MOBILITY AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN TEXAS: A MULTIYEAR, STATEWIDE INVESTIGATION

Purpose The first purpose of this journal-ready dissertation was to investigate the relationship of mobility to student achievement in Grade 6 students when controlling for economic status and not controlling for economic status. The second purpose was to examine the relationship of mobility to Grade 7 students’ academic achievement when controlling for and not controlling for economic status. Finally, the third purpose was to examine the relationship of mobility to the academic achievement of Grade 8 students when controlling for and not controlling for economic achievement. Method A non-experimental research design was used in this study. Participants were selected from the Texas Education Agency Public Education Information Management System. This database is publicly accessible and contains archival data about students’ enrollment, demographic, and testing history. Archival data were obtained for the 2002-2003, 2003-2004, 2004-2005, 2005-2006, 2006-2007, and 2007-2008 school years for Grade 6, 7, and 8 students in an accountability subset for a campus or district. Raw scores from the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills Reading, Mathematics, Science, and Writing tests were analyzed to determine if mobility, as measured by a student being enrolled at a campus less than 83% of the school year, had an effect on academic achievement, and if that effect persisted when controlling for economic status. Findings Results were consistent across all three grade levels and all subject areas. Statistically significant results were present for all analyses when controlling for and not controlling for economic status. Effect sizes for the relationship between economic status and academic achievement were large. Effect sizes for the relationship between mobility and academic achievement were trivial when controlling for and not controlling for economic status. Average scores for mobile students were between 1.93 and 3.69 points lower than the average scores of non-mobile students in reading; 2.57 and 5.63 points lower than the average scores of non-mobile students in mathematics; 1.66 and 2.42 points lower than the average scores of non-mobile students in writing; and 4.65 to 5.02 points lower than the average scores of non-mobile students in science. As such, results were congruent with the extant literature