Driessen, G. (2001). Public-private effects in elementary schools in the nineties. Paper Annual Meeting AERA, Seattle, WA, USA, April 9-14, 2001.

1. 1
PUBLIC-PRIVATE EFFECTS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IN THE NINETIES
dr. Geert Driessen, ITS, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands, P.O. Box 9048, 6500 KJ
Nijmegen, The Netherlands. E-mail: G.Driessen@its.kun.nl.
THE PARADOX OF THE PRIVATE SCHOOL SECTOR
Since the beginning of the 20
th
century Dutch society can be characterized as “pillarized”,
i.e.vertically segregated on the basis of religion with each “pillar” containing its own political
parties, schools, TV networks, newspapers, etc. (de Rooij, 1997). This close interweaving of the
religious and the secular implies that the choice of a private versus public school was not made on
educational grounds but on religious grounds (Dronkers, 1996). After the1960s, a process of
secularization and dechurching was initiated and the role of religion and the church within society
changed drastically (Felling, Peters & Schreuder, 1991). While the waning influence of the church
can be observed in most social institutions and organizations, it is remarkable that the
denominational educational system has remained largely intact. In 1950, for example, 73% of all
elementary school children attended a private school; in 1993, this was still 68% (Dronkers, 1996).
The occurrence of this paradoxical situation is related, in the opinion of Bax (1988), to the
vested interests of the professionals in denominational organizations and their legal protection.
According to Dronkers (1996) the informal relations between the school administration and the
teachers in private schools may contribute to the high achievement of the students in such schools
and thereby attract non-religious parents as well. Private schools may also be more attractive
because they pay considerable attention to basic values and norms. More traditional parents also
avoid public schools because they are generally too progressive. Finally, the conscious educational
choice of the parents and teachers at a private school encourages the development of an educational
community with shared values and may thereby foster higher achievement as well. Private schools
can thus provide some counterweight to the negative influence of increased individualization in
modern society. That the denominational education system has remained intact does not mean that
factors other than religion have not gradually come to play a role in the choice of school, especially
the quality of the education (Ritzen, van Dommelen & de Vijlder, 1997). One can add to this that,

2. 2
since the 1980s, a number of “new” denominations have emerged, such as the Islamic and the
Hindu (Driessen & Valkenberg, 2000).
In so far as differences that appear to be attributable to denomination or religious affiliation are
encountered, a variety of explanations have been put forth. Many of the explanations, however,
have not been empirically validated. Among others, Dijkstra (1997) mentions the selectivity thesis,
which suggests that the differences between private and public schools can be explained by the fact
that private schools attract better and more motivated students than public schools. Another
explanation may lie in the large degree of solidarity, involvement, and dedication on the parts of
the parents, teachers, and administration in private schools occupying a minority position. Such
schools are more or less forced to strongly compete with the most dominant schools in the region.
One can also sometimes speak of a better and more stable educational climate in private schools
when compared to public schools. This is a consequence of the fact that the private form of
administration makes it possible to protect the school against “undesired influences”. Yet another
explanation lies in the more effective management and administration of private schools. Dijkstra
(1997) also points to the importance of the social network or “functional community” surrounding a
school. In addition, Dijkstra (1992) observes that one can speak of a strong achievement-oriented
socializing culture for certain religious denominations. Some religions have a strong language
culture or culture of literacy, which obviously promotes educational achievement. Conversely, the
religious orientation of the parents can also negatively influence the educational achievement of
their children via their educationally unsupportive behavior.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Our review of the literature shows that the relations between the religious affiliation of parents and
the denominations of schools, on the one hand, and cognitive and non-cognitive educational results,
on the other hand are not clear. These connections have become very relevant over the past few
years, however, because both the government and society have been placing an increasingly
emphasis on the quality of education (Ritzen, van Dommelen & de Vijlder 1997). The quality of
the education can be deduced primarily from the output of the schools in terms of student

3. 3
achievement. According to Laemers (1999), the quality of the education is now grosso modo the
most important factor motivating parental school choice with the choice of a particular
denomination becoming more implicit as a result. This does not mean, according to Laemers, that a
group of parents with a specific interest in the denomination of the school does not exist as the
recent founding of Islamic, Hindu, and Evangelical schools clearly attests.
In light of these developments, it is relevant to determine the possible relations between
religious affiliation, denomination, and educational results. Relevant is also the possible
“mismatch” between parental affiliation and school denomination and the effects of this deviating
school choice on educational results. With the data from the Dutch cohort study of Elementary
Education (the so-called PRIMA study), these relations can now be studied. The PRIMA data allow
to control for socio-economic background characteristics and to study the early school years, which
constitute a phase of the school career that has yet to be considered. Stated concretely, we would
like to answer the following questions:
· What are the discrepancies between the religious affiliations of parents and the denominations of
the elementary schools attended by their children?
· What is the relation between religious affiliation, school denomination, the importance attached
to religious affiliation for child rearing by the parents, and the degree of satisfaction on the part
of the parents with the school?
· What relations exist between the religious affiliation of the parents, the denomination of the
school, the language and math achievement of the students, and the self-confidence and general
well-being of the students?
· What role does the socio-ethnic background of the students play in these relations?
DATA AND METHOD
The data from the PRIMA study were collected in the 1996/97 school year (Driessen, van Langen,
Portengen & Vierke, 1998).
1
Within the PRIMA cohort, a sample of 432 schools largely
representative of all elementary schools in The Netherlands can be distinguished. The parents of the
kindergarten children (2
nd
grade; 6-7 years of age) were asked about their religious affiliation via a

