SCHOOLING POLICIESFOR QUALITY ANDECONOMIC GROWTHEric A. HanushekStanford UniversityMay 2013
Key Questions1. Does achievement matter?YES2. Is Spain competitive?NO3. How is Spain doing?NOT WELL4. Are there things to ...
Does achievement matter?andIs Spain competitive?
Cognitive Skills and Long Run Economic Growth
Years of Schooling and Economic GrowthWithout quality controlWith quality control
PISAMathematicsAchievement, 20090100200300400500600ShanghaiSingaporeHongKongKoreaTaiwanFinlandLiechtensteinSwitzerlandJapa...
PISAMathematicsAchievement, 20090100200300400500600ShanghaiSingaporeHongKongKoreaTaiwanFinlandLiechtensteinSwitzerlandJapa...
PISAMathematicsAchievement, 20090100200300400500600ShanghaiSingaporeHongKongKoreaTaiwanFinlandLiechtensteinSwitzerlandJapa...
020004000600080001000012000Iceland Finland EU 2020billion€Improvement in AchievementPresent Value of Gains to GDP for Spain
020004000600080001000012000Iceland Finland EU 2020billion€Improvement in Achievement6.2% 5.0%20.2%Present Value of Gains t...
How is Spain doing?
0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%5.0%LatviaChileBrazilPortugalHongKongGermanyPolandLiechtensteinSloveniaColombiaLit...
