Cited by 44Children's Rights and ParticipationHigher Education Practises and EngagementYouth Development and Social Support

Is Responsiveness to Student Voice Related to Academic Outcomes? Strengthening the Rationale for Student Voice in School Reform

Open access
Kahne, Joseph, Bowyer, Benjamin, Marshall, Jessica, Hodgin, Erica·2022·American Journal of Education

Abstract

Purpose: Drawing on relevant literature, we conceptualize three pathways through which responsiveness to student voice may promote academic goals. Then, we analyze panel data of students in the Chicago Public Schools to examine this relationship. We focus on the “responsiveness” of teachers and administrators to student voice, because prior work has highlighted that opportunities for student voice are often symbolic. Our central goal is to examine whether responsiveness to student voice is related to academic outcomes. Research Methods/Approach: We draw upon student records collected in Chicago Public Schools from the 2017–18 and 2018–19 school years, as well as students’ responses to questions administered in the district’s 2019 5Essentials Survey. We estimate models of the effect of responsiveness to student voice on students’ ninth-grade academic outcomes, controlling for students’ eighth-grade attendance and grade point average. Findings: In schools that students regard as responsive to their expressed critiques, students have better grades and attendance and reduced rates of chronic absenteeism. This is the first large-scale study employing panel data to examine the relationships between responsiveness to student voice and academic performance. Implications: Proponents of student voice have long emphasized its benefits in terms of democratic values and respect for the full humanity of young people. Scholars argue these benefits may be particularly important for students from marginalized communities. This study indicates that there are academic benefits as well. However, future studies are warranted to deepen our understanding of the mechanisms through which responsiveness to student voice yields valued benefits.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/719121

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kahne, J., Bowyer, B., Marshall, J., & Hodgin, E.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Riverside (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Education
Published
2022-05-01
Volume
128
Issue
3
Pages
389-415
ISSN
  • 0195-6744 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-6511
OpenAlex
W4221122891
Cited by
44
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2
FWCI
10.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
American Journal of Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Children's Rights and Participation
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Youth Development and Social Support
Keywords
student voice, educational outcomes, educational reform, teacher responsiveness, chronic absenteeism, student attendance, grade point average, ninth grade students, Chicago Public Schools, student engagement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review