about me
art
biz
Chess
corrections
economics
EconoSchool
Finance
friends
fun
game theory
games
geo
mathstat
misc
NatScience
... more
Profil
Logout
Subscribe Weblog

 
The table given below presents the overall summary of estimates (based on 376 studies) of the effects of key resources on student performance. The tabulations note the numbers of separate estimates for each parameter along with estimated direction of effect with their statistical significance (5 % level).
resources_hanushek
Of all of the measures that lend themselves to tabulation, stronger teacher test scores [some sort of IQ or achievment test] are mostly consistently related to higher student achievement, even though only 37% provide postitive and statistically significant effects. <> Given the small confidence in just getting noticeable improvements, it seems somewhat unimportant to investigate the size of any estimated effects (p. 2077).

<>... Since policy is often directed at the resource levels, questions about the effectiveness of the public provision of schooling naturally arise. <> [One] perspective is simply that current incentives, within the public provision of schooling, do not motivate schools toward improving student performance [Hanushek (1994)]. The simple premise is that the unresponsiveness of performance to resources is largely a reflection that very little rests on student performance. Good and bad teachers or good and bad administrators can expect about the same career progressions, pay, and other outcomes making the choice of programs, organization, and behaviors less dependent on student outcomes than on other things that directly affect the actors in schools.* (p. 2089)[1]

* For the sake of fairness: He notes that "Such a description is, however, itself much too simple, because we have limited experience with alternative incentive schemes [Hanushek (1994)]".

[1] Handbook of Public Economics, Volume 4, Chapter 30, Edited by A.J. Auerbach and M. Feldstein 2002