1. Volume measure in education The French experience
Luxembourg
26, May 2005

2. Education : the frame Education : 15 millions students
1.8 million employees
Biggest budget of the State
27% of the non market production (P13) of general government (S13)
20% expenses (COFOG)
Added value
non market education = 71b€ = 4,3% GDP
market education = 6,4b€ = 0,4% GDP

3. Source of data
Satellite account of education (Department of education)
Data collected annually
Consistent with national accounts but focussed on education
Different kinds of data

4. Data available
Number of students by level (preelementary, elementary, 1st cycle..)
Statistics on success rates in exams
Costs broken down by kind of expense
Teaching
Logistics (secretary’s office, careers advice..)
Other services closely related (help for transport, lunches, purchase of books)

5. Data available Expenses by payers Sources State Local governments
Households
Non financial corporations
Sources

6. Input vs. output method Basis 1995 : input method
Direct measure of price, volume is inferred
Basis 2000 : output method
Direct measure of volume, price is inferred
Use statistics of French Education satellite account
Measure of education granted to pupils and students

7. Output method : why ? To comply with Eurostat’s recommendations
Better judgement of public expenses Reform of State accountancy in 2006 : efficiency of expense crucial point

8. Output method : which measure ???
Method : indicators of volume in education weighted by costs
Question : which indicator to use ???
Total hours * Stocks of students proxied by number of students BUT
Quality effect issue

9. Use of stocks of students
Volume of education of year n at a level j = number of students at the level j during the year n
With number of students during the scholar year from Sep (n-1) to June (n)

10. Total volume Agregate volume index :
Evolution of between (n) and (n+1) weighted by structure of costs (n). Stratification by 12 levels => chained Laspeyres index
Costs
exclude capital expenses
Total paid by general government S13

11. Calculation

12. BUT…
Same output for each kind of students (paying or not attention to the lesson)
Don’t take heed of quality effect
Means allocated approach
Results approach (assumption strong link between means and results)

13. Means allocated approach
Indicator : number of students by class
Effect not obvious (conclusion of a group of experts 2001)
Effect non linear (function of size of each class)
Corrected

14. Means allocated approach
Number of students corrected
If the number of students in a class is higher than 27, only 27 students receive education
New number of students :

15. Means allocated approach
Evolution depending on real number of students, corrected number
Fairly same results with other concave functions
Method calling for data difficult to get

16. Education results approach
Measure of acquisition of education
What kind of improvement (skills, knowledge, communication, self reliance) ???
=> No existing measure
Measure by :
1) having passed an exam
2) having moved up to next grade if no exam

17. Measures of successful students (flow method)
A student receives education at level j of year n, F(j)
F(j)=1 if having passed an exam or moved up to next grade
F(j)=0 otherwise
Assumption : level more or less constant (study confirmed level of 11 year old pupils same between 1987 and 1997)

18. Problem of data Possible in 1st and 2nd cycle
Elementary : information of delayed pupils : infer successful with some assumptions
University : too difficult defining successful students (too many trainings) : method by stocks

19. Conclusions of this method
Between , volume indexes :
flows successful > stocks
Average difference : 0,2%
Biggest difference at the middle of the period

20. Flows method vs. stocks method

21. Final method chosen
Method by successful flows not applicable each year (too complicated)
Final method : numbers of students weighted by costs + quality effect
Quality effect : moving average of volume flows-volume stocks between 1994 & 2001
From 2001 no more quality effect (calculation redone in few years)

22. Output flows vs. stocks methods

23. Finally : output method vs. input method