1. Private coaching and the impact of the rural employment guarantee programme on it: Evidence from West Bengal, India
Upasak Das
December 2016

2. Introduction
Sustainable Development Goals: Achieving universal access to quality education.
Widespread literature on provision and access of education and its effects (Lóapez and Valdés, 2000; McCowan, 2007; Lewin 2009)
One dimension of education that has been of importance is the choice and expenditure on private coaching

3. Private coaching: Fee-based tutoring that is given to provide supplementary instruction to students in academic subjects that they study in the mainstream academic system (Dang and Rogers, 2008)
Malaysia, Japan, South Korea: Majority of the students in primary as well as middle and secondary level receive private coaching.
Private coaching is more used by higher income households, residing in urban areas, studying in higher grades or appearing for competitive examinations, low achievers or studying in government schools (Baker et al. 2001, Glewee and Jayachandran, 2006, Glewwe & Kremer, 2006, Tansel and Bircan, 2006, Dang, 2007; Kim and Lee, 2010, Dongre and Tewary, 2014, Gangopadhyay and Sarkar 2014).

4. Objectives
Impact of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) on educational expenditures on private coaching in parts of West Bengal
If participation and extent of participation indicated by the number of days of work under MGNREGA and the earnings from it have an impact on the decision to send the children for private coaching and the expenditure incurred on it
NOTE: More than 53% of the sampled households who worked in MGNREGA reported that the money received has been spent on private coaching for their children apart from food and clothing

5. MGNREGA
The MGNREGA was passed by the Indian Parliament on 23rd August 2005
At least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment (unskilled work) in every financial year to every rural household at a statutory minimum wage.
Welfare impacts
Reducing poverty and enhancing welfare (Imbert & Papp, 2014; Klonner and Oldiges 2014)
Reduction in short-term migration (Das, 2015)
Empowerment of women (Khera and Nayak, 2009; Dev, 2011)
Access to credit (Dey and Imai, 2015)
Positive impact of female participation on educational outcomes (Afridi et al. 2016)

6. Private Coaching in India and West Bengal
NSSO, 2014:
About 25% of the students depend on private coaching
At primary level, 23% of the male students and 20% female students opt for private coaching
At higher levels, this increases to 38% and 35% for male and female students respectively
Azam (2015): Private coaching is relatively inelastic at each levels of schooling and hence is considered as a necessary good in the household consumption basket
West Bengal: More than 65% opt for private coaching. At higher levels, this is about 90%

7. Data
Field survey conducted from January to April 2012 in two blocks of Cooch Behar district of West Bengal
Two blocks- Haldibari Block and Cooch Behar-I block
Haldibari block: Dakhin Bara Haldibari GP and Devanganj GP;
Cooch Behar-I block: Dawaguri GP and Falimari GP
556 households were surveyed
Questions of socio-economic and demographic characteristics; MGNREGA participation, private coaching expenditure (monthly).

8. Outcome and Primary Variables of Interest
Children of 6 to 18 years.
Outcome Variable: whether the child attends private coaching and expenditure incurred on it [Log (expenditure+1)]
Primary Variables:
Participation in MGNREGA in 2011 (any member got work)- binary.
Log (number of days of work in MGNREGA in )
Log (annual earnings from it +1)
Controls: Age, gender, socio-economic, demographic factors.

9. Estimation Methodology
Regression equation:
if child, from household, in GP, is sent to private coaching, 0 otherwise/ expenditure incurred.
and = child specific and household characteristics
= household participation in MGNREGA

10. Omitted variable bias (Angrist and Pischke, 2009)
OLS regression of participation/ extent of participation in MGNREGA.
First stage regression:
= vector of exogenous variables which affect participation in MGNREGA
= the vector of instruments defined at GP level

11. Putting the residuals in the second stage regression
Attendance in private coaching: probit regression
Expenditure incurred: OLS and tobit regression
Bootstrapping at the village level to correct for the standard errors
If the coefficients of the residuals are found to be statistically significant at 1% or 5% level, the variable should be treated as endogenous (Ravallion and Wodon, 2000)

12. Instruments
(i) A dummy to indicate if the GP is ruled by the Trinamool Congress (TMC) Government
(ii) Expenditure incurred for unskilled workers at the GP level per 1000 households demanding work under MGNREGA and
(iii) Number of MGNREGA staffs employed at the GP level in

13. First stage regression
Probit
Tobit
Working in MGNREGA
Log of number of days worked
Log of earnings
Instrument Variables
GP ruled by TMC
-1.512***
-3.331***
-8.754***
(0.312)
(0.610)
(1.778)
Number of MGNREGA staffs at GP level
0.490***
1.267***
2.990***
(0.110)
(0.203)
(0.576)
Expenditure incurred per 1000 workers at GP level
0.173***
0.498***
1.115***
(0.049)
(0.088)
(0.252)
Controls
Yes N
387

14. Descriptive Statistics
Over 52% of the children attends private coaching
Variables
Total
No private coaching
Attend private coaching
Difference
Expenditure on private coaching (in Rs.)
Participated in MGNREGA in 2011 (P)
0.494
0.489
0.499
-0.010
Number of days worked in MGNREGA (2011)
15.882
12.593
18.813 *
Annual income (2011) (in Rs.) *

15. Regression Results (Participation)
Going to tuition (Probit)
Expenditure in tuition (OLS)
Expenditure in tuition (Tobit)
Without residual
With residual
Residuals
-1.060*
-2.475**
-4.195**
(0.579)
(0.963)
(1.655)
Worked in MGNREGA
0.223*
1.283**
0.421**
2.896***
0.760**
4.956***
(0.115)
(0.570)
(0.190)
(0.945)
(0.384)
(1.657)
Controls
Yes
GP fixed effects N
739

16. Regression Results (Number of working days)
Going to tuition (Probit)
Expenditure in tuition (OLS)
Expenditure in tuition (Tobit)
Without residual
With residual
Residuals
-0.172
-0.440*
-0.723*
(0.137)
(0.229)
(0.394)
Log of working days
0.109**
0.281**
0.194***
0.635***
0.362***
1.085***
(0.045)
(0.131)
(0.075)
(0.221)
(0.135)
(0.370)
Controls
Yes
GP fixed effects N
739

17. Regression Results (Earnings)
Going to tuition (Probit)
Expenditure in tuition (OLS)
Expenditure in tuition (Tobit)
Without residual
With residual
Residuals
-0.105
-0.250**
-0.421**
(0.065)
(0.104)
(0.180)
Log of earnings
0.034**
0.139**
0.063**
0.313***
0.115**
0.535***
(0.016)
(0.063)
(0.027)
(0.101)
(0.052)
(0.174)
Controls
Yes
GP fixed effects N
739

18. Local Polynomial Regression Plots

20. Qualitative Evidence An agricultural labourer from the Dawaguri GP
Private coaching popular in Dawaguri GP- about 70% of the children attends it
Households from GPs in the haldibari block

21. Conclusion
Evidence of impact of MGNREGA in increasing the expenditure on education through private coaching
Large welfare impacts through MGNREGA
Glaring problems making MGNREGA less attractive (Mukhopadhyay et al., 2015, Narayanan et al. 2016)
Need to address problems related to rationing of jobs and delayed payments
Higher allocation of resources to the programme