4. 4
written questionnaire. Information of 8394 students was available. Two questions were asked
with regard to the religious affiliation of the parents. First: “Which church, religious community, or
ideological group do you and your partner ascribe to?” The response categories were: (1) none, (2)
Catholic, (3) Dutch Reformed, (4) Calvinist, (5) other Christian, (6) Islamic, (7) Hindu, or (8)
other.
2
The second question was: “Do you and your partner consider it important for your child to
be raised according to a particular religious affiliation (see previous question)?” The possible
response categories varied from (1) completely unimportant, to (5) very important.
Regarding the denominations of the schools the following categories were distinguished: (1)
public, (2) Catholic, (3) Protestant Christian, (4) Reformed, Reformational, (5) Islamic, Hindu, or
(6) private non-religious.
3
RESULTS
Denomination and Religious Affiliation
In Table 1, the denominations of the schools and the religious affiliation of the parents are related
to each other. The rows present the percentage students (i.e., parents) of a particular denominational
category with a particular religious affiliation. The columns present the percentage students within
a particular category of religious affiliation attending a particular denomination school.
<<<table 1 about here>>>
The table shows public schools to have primarily children of parents with no religious affiliation
(60%). The Catholic schools also contain predominantly Catholic students, namely 71%. The
Protestant Christian schools contain a very mixed public; if we combine the Dutch Reformed,
Calvinist, and other Christian affiliations, however, the religious affiliations of almost 60% of the
parents in these schools are found to fall into this category. The Reformed and Reformational
schools, in contrast, have a rather selective public, which also holds for the Islamic and Hindu
schools. The private non-religious schools attract predominantly children of parents with no
religious affiliation or a Catholic affiliation.

5. 5
For both the Catholic and Protestant Christian schools, it is the case that a significant portion of
the parents do not have a religious affiliation (17% and 23%, respectively). For the schools with a
somewhat stronger religious foundation (Reformed, Reformational, Islamic, Hindu), this is
absolutely not the case: all of the parents of the students in these schools are religious. From the
table, it can also be deduced that of the parents with no religious affiliation, more than half (55%)
send their children to a public school. Of the Catholics, more than three-quarters (76%) of the
students attend a Catholic school. More than half of the Dutch Reformed, Calvinist, and other
Christian students attend a Protestant Christian school. Of the Muslims and Hindus, only a very
small portion of the students attend their “own” school, only 13%. The remaining Muslims and
Hindus are more or less equally divided across the three largest school denominations.
If we roughly examine the extent to which one can speak of discrepancies between the religious
affiliations of the parents and the denominations of the schools (e.g., no religious affiliation at a
Catholic school, Catholic affiliation at a public school), we come up with almost 40% of the
students. This is in keeping with the findings of other research (cf. Benjamins & Veerman, 2000;
van Kessel & Tiebosch, 1998). On the basis of these discrepancies, we next constructed a — fairly
rough — variable to indicate per category of religious affiliation whether the parents have sent their
child to another denomination school or not. For 62% of the families, religious affiliation was
found to be equivalent to the denomination of the school. For 40% of the parents with no religious
affiliation, the denomination deviates. For the Catholic parents, this is 20%; for the Dutch
Reformed, this is 37%; for the Calvinists, this is 78%; for the other Christians, this is 27%; for the
Muslims and Hindus, this is 78%; and for the categories other religious affiliation, it is 93%.
The Importance of Religious Affiliation
The conclusion that can be drawn from Table 1 is that a large portion of the children attend schools
with a denomination that is not in keeping with the religious affiliation of the parents. But to what
extent do the parents actually mind this? Just how important do parents consider their religious
affiliation for child rearing? In Table 2, an overview of this information is presented. Just to remind
you: The scores can vary from (1) completely unimportant to (5) very important. The average for
the entire sample was found to be 2.9 with a standard deviation of 1.3. At the bottom of the table,

6. 6
the size of the nominal-metric correlation is also reported, the Eta coefficient. The squaring of this
coefficient indicates the proportion of the variance explained.
<<<table 2 about here>>>
With regard to the religious affiliation of the parents, the table shows — in keeping with our
expectation — that parents without a religious affiliation attach the least importance to religious
affiliation for child rearing. The smaller, more orthodox categories, in contrast, attach the most
importance to religious affiliation for the rearing of children. The Catholic and Dutch Reformed
parents occupy an intermediate position.
If we start from the denomination of the school, we see that — in so far as they are comparable
— the scores for the categories of religious affiliation and denomination run largely parallel. Once
again, the parents from the Reformed and Reformational schools attach the greatest importance to
religious affiliation and the parents of the children at the public schools attach the least importance
to religious affiliation. These findings correspond to those reported by van Kessel (1988).
With regard to a discrepancy between religious affiliation and denomination of the school, it is
found that for a number of categories parents consider religious affiliation more important for child
rearing when there is such a discrepancy than when there is no such discrepancy. This could point
to a need for more religious schools, especially Reformed, Reformational and Islamic and Hindu
schools.
Socio-ethnic Background, Religious Affiliation, and Denomination
Which parents choose which schools? This is the next question that we will attempt to answer. Of
particular interest will be the socio-ethnic background of the family. One indicator of this is the
so-called weighting factor used by the Dutch Ministry of Education to assess the degree of
disadvantage for students. This indicator is based on ethnic origin along with the educational and
professional level of the parents (cf. Driessen, 2000). We distinguished three categories: (1)
children who do not find themselves at a disadvantage; (2) native-Dutch children at a disadvantage;
and (3) ethnic minority children at a disadvantage. The distribution of the students in our sample

7. 7
across these categories was found to be: 67%, 24%, and 9%, respectively. In addition to this
indicator of background milieu, we distinguished seven levels of parental education varying from
(1) maximum of elementary education to (7) college education. For the entire sample, the average
level of parental education was found to be 4.2 with a standard deviation of 1.6. In Table 3, the
distributions of the socio-ethnic backgrounds and parental levels of education are presented
according to religious affiliation and denomination of the school.
<<table 3 about here>>>
When we examine the relation between religious affiliation and socio-ethnic background, it appears
that 72% of the students with parents without a religious affiliation belong to the group with no
disadvantage; 26% to the group of native Dutch disadvantaged students; and 3% to the group of
ethnic minority disadvantaged students. The distributions for the students of Catholic or Dutch
Reformed parents do not deviate much from this. The Calvinist category shows a relatively greater
number of students with no disadvantage and also very few native Dutch and ethnic minority
disadvantaged children. Among the other Christians, the percentage ethnic minority disadvantaged
children stands out. As expected, almost all of the Muslim and Hindu children are disadvantaged
ethnic minorities. When compared to the other categories of religious affiliation, the category
“other” shows relatively few children with no disadvantage and relatively few native Dutch
disadvantaged children; the percentage ethnic minority disadvantaged children is relatively high.
When we consider the denomination of the school in relation to the socio-ethnic background of
the students, we see that within the three largest denominations (Catholic, public, and Protestant
Christian), about two-thirds of the students consistently belong to the category of students with no
disadvantage; approximately 25% belong to the category of native Dutch disadvantaged students;
and approximately 9% belong to the category of ethnic minority disadvantaged students. The
Catholic schools tend, in this light, to have slightly more native Dutch students than the other
schools and thus have somewhat fewer ethnic minority students as well. At the Reformed and
Reformational schools, there is a relatively large percentage students with no disadvantage and
virtually no ethnic minority disadvantaged students. At the Islamic and Hindu schools, there are
primarily ethnic disadvantaged minority students. Finally, at the private non-religious schools, there

8. 8
is a relatively large percentage students with no disadvantage and ethnic minority students at a
disadvantage.
Religious Affiliation, School Denomination, and Educational Results
What is the relation between religious affiliation and school denomination, on the one hand, and a
number of the cognitive and non-cognitive educational results, on the other hand? With regard to
the latter, four categories of results were distinguished: language achievement, math achievement,
self-confidence, and general well-being. Achievement was measured with the aid of two tests
developed by the National Institute for Educational Measurement (CITO) to provide an indication
of the level of pre-reading and pre-arithmetic skills. For the entire sample, the average scores on the
tests were 974 and 904, respectively, with standard deviations of 34 and 63 (reliability: KR-20 .96
and .90, respectively). Self-confidence and general well-being were measured using a series of
statements presented to the teachers with the request that the teachers indicate the extent to which
they apply per student. The ratings could vary from (1) definitely untrue, to (5) definitely true. On
the basis of the reactions, the factors self-confidence and general well-being were constructed
(reliability: Cronbach’s α of .75 and .77, respectively). The average ratings for the entire sample
were 3.5 and 4.2, respectively, with standard deviations of .7 and .5. In Table 4, an overview of the
average scores according to religious affiliation and school denomination is presented.
<<<table 4 about here>>>
With respect to language achievement, it can be seen that nearly 6% of the variation in the scores is
“explained” by the religious affiliation of the parents (viz. Eta .24
2
x 100). The language
achievement of the children of parents with a Catholic religious affiliation is the highest with a
score of 978; the language achievement of the Muslim and Hindu children is the lowest with a
score of 943 (the difference between these scores is 35 points or 1 standard deviation). The latter
finding is not particularly surprising when one realizes that the parents in the Muslim and Hindu
groups are also the lowest educated parents. With respect to math achievement, one can speak of a
comparable pattern of findings: the children of Catholic parents achieve best; the Muslim and

9. 9
Hindu children achieve poorest (with a difference of 58 points or 0.9 standard deviation). With
respect to self-confidence and general well-being, no significant differences were observed for the
different categories of religious affiliation.
The differences observed for denomination of school were smaller than the differences observed
for religious affiliation. In so far as they are comparable, the pattern of the scores for school
denomination parallels the pattern of the scores for religious affiliation. It is striking that the
teachers at the Islamic and Hindu schools judge their students as having a relatively large degree of
self-confidence (a difference of .4 points as compared to the other categories or half a standard
deviation).
The final conclusion after inspection of the results in Table 4 is that moderate differences in
language and math achievement appear to correlate with religious affiliation and small differences
with denomination. When the category “Islamic/Hindu” is omitted from further analyses, however,
the difference according to religious affiliation and denomination disappears completely. The
differences in the remaining categories explain no more than 0.5% of the variance in the test
results. With regard to self-confidence and general well-being, there are again no differences.
Religious Affiliation, Denomination, Educational Results, and Socio-ethnic Background
As already mentioned, differences in the socio-ethnic backgrounds of the children were found to
relate to religious affiliation and school denomination. Although the differences in language and
math achievement depending on religious affiliation and school denomination were only moderate,
we still wanted to determine what remains of the differences after taking socio-ethnic background
into consideration.
The characteristics of religious affiliation and denomination are located at two different levels,
namely at the student and at the school level. It has recently been suggested that this level
difference should be explicitly taken into consideration and a suitable form of analysis applied,
namely multilevel analysis (Snijders & Bosker 1999). In the present study, we used the program
MLn (Rasbash & Woodhouse 1996).
Given that religious affiliation and denomination are nominal variables, we used dummy
variables for each of the categories of these predictors. In order to prevent the occurrence of linear

10. 10
dependence within the model, one of the dummy variables was omitted from the analyses. The
regression coefficients are then the effects of a category in contrast to the omitted category. We
decided to omit “no religious affiliation” for religious affiliation and “public school” for
denomination. Effects thus represent differences in the category averages in contrast to the category
of “no religious affiliation” and “public school,” respectively.
In Table 5, the following models are presented:
0 the null model;
R total influence of religious affiliation;
D total influence of denomination;
B total influence of socio-ethnic background;
R.B independent influence of religious affiliation (with background constant);
D.B independent influence of denomination (with background constant).
The results with regard to language will be described extensively. The first or null model shows
the total variance in the language achievement of the students to be divided into two levels: the
largest part or 86.8% is located at the student level while a small part or 13.2% is located at the
school level.
The percentages of the variance explained by the models following the null model or models R,
D, and B are determined with respect to the total variance at that level. The student-level variables
of religious affiliation and socio-ethnic background exert an influence at both the student and
school levels. Religious affiliation explains 3.1% of the student-level variance and 22.7% of the
school-level variance. Because denomination is a school variable, it can only explain school
variance, which was found to be 7.6%. Socio-ethnic background explained more of the variance in
language than religious affiliation did; 4.3% at the student level and 29.7% at the school level.
The percentages of the variance explained in the models R.B and D.B — when socio-ethnic
background is thus held constant — represent the amount of additional variance explained by
religious affiliation and denomination, respectively, after the influence of background has been
excluded. At both levels, religious affiliation is found to add only 0.9% to the amount of explained
variance and denomination only 3.6%.

11. 11
It is sometimes concluded that school-level predictors are extremely important for the students’
school achievement. The fact is, however, that given the existence of relatively little variance to
explain at the level of the school, their contribution to the total amount of explained variance can
actually only be very small. For the influence of religious affiliation at the level of the student, this
is 3.1% of 86.8% or 2.7%; at the level of the school, it is 22.7% of 13.2% or 3.0%. Only 5.7% of
the total variance is thus explained. For the influence of socio-ethnic background at the level of the
student, the amount of variance explained is found to be 4.3% of 86.8% or 3.8%; at the level of the
school, it is 29.7% of 13.2% or 3.9%. Only 7.7% of the total variance is thus explained.
The χ
2
/df values are used to test whether a model significantly deviates from a more restricted
model. The models R, D, and B are again tested against the null model; the models R.B and D.B
are tested against model B. Values representing a significant difference are indicated with a *
(p<.005). Significant regression coefficients are also indicated in such a manner. Religious
affiliation can thus be seen to explain a significant portion of the variance in the language scores
while this is not the case for denomination. Religious affiliation also contributes significantly to the
explanation of the variance in the language scores even when socio-ethnic background is held
constant. Of the regression coefficients for religious affiliation and denomination, only the effects
of the category Islamic/Hindu in contrast to no religious affiliation is found to be significant.
<<<table 5 about here>>>
Satisfaction with the School
The differences in the cognitive and non-cognitive educational results depending on religious
affiliation and denomination can be seen to be relatively small. Minimal qualitative differences thus
exist between the schools. The closing question, then, concerns the degree of satisfaction reported
by parents with regard to the school their child is attending. The relevant information was attained
using a questionnaire. The parents were presented the following items: “To what extent are you
satisfied with the manner in which the school: (a) attends to religious convictions; (b) provides for
peace and order within the school; (c) offers help to weak students; (d) teaches students to work
together; (e) deals with rules and discipline; (f) makes the demands that the child must meet clear;

12. 12
(g) offers help to children at risk of falling behind; and (h) prepares the students for a multicultural
society? The response categories varied from (1) dissatisfied, to (4) very satisfied. Both factor and
reliability analyses revealed a single general factor consisting of items b - h (Cronbach’s α = .87).
In addition, the first item (regarding religious conviction) was regarded as a separate “factor”. The
scores for both factors have the same interpretation as the scores for the items themselves. The
average ratings for the entire sample were found to be 3.1 for the general factor and 2.9 for the
religious conviction factor with standard deviations of 0.5 and 0.6, respectively. In Table 6, an
overview of the average parental ratings is presented according to religious affiliation and
denomination.
<<<table 6 about here>>>
From this table, it can be seen that the parents are generally somewhat more than “satisfied” with
the school and that this holds to an equal degree for the different categories of religious affiliation
and school denomination. It also holds for the different categories of discrepancy (or no
discrepancy) between religious affiliation and school denomination.
With regard to the degree of satisfaction with the attention paid to religious convictions in the
schools, a few significant differences can be detected. Calvinist and Dutch Reformed parents show
the most satisfaction (a difference of 0.5 standard deviation). Muslim and Hindu parents show the
least satisfaction (a difference of 0.4 standard deviation). The latter probably relates to the fact that
Muslim and Hindu parents have virtually no opportunity to send their children to their “own”
schools (cf. Driessen & Valkenberg, 2000). When we take the denomination of the school as our
starting point, the parents of children attending Reformed and Reformational schools appear to be
most satisfied with the attention paid to religious conviction at these schools (a difference of 1.1
standard deviations). We also see the Muslim and Hindu parents with children attending their
“own” schools to be fairly satisfied with the attention paid to religious conviction (a difference of
0.5 standard deviation). When one can speak of a discrepancy between religious affiliation and
school denomination, the differences in the satisfaction of the parents with the attention paid to

13. 13
religious conviction is generally marginal. Nevertheless, the Muslim and Hindu parents appear to
be least satisfied and the Calvinist parents — once again — most satisfied.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
When the research findings are summarized, we come to the following conclusions.
· In 40% of the cases a discrepancy exists between the religious affiliations of parents and the
denominations of the schools that their children attend.
· There are large differences in the degree to which parents attach particular importance to their
religious affiliation for child rearing.
· There are differences in the socio-ethnic backgrounds of the parents with different religious
affiliations and in the student populations from different denomination schools.
· With respect to the language and math achievement of the students, moderate differences in the
correlations with the religious affiliation of the parents were observed and small differences in
the correlations with school denomination. With respect to the self-confidence and general
well-being of the students, no differences were observed with regard to religious affiliation or
denomination.
· About 8% of the differences in the language and math achievement of the students can be
attributed to the socio-ethnic background of the children. When background is taken into
consideration, the effects of religious affiliation and denomination are found to be minimal.
· The general satisfaction of the parents with the education of their children does not differ
depending on religious affiliation or school denomination. With regard to the degree of
satisfaction with the attention paid to specific religious convictions at school, clear differences
were observed. The parents of students attending Reformed and Reformational schools are most
satisfied.
In closing, we would like to address two points in greater detail: first, the discrepancy between
religious affiliation and denomination; second, the educational results. With regard to the relation
between religious affiliation and denomination, we have already pointed out that the findings
should not be interpreted in absolute terms. In the choice of school, factors other than the

14. 14
denomination of the school also play a role — factors such as quality, distance, and availability
(Boef-van der Meulen & Herweijer, 1992; Laemers, 1999). This is in line with recent religious
sociological research which has shown attachment to institutions to be declining while religiosity is
becoming strongly individualized (e.g., Becker & de Wit, 2000; Dekker & Ester, 1996 ). For many
people, the dividing line between groups and opinions is no longer compulsory and definite but
flexible and open.
With regard to educational results, we found no evidence in the present study for the idea that
either religious affiliation or denomination contribute to the explanation of differences in either
cognitive or non-cognitive results. Indeed, the only effects encountered — namely those regarding
language and math achievement — disappeared when the socio-ethnic background of the students
was taken into consideration. In light of previous research findings (cf. Dijkstra & Peschar, 1996),
this is a particularly relevant qualification for three reasons: the analyses were conducted on a
recent and large-scale national sample of students and parents; the study addressed a previously
unstudied and early period of elementary school; and both non-cognitive in addition to cognitive
effects were examined. With regard to the observed educational results, we would also like to add
the following comment. In the literature, it is often observed that an important motive behind the
choice of school is quality and that the continued existence of educational pillarization may relate
to qualitative differences between the denominations (cf. Dronkers, Hofman, & Dijkstra, 1997; van
der Wouw, 1994). In the light of this observation it is interesting to note that no differences in the
degree of satisfaction on the part of the parents with the schools of their children were found to
depend on the denomination of the school.
NOTES
1. The data used in the present analyses stem from the Dutch cohort study Primary Education
(‘PRIMA’). Collection of the data on this cohort was financially supported by the Foundation for
Behavioral Sciences from the Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). The authors
would like to thank Jan Doesborgh for his help with the multilevel analyses.

15. 15
2. The Dutch Reformed (“Nederlands Hervormden”) generally are the more liberal Protestants,
while the Calvinists (“Gereformeerden”) generally are the stricter, traditional Protestants.
However, it should be kept in mind that the features of the different branches of Protestantism
are not mutually exclusive.
3. The Protestant Christian (“Protestants-Christelijk”) school denomination is a general category
of Protestant schools, while the Reformed (“Gereformeerd”) and Reformational
(“Reformatorisch”) denominations are the orthodox branches of Protestants schools. The Private
Non-Religious (“Algemeen-Bijzonder”) category includes schools that do not assume a
particular denominational ideology but a pedagogical orientation.
REFERENCES
Bax, E. (1988): Modernization and cleavage in Dutch society. A study of long term economic and
social change. Ph.D. diss., University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Becker, J., & J. de Wit (2000): Secularisatie in de jaren negentig. Kerklidmaatschap, veranderingen
in opvattingen en een prognose. Den Haag: SCP.
Benjamins, R., & M. Veerman (2000). Christelijk geïnspireerd onderwijs onderzocht. Onderzoek
naar godsdienst en levensbeschouwing op katholieke en protestantse basisscholen. Hilversum:
NZV.
De Rooy, P. (1997): Farewell to pillarization. The Netherlands’ Journal of Social Sciences, 33,
27-41.
Dekker, P., & P. Ester (1996): Depillarization, deconfessionalization, and de-ideologization:
Empirical trends in Dutch society 1958-1992. Review of Religious Research, 37, 325-41.
Dijkstra, A. (1997): Onderwijskansen en richting van de school. In: A. Dijkstra, J. Dronkers, & R.
Hofman (Eds.): Verzuiling in het onderwijs. Actuele verklaringen en analyse. Groningen:
Wolters-Noordhoff. 144-84.
Dijkstra, A., & J. Peschar (1996): Religious determinants of academic attainment in the
Netherlands. Comparative Education Review, 40, 47-65.

16. 16
Driessen, G. (2000): The limits of educational policy and practice? The case of ethnic minority
pupils in the Netherlands. Comparative Education, 36, 55-72.
Driessen, G., & P. Valkenberg (2000). Islamic schools in the Netherlands: Compromising between
identity and quality? British Journal of Religious Education, 23,14-25.
Driessen, G., A. van Langen, R. Portengen, & H. Vierke (1998): Basisonderwijs: Veldwerkverslag,
leerlinggegevens en oudervragenlijsten. Basisrapportage PRIMA-cohortonderzoek. Tweede
meting 1996-1997. Nijmegen: ITS.
Dronkers, J. (1996): Dutch public and religious schools between state and market. A balance
between parental choice and national policy? In: D. Benner, A. Kell, & D. Lenzen (Eds.):
Bilding zwischen Staat und Markt. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz Verlag. 51-66.
Dronkers, J., R. Hofman, & A. Dijkstra (1997): Verzuiling onder druk? De toekomst van de
onderwijsverzuiling. In: A. Dijkstra, J. Dronkers, & R. Hofman (Eds.): Verzuiling in het
onderwijs. Actuele verklaringen en analyse. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff. 323-42.
Felling, A., J. Peters, & O. Schreuder (1991): Dutch religion. The religious consciousness of the
Netherlands after the cultural revolution. Nijmegen: ITS.
Laemers, M. (1999): Schoolkeuzevrijheid; veranderingen in betekenis en reikwijdte. Ubbergen:
Tandem Felix.
Phalet, K., C. van Lotringen, & H. Entzinger (2000): Islam in de multiculturele samenleving.
Opvattingen van jongeren in Rotterdam. Utrecht: ERCOMER.
Rasbash, J., & G. Woodhouse (1996): MLn command reference. Version 1.0a. London: University
of London.
Ritzen, J., J. van Dommelen, & F. de Vijlder (1997): School finance and school choice in the
Netherlands. Economics of Education Review, 16, 329-35.
Van der Wouw, B. (1994): Schoolkeuze tussen wensen en realiseringen. Een onderzoek naar
verklaringen voor veranderingen in schoolkeuzepatronen vanuit het perspectief van (etnische)
segregatie. Nijmegen: ITS.
Van Kessel, N. (1988): De directe meting in de praktijk. In: M. Cohen (Ed.): Verlangd onderwijs
en scholenplanning. Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink. 15-45.
Van Kessel, N. (2000). Verlangd onderwijs in de gemeente Amsterdam. Nijmegen: ITS.

17. 17
Van Kessel, N., & C. Tiebosch (1998). Verlangd onderwijs in de gemeente Rotterdam. Nijmegen:
ITS.

18. 18
ABSTRACT
After 1850, The Netherlands developed into a strongly pillarized or denominational society.
Starting in 1965, however, a process of secularization and depillarization emerged and the influence
of the institutionalized denominations strongly declined. At this moment, there are indications that
the process of secularization has reached its peak. Remarkably enough, such secularization and
depillarization has had little influence on the educational system in The Netherlands. In the present
article, the relations between the religious affiliations of parents, the denominations of the schools
attended by their children, and both the cognitive and non-cognitive educational achievement of
their children are examined. A representative sample of 8400 kindergarten students from 432
elementary schools is studied. The results show 40% of the parents to send their children to a
school that does not correspond to their religious affiliation. Furthermore, the denomination of the
school does not appear to affect educational results. Effects of the religious affiliation of the parents
on the cognitive achievement but not the self-confidence or general well-being of their children
were found. When the socio-ethnic background of the students was taken into consideration,
however, the observed effects disappeared.

19. 19
Table 1: Denomination of the school and religious affiliation of the parents (row/column
percentages)
Denomination Religious Affiliation of the Parents
of the School None RC DR Ca Ch Is, Hi Other Total N
Pu 60/55 17/13 10/23 1/5 3/15 7/30 3/38 28 2332
RC 17/23 71/76 3/9 1/6 2/20 4/26 1/19 40 3317
PC 23/18 11/7 30/61 18/66 11/51 7/24 2/19 24 1967
Red, Rel 0/0 0/0 19/5 50/21 20/11 0/0 11/16 3 228
Is, Hi 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 99/13 1/1 1 73
PNR 36/5 38/4 6/2 2/1 4/3 11/7 4/8 4 343
Total 31 38 12 7 5 7 2 100
N 2549 3096 963 533 409 550 160 8260
NOTE: Pu = public; RC = Catholic; DR = Dutch Reformed; Ca = Calvinist; Red = Reformed; Rel = Reformational; Is = Islamic; Hi
= Hindu; PNR = private non-religious, Ch = other Christian
Table 2: Importance of religious affiliation for child rearing according to the religious affiliation of
the parents, denomination of the school, and discrepancy between the religious affiliation of the
parents and denomination of the school (averages)
Religious Affiliation Denomination of the SchoolDiscrepancy between Affiliation and
of the Parents Denomination
None 1.7 Pu 2.1 Affiliation = Denomination 2.8
RC 3.1 RC 3.0 Deviation from no Religious affiliation 2.0
DR 3.6 PC 3.5 Deviation from RC 2.8
Ca 4.2 Red, Rel 4.9 Deviation from DR 3.1
Ch 4.1 Is, Hi 4.6 Deviation from Ca 4.0
Is, Hi 4.2 PNR 2.5 Deviation from Ch 3.9
Other 3.7 Deviation from Is, Hi 4.1
Deviation from Other affiliation 3.7
Eta .70 .49 .41
NOTES: Pu = public; RC = Catholic; DR = Dutch Reformed; Ca = Calvinist; Red = Reformed; Rel = Reformational; Is = Islamic;
Hi = Hindu; PNR = private non-religious, Ch = other Christian.
Deviation from “no religious affiliation” means parents with no religious affiliation send their child to a religious school and not a
public school; “deviation from Catholic affiliation” means parents with a Catholic religious affiliation do not send their child to a
Catholic school; etc.

20. 20

21. 21
Table 3: Socio-ethnic background (percentages) and parental level of education (average scores)
according to religious affiliation and school denomination
Socio-ethnic Background Socio-ethnic Background
Religious No Dutch Ethnic Level of Denomination No Dutch Ethnic Level of
Affiliation Disad. Disad. Disad. Education Disad. Disad. Disad. Education
None 72 26 3 4.3 Pu 68 22 10 4.3
RC 70 27 2 4.2 RC 66 26 8 4.2
DR 72 26 1 4.2 PC 66 25 10 4.1
Ca 79 20 1 4.5 Red, Rel 79 20 1 4.4
Ch 71 17 13 4.4 Is, Hi 11 0 89 3.8
Is, Hi 7 1 92 3.2 PNR 75 15 11 4.5
Other 62 22 17 4.4
Eta .59 .17 .18 .07
NOTE: Pu = public; RC = Catholic; DR = Dutch Reformed; Ca = Calvinist; Red = Reformed; Rel = Reformational; Is = Islamic; Hi
= Hindu; PNR = private non-religious, Ch = other Christian.
Table 4: Language achievement, math achievement, self-confidence, and general well-being
according to religious affiliation of the parents and denomination of the school (averages)
Religious Language Math Self- Well- Denomination Language Math Self- Well-
Affiliation confidence being confidence being
None 975 904 3.5 4.1 Pu 973 901 3.5 4.1
RC 978 914 3.5 4.1 RC 977 910 3.5 4.0
DR 976 904 3.5 4.1 PC 972 897 3.6 4.1
Ca 975 904 3.6 4.1 Red, Rel 972 902 3.5 3.9
Ch 974 899 3.6 4.1 Is, Hi 949 863 3.9 4.0
Is, Hi 943 856 3.6 4.1 PNR 975 910 3.4 4.1
Other 971 901 3.6 4.1
Eta .24 .22 .04 .03 .10 .11 .07 .07
NOTE: Pu = public; RC = Catholic; DR = Dutch Reformed; Ca = Calvinist; Red = Reformed; Rel = Reformational; Is = Islamic; Hi
= Hindu; PNR = private non-religious, Ch = other Christian.

22. 22
Table 5: Results of multilevel analyses of language and math achievement according to religious
affiliation of parents (R) and school denomination (D) without and with socio-ethnic background
(B) controlled for
LANGUAGE 0 R D B R.B D.B
Variance components
Student level (%) 86.8 3.1 4.3 +0.9
School level (%) 13.2 22.7 7.6 29.7 +0.9 +3.6
χ
2
/df 54.5* 4.5 453.8* 13.6* 2.7
Regression coefficients
Background -13.0* -10.0* -12.9*
Religious affiliation (compared to No religion):
- RC 0.2 0.3
- DR 0.6 0.4
- Ca 0.0 -0.7
- Ch -0.9 0.1
- Is, Hi -28.8* -16.0*
- Other -4.0 -1.7
Denomination (compared to Public school):
- RC 4.4 4.2
- PC 0.0 -0.1
- Red, Rel 0.8 -2.1
- Is, Hi -24.3* -6.9
- PNR 2.9 1.5
MATH 0 R D B R.B D.B
Variance components
Student level (%) 80.5 2.3 4.7 +0.4
School level (%) 19.5 13.0 5.7 17.5 +1.3 +3.4
χ
2
/df 38.7* 3.6 448.4* 6.6 2.4
Regression coefficients
Background -23.6* -20.1* -23.5*
Religious affiliation (compared to No religion):
- RC 3.1 3.2
- DR 1.5 1.3
- Ca 0.8 -0.4
- Ch -2.6 -0.7
- Is, Hi -43.2* -18.2*
- Other -3.6 1.0
Denomination (compared to Public school):
- RC 10.0 9.7
- PC 0.0 -0.2
- Red, Rel 2.7 -2.3
- Is, Hi -37.0 -5.5
- PNR 10.7 8.1

23. 23
NOTE: Pu = public; RC = Catholic; DR = Dutch Reformed; Ca = Calvinist; Red = Reformed; Ref = Reformational; Is = Islamic; Hi
= Hindu; PNR = private non-religious, Ch = other Christian.

24. 24
Table 6: Satisfaction of parents with school in general and handling of religious convictions in
particular according to religious affiliation of the parents, school denomination, and type of
discrepancy between religious affiliation and denomination (averages)
Satisfaction Satisfaction
Satisfaction
Religious General Religious Denomination General Religious Discrepancy General Religious
Affiliation Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor
None 3.1 2.9 Pu 3.1 2.8 Affiliation = Denomination 3.1 3.0
RC 3.1 2.9 RC 3.1 2.9 Deviation from No religion 3.1 2.9
DR 3.1 3.1 PC 3.1 3.1 Deviation from RC 3.1 2.8
Ca 3.1 3.2 Red, Rel 3.2 3.6 Deviation from DR 3.2 2.9
Ch 3.1 2.9 Is, Hi 3.1 3.2 Deviation from Ca 3.1 3.1
Is, Hi 3.1 2.7 PNR 3.1 2.8 Deviation from Ch 3.1 2.8
Other 3.1 3.0 Deviation from Is, Hi 3.1 2.6
Deviation from Other affiliation 3.1 3.0
Eta .05 .19 .06 .26 .04 .17
NOTE: Pu = public; RC = Catholic; DR = Dutch Reformed; Ca = Calvinist; Red = Reformed; Rel = Reformational; Is = Islamic; Hi
= Hindu; PNR = private non-religious, Ch = other Christian.