DOCUMENT RESUME AA 000 523 Educational Production Function. Final Report. Harvard Univ ...

112 Pages·2007·7.17 MB·English

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 037 590
AA 000 523
Bowles, Samuel
AUTHOR
Educational Production Function. Final Report.
TITLE
Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass.
INSTITUTION
Office of Education (DHEW)
SPONS AGENCY
Washington, D.C.
,
Feb 69
PUB DATE
OEC-1-7-000451-2651
CONTRACT
NOTE
111p.
EDRS Price MF-$0.50 HC-$5.65
EDRS PRICE
*Academic Achievement, *Cost Effectiveness,
DESCRIPTORS
Educational Economics, *Evaluation, Guidance
Programs, *Productivity, Statistical Data, *Systems
Analysis
Project Talent
IDENTIFIERS
ABSTRACT
This study, concerning the conceptual and
econometric problems involved in estimating educational production
functions, focuses on the following topics: 1) the meaning of an
educational production function estimated from cross-section data; 2)
the measurement of the output of schools; 3)
the problem of measuring
the initial endowment of students upon entering school;
the
4)
measurable dimensions of learning environment, both school and home;
the shortcomings of the Project Talent five-year follow-up data;
5)
estimated educational production functions, using Project
and 6)
Talent data as well as data from the Equal Educational Opportunity
Survey of the Office of Education. Some major findings are: a)
the
estimated relationships are consistent with the conceptual model
developed in this report; b) teacher quality appears to be an
important determinant of scholastic success; and c)
the production
functions explain a very small percentage of the variance of
scholastic achievement, even using the full range of social class and
school input variables.
(Author/LS)
Educational Production
Function
Samuel Bowles
Final Report
on
Research Supported
by the U.S.
Office of Education
Under Contract
Number OEC 1-7-000451-2651
4.)64:e
.ce
February, 1969
LIST OF TABLES
Zero-Order Correlations
Among Measures of
School Outputs
16
2.
The Effect of
Environmental Differences
on I.Q. Differences. 21
of Identical Twins
Reared Apart
3.
The Effect of
Environmental Differences
on Scholastic
27
Achievement Differences
Among Paired Identical
Twins
Reared Apart
A Model for the
Estimation of the
Environmental Influences
'33
on Learning
Comparison of the
Unweighted Project
Talent Sample with
45
National Population
Relative Black and
Total Scores,
Equality of Educational
47
Opportunity Survey and
Project Talent
Five-year Follow
-Up
Number of Respondents
by the Number
of Missing Observations
50
Number of Respondents
with Missing
Data on Selected
51
-Variables
Response Frequency fdr,Each
Pair of Variables
1960 Black
54
Male Seniors in
USOE Re ions 1, 2,
3 in Project
Talent
55
Five-Year Follow-Up
56
10.
Tests Used as Basis
for Composite
Score - General Academic
58
Ability
11.
Means and Standard
Deviations of
Variables
59
12.
An Educational
Production Function:
Dependent Variable
61
is Reading
Comprehension
-13.
An Educational Production
Function:
Dependent Variable
62
is Mathematical
Achievement
14.
An Educational
Production Function:
Dependent Variable
63
is General Academic
Ability
15.
Occupational Scale
64
4;ga
Comparison of Social Class and School Variables in The
66
Production Functions
T-Statistics for Senior Class Size Variable
17.
70
73
Dependent Variable
An Educational Production Function:
18.
is Reading Comprehension with Integration Variable
74
Dependent variable
An Educational Production Function:
19.
is Mathematic Achievement with Integration Variable
75
Dependent Variable
An Educational Production Function:
20.
is General Academic Ability with Integration Variable
Means, Standard Deviation and Zero-Order Correlations Among
77
21.
Variables Used in Estimates
80
An Educational Production Function, Black Twelfth Grade
22.
Students
An Educational Production Function with School Policy and
82
23.
Community Support Proxies, Black Twelfth Grade Students
Estimated Regressions for Samples of Northern Twelfth Grade
85
24.
Students
Estimated Regressions for Samples of Southern Twelfth Grade
86
25.
Students
Correction for Specification Bias Due to Omitted Initial
88
26.
Endowments in the Educational Production Function
An Educational Production Function with Student Attitudes
90
27.
Measured
An Educational Production Function, Dependent Variable is
94
28.
Starting Monthly Salary
Relation of Socio-Economic Status of Parents to Earnings
95
29.
t-- Statistics for SES Variables
Relation of Scholastic Achievement to Earnings; t-Statistics 96
30.
fOr Test Scores; Dependent Variable is Starting Monthly Salary
Zero-Order Correlations Among Variables (EEOS data)
98
31.
Zero Order Correlation Among Variables
.99
32.
100
101
.
Summary
4
This study concerns the conceptual and econometric problems
Atten-
involved in estimating educational production functions.
First, the meaning of
tion is given to the following topics.*
educational' production function estimated from cross-section
an
Attention is given to the problem of simul-
data is discussed.
taneity, and to the difficulties arising from the absence of
the usual maximizing behavioral assumptions which ordinarily
Second, I deal with
underlie production function estimates.
In this study, I
the measurement of the output of schools.
concentrate on achievement scores as a measure of output, al-
though there is some attention given to economic measures, such
Third, I discuss the problem of mea-
as post-school earnings.
suring the initial endowment of students upon entering school.
A method of dealing with the normal mis-specification of educa-
tional production functions arising from this source is developed
Fourth, the measurable dimensions of the
and implemented.
A
learning environment, both school and home, are discussed.
model of the learning environment is developed, based on the
Fifth,
findings of sociological and psychological research.
the shortcomings of the Project Talent five-year follow-up data
Particularly important is the magnitude of non-
are discussed.
items
response to the follow-up and non-response on particular
Sixth, educational production
by those included in the follow-up.
functions are estimated using Project Talent data, as wet as
data from the Equal Educational Opportunity Survey of the Office
of Education.
The following findings are particularly important:
a)
the estimated relationships are consistent with the
con-
ceptual model developed in this report; b) teacher quality
appears to be an important determinant of scholastic success;
c) some other dimensions of the school environment
appear to be
important, although the relationships are somewhat inconsistent;
and d) the production functions explain
a very small percentage
of the variance of scholastic achievement, even using the full
range of social class and school input variables.
A
PREFACE
I.
The following is the final report on the first stage of a
research project on educational production functions supported
by the U.S. Office of Education under grant number OEC 1-7-0C:0451-2651.
The first stage has been devoted to an exploration of the
Conceptual and econometric problems involved in the construction
of educational production functions, and the estimation of some
preliminary functions in which the school output is measured by
It was originally planned that the data
scholastic achievement.
used in the first stage would be drawn entirely from Project
However, unfteseen delays in acquiring the necessary
Talent.
tapes have resulted in a somewhat restricted use of Talent data
supplemented in part by data from the Office of Education's
Equality of Educational Opportunity Survey.
The second stage is devoted to the economics of educational
Here the emphasis will be on the relation-
production functions.
ship between school inputs, social class, and post school earnings,
Some exploratory
occupational attainment, and employment status.
The preliminary
analysis in this area was included in stage one.
The data
results are outlined in the postscript to this report.
used in this economic analysis are from Project Talent.
(11/1/66 through 12/31/68),
'During the period of this contract
study in these
from other sources for
I have received support
of my progress.
This report constitutes a summary
problems.
specific sources
findings or concepts with
To identify particular
anA imnnssible.
nc ^noire:ie.
-2
I would like to thank a number of people for
assistance.
Pamela King, Alice Crampin,
Mathew Lambrinides, and Keith
Clemens served capably
as research assistants.
I received useful
advice from Zvi Griliches,
Susan
Contratto, Christopher Jencks,
Lester Thurow, Stephan Michelson
Henry Levin, Arthur MacEwan,
,
Thomas Weiskopf, and Christopher
Terry Rothra and Deanna
Sims.
Lee typed the manuscript
Researchers using Project Talent data
are asked to include
the following statement in
their report:
"This investigation
utilized the Project Talent
Data Bank, a cooperative effort of
the U.S. Office of Education, the
University of Pittsburgh, and
the American Institutes for Research.
The design and interpre-
tation of the research reported
herein, however, are solely the
responsibi ity of the author."
.
INTRODUCTION
.
*en
function relates school
An educational production
Represen-.
of school output.
and student inputs to a measure
in this form is
Liolion of the .educational production process
descriptive study of human
of 1.0.it:ticular jnterest in the
investiqations of
oapital formation as well as in normative
in the educational sector.
the optimal allocation of resources
efrect on-labor produc
if schooling has any uniquo.
oarHings, this effect should be traceable to the
tivity or
as a consequence
dtvelopment of cognitive skills and attitudes
the
Further, we may be able to relate
of school Atendance.
attributes.to school
:icveloptu.nt ot:1 productive personal
educational
oolicior;.concoening the allocation of scarce
sohool inputs to
A ploduction function rclatinq
rosonivos
productive oaodcity would
an individunl's
dovolopmouli of
ihe
bvitec-cducatc.! carn morn.
(jive Its a much better idea why tho
differences in production funeLt.las
Moreover, by irvestigating
class groups, as well as
for different facial and social
w
these
1-!,fferences in educational inputs among
of the dotermination
1)(1u:or understand one important aspect
hhc distribution of personal earnings.
In
the determination of school policy, nand in long-
educatiomil pro-
run Educational planning, knowledge of the
duction function is essential to the achievement of efficient
This is true, of course, regardless of
1;onvcc allocatipn.
r
whlAhor thc decision
unit is pursuing
the objective
of growth,
equality,
or any combination
of these and other
goals.
Without an estimate
of the technology
of education,
the rela-:
tion between the
opportunity costs
of particular
policies and
their expecLed
benefits must be
little
more than guesses.
An educational production
function is defined
as follows:
(1)
A =
(X1,
Of
X
X
.
411
'W
z)
where
=
measure of school output
13ome
-- for example, a
score on a scholastic achievement
battery;
X
...
= variables measuring the
school environment.
The
Variables here
would typically
include the amount
nd quality of teaching
services, the physical
facilities of the
school, the length of
time that
the student is exposed
to these inputs;
IOW X
X
= variables representing
n
environmental influences
v
4:41 learning outside the
school
e.g., the parents'
educational attainment;
X
w"
= variables representing the
initial level of learning
z
attained by the student
prior to entry into
the
type of schooling in
question.
We are
interested
in gaining estimates of the
structural
parameters of the function, f.
It will be seen below that
we
cannot estimate the above equation in
the form presented, although
some progress can be made with a slightly modified
version.