Measuring the Education Function of Government in the United States Michael S. Christian U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AA-AAS Whats Up, Whats Down and Whats Next in South Dakota Linda Turner Special Education Programs SD Dept of Education.
Advertisements

Does Income Distribution Matter for Effective Demand? Evidence from the U.S. Christopher Brown Arkansas State University.
Measuring Productivity in the Australian Mining Sector
Liberal Arts Math. Objectives  By the end of this lesson, you  Can multiply decimal numbers without the use of a calculator.
Using VAM Data to Determine Points (50 % of the Total) toward Unified Single Rating Draft Procedures 11/21/2012 DRAFT DOCUMENT.
Does Formative Feedback Help or Hinder Students? An Empirical Investigation 2015 DEE Conference Carlos Cortinhas, University of Exeter.
Gifted Indicator. Reported in 2014, counts as Indicator in 2015 Progress: Value-Added Performance Index Inputs.
ASSESSMENT, STANDARDS, & ACCOUNTABILITY. WHY IS ASSESSMENT IMPORTANT? Used to gather information and make decisions about student learning Formal tests.
EIP: Early Intervention Program Gould Elementary EIP Teacher: M. G. Stewart.
The Impact of Comprehensive School Counseling Programs on Student Performance Greg Brigman, Ph.D. Linda Webb, Ph.D. Elizabeth Villares, Ph.D. Florida Atlantic.
September 2013 THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS & THE NEW STATE TESTS: ADVANCING COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS IN NYC.
Measuring the Output of Health in the United States Workshop on Measurement of Non-Market Output in Education and Health Michael S. Christian U.S. Bureau.
Education 2 – Outputs © Allen C. Goodman, What we’ll look at Choosing Outputs –Means? –Something Else? Producing Outputs –How do we measure them?
Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker How much does the U.S. spend to treat different diseases?
Education 2 – Outputs © Allen C. Goodman, What we’ll look at Choosing Outputs –Means? –Something Else? Producing Outputs –How do we measure them?
 Educator Effectiveness System  Comparative Measures  Resource for Professional Development.
2.2D Peer Benchmarking Output template. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND License. To view a copy of this license, visit
MISSOURI: ECONOMIC FUTURE WITH EDUCATIONAL REFORM This file contains detailed projections and information from the article: Eric A. Hanushek, Jens Ruhose,
Maine: Economic future with educational Reform
Session 6: Education- International databases and comparisons
Department of Economics, University of Stellenbosch
New Hampshire: Economic future with educational Reform
Perceptions, Rankings and CASD
alabama: Economic future with Educational Reform
Performance differences between religious and nonreligious schools
Minnesota: Economic future with educational Reform
alaska: Economic future with educational Reform
Kansas: Economic future with educational Reform
شاخصهای عملکردی بیمارستان
Kansas Elementary and Secondary Education Act Advisory Council (ESEA)
فرق بین خوب وعالی فقط اندکی تلاش بیشتر است
Arizona: Economic future with educational Reform
Michigan: Economic future with educational Reform
Washington: Economic future with educational Reform
Wisconsin: Economic future with educational Reform
New York: Economic future with educational Reform
New Jersey: Economic future with educational Reform
Florida: Economic future with educational Reform
Tennessee: Economic future with educational Reform
Nebraska: Economic future with educational Reform
Texas: Economic future with educational Reform
New Mexico: Economic future with educational Reform
Quality Education Commission Presentation to the Senate Committee
Utah: Economic future with educational Reform
Hawaii: Economic future with educational Reform
oregon: Economic future with educational Reform
virginia: Economic future with educational Reform
Madison Elementary / Middle School and the New Accountability System
montana: Economic future with educational Reform
South dakota: Economic future with educational Reform
california: Economic future with educational Reform
Georgia: Economic future with educational Reform
Louisiana: Economic future with educational Reform
Kentucky: Economic future with educational Reform
connecticut: Economic future with educational Reform
Iowa: Economic future with educational Reform
West Virginia: Economic future with educational Reform
Pennsylvania: Economic future with educational Reform
Ohio: Economic future with educational Reform
Delaware: Economic future with educational Reform
Price and volume measures for education
North Dakota: Economic future with educational Reform
indiana: Economic future with educational Reform
Dixon Elementary # Dixonscholars
vermont: Economic future with educational Reform
Colorado: Economic future with educational Reform
Mississippi: Economic future with educational Reform
MIMIC ACCOUNTABILITY USING BENCHMARK DATA ! ?.
oklahoma: Economic future with educational Reform
Mayra Perez, Ed. D. October 10, 2016
Presentation transcript:

Measuring the Education Function of Government in the United States Michael S. Christian U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

2 Input and Volume Approaches  Public education currently measured in United States using input approach  Value of output equals cost of inputs  Assumes productivity is constant and zero  Direct volume measurement allows for changes in productivity

3 Elementary and Secondary  Most straightforward volume measure is simple count of students  Grew at annual 0.7% rate  Input measure grew 2.4%  Assumes all students are equal outputs  Assumes quality of education is constant

4 Special Education  Growth in special education  9.4% of students in 1980, 12.1% in 2001  Chambers et al (2004): special-ed students twice as expensive  Count special-ed students double  Increases growth rate from 0.73% to 0.85%

5 School Quality  Improvement in school quality  Student outcomes (test scores)  Quality of school inputs

6 Test Scores  Test scores  12 th grade math scores improved by about one third standard deviation over  How should we use this to adjust volume?  What is the rate of substitution between years of education and cognitive skill?

7 Test Scores to Years of Education  Use effect of education on test scores  Takes 3.3 years for average NAEP scores to rise 1 cross-sectional deviation  1 standard deviation = 3.3 years education  1/3 s.d. increase in 12 th grade scores: 12 years in 1999 = 13.1 years in 1982  Upper-bound adjustment

8 Adjusting With Test Scores  Test scores adjustment increases growth from 0.85% to 1.22%  Adjusting for raw scores assumes all improvements are caused by schools  Holding parents’ education constant reduces adjusted growth rate to 1.00%

9 School Inputs  Quality of school inputs  Pupil-teacher ratio fell from 18.7 in 1980 to 15.9 in 2001  Inexperienced (0-1 years) teachers rose from 5.3% in 1980 to 8.8% in 2000  How do these changes affect the quality of education?

10 School Inputs to Years of Education  Huge academic literature measures effects of school inputs on test scores  Multiply effects by substitution rate between test scores and years of education to make quality adjustment

11 Adjusting with School Inputs  Literature on school inputs  Teacher experience important  Class size controversial  Not much evidence for others  Adjusting for class size, experience increases growth 0.85% to 1.06%

12 Summary of Adjustments Annual volume growth, Direct volume measures Count of students0.73% School inputs and special ed1.06% Test scores and special ed1.22% Input measure2.41%

13 Elementary/Secondary Measures

14 All Levels of Education (1)  Total education volume measure  Volume measures for all of elementary/ secondary, instruction part of higher  Input measures for rest of higher, “other”  Combined using Fisher index  Result is 90/10 volume/input hybrid index

15 All Levels of Education (2) Annual volume growth, Slowest volume measure1.08% Fastest volume measure1.45% Input measure2.47%

16 All Levels of Education (3)