Common use of Table 2a Clause in Contracts

Table 2a. Sample characteristics Pre-Assessment N (%) Post-Assessment 1 N (%) Post-Assessment 2 N (%) Gender Girl 713 (51.3%) 1,231 (50.8%) 1,097 (50.5%) Boy 677 (48.7%) 1,193 (49.2%) 1,074 (49.5%) Spoken language Dutch 1,170 (84.2%) 2,110 (87.0%) 1,877 (86.5%) Other 220 (15.8%) 314 (13.0%) 294 (13.5%) Pocket money Yes 1,115 (80.2%) 1,889 (77.9%) 1,698 (78.2%) No 275 (19.8%) 535 (22.1%) 473 (21.8%) Money from doing chores Yes 867 (62.4%) 1,544 (63.7%) 1,444 (66.5%) No Talking about money at home Yes 523 (37.6%) 1,095 (78.8%) 880 (36.3%) 1,937 (79.9%) 727 (33.5%) 1,802 (83.0%) No Talking about money in class Yes 295 (21.2%) 792 (57.0%) 487 (20.1%) 1,714 (70.7%) 369 (17.0%) 1,788 (82.4%) No 598 (43.0%) 710 (29.3%) 383 (17.6%) All primary schools in the Netherlands were classified according to their four-digit postal code (without the two uppercase letters). Each postal code area (with approximately 4,000 citizens) was linked to an area-level socioeconomic status score7 from the Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau [The Netherlands Institute for Social Research] (2018) according to its inhabitants‘ income level, education level, and occupation. The primary schools were then grouped into low, medium, and high socioeconomic status scores (see Table 2B). In each of the three socioeconomic status groups, the Education Research Department of the Executive Agency (Dienst Uitvoering Onderwijs or DUO)8 of the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science recruited fifth grade teachers through a simple random sample selection procedure. These teachers were then asked whether or not they used the financial education program. Based on their responses, the schools were divided into two groups. The schools 7The socioeconomic status score used was for 2014 because this indicator is derived every four years by the Netherlands Institute for Social Research. 8DUO Education Research specializes in research for schools in primary and secondary education and secondary vocational education. that used the program served as the intervention group and the schools that did not use the program served as the control group.