education, and Cultural Change: Papers in the Sociology of

Education, edited by Richard Brown. London: Tavistock.

———. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

———. 1997. ‘‘The Forms of Capital.’’ Pp. 46–58 in Education: Culture, Economy,

and Society, edited by A. H. Halsey, Hugh Lauder, Phillip Brown, and Amy Stuart

Wells. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Chin, Tiffani and Meredith Phillips. 2004. ‘‘Social Reproduction and Child-rearing

Practices: Social Class, Children’s Agency, and the Summer Activity Gap.’’

Sociology of Education 77:185–210.

Corsaro, William A. and Donna Eder. 1990. ‘‘Children’s Peer Cultures.’’ Annual

Review of Sociology 16:197–220.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Deasy, Richard J. (Ed). 2002. Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student

Academic and Social Development. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.

DiMaggio, Paul. 1982. ‘‘Cultural Capital and School Success: The Impact of Status

Culture Participation on the Grades of U.S. High School Students.’’ American

Sociological Review 47:89–201.

DiMaggio, Paul and John Mohr. 1985. ‘‘Cultural Capital, Educational Attainment,

and Marital Selection.’’ American Journal of Sociology 90:231–261.

DiMaggio, Paul, and Micheal Useem. 1978. ‘‘Cultural Democracy in a Period of

Cultural Expansion: The Social Composition of Arts Audiences in the United

States.’’ Social Problems 26:179–97.

Dumais, Susan A. 2002. ‘‘Cultural Capital, Gender, and School Success: The Role

of Habitus.’’ Sociology of Education 75:44–68.

Halle, David. 1993. Inside Culture: Art and Class in the American Home. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Kalmijn, Matthijs, and Herbert Kraaykamp. 1996. ‘‘Race, Cultural Capital, and

Schooling: An Analysis of Trends in the United States.’’ Sociology of Education

69:22–34.

Katsillis, John and Richard Rubinson. 1990. ‘‘Cultural Capital, Student Achieve-

ment, and Educational Reproduction: The Case of Greece.’’ American Sociologi-

cal Review 55:270–279.

Kingston, Paul W. 2001. ‘‘The Unfulfilled Promise of Cultural Capital Theory.’’

Sociology of Education Extra Issue:88–99.

Kohn, Melvin. 1969. Class and Conformity: A Study in Values. Homewood, IL:

Dorsey Press.

Lareau, Annette. 2000. Home Advantage: Social Class and Parental Intervention in

Elementary Education, 2nd edition. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littleford.

———. 2002. ‘‘Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black Families

and White Families.’’ American Sociological Review 67:747–776.

———. 2003. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race and Family Life. Berkeley: University

of California Press.

Lareau, Annette and Erin McNamara Horvat. 1999. ‘‘Moments of Social Inclusion

and Exclusion: Race, Class, and Cultural Capital in Family-School Relation-

ships.’’ Sociology of Education 72:37–53.

Peterson, Richard A. and Albert J. Simkus. 1992. ‘‘How Musical Tastes Mark Occu-

pational Status Groups.’’ Pp. 152–186 in Cultivating Differences : Symbolic Bound-

aries and the Making of Inequality, edited by Michele Lamont and Marcel

Fournier. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Roscigno, Vincent J. and James W. Ainsworth-Darnell. 1999. ‘‘Race, Cultural

Capital, and Educational Resources: Persistent Inequalities and Achievement

Returns.’’ Sociology of Education 72:158–178.

Schellenberg, E. Glenn. 2004. ‘‘Music Lessons Enhance IQ.’’ Psychological Science

15:511–514.

146 S. A. Dumais

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Appendix. Descriptive statistics for variables used in the analyses

Variable Mean

Standard

deviation

Female (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .496 .500

Black (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .174 .379

Hispanic (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .166 .372

Socioeconomic Status �.062 .742

Socioeconomic Status Quintile 2.959 1.357

Music Lessons in Kindergarten and=or First Grade (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .112 .316

Dance Lessons in Kindergarten and=or First Grade (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .207 .405

Performing Arts in Kindergarten and=or First Grade (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .261 .439

Art Lessons in Kindergarten and=or First Grade (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .134 .341

Athletics in Kindergarten and=or First Grade (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .630 .483

Clubs in Kindergarten and=or First Grade (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes) .356 .479

Total Number of Activities in Kindergarten and=or First Grade 1.701 1.390

Kindergarten Reading Test Score 38.074 12.419

Gain in Reading Test Score Between First and Third Grade 39.922 14.808

Third Grade Teachers’ Ranking of Student’s Language Arts Skills

(1 ¼ low, 5 ¼ high)

3.097 1.007

Kindergarten Math Test Score 31.594 11.008

Gain in Math Test Score Between First and Third Grade 29.933 11.115

Third Grade Teachers’ Ranking of Student’s Mathematics Skills

(1 ¼ low, 5 ¼ high)

3.148 .913

N ¼ 5,696.



Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:12

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Documents

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS' EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES: THE EFFECTS OF PARTICIPATION ON ACHIEVEMENT AND TEACHERS' EVALUATIONS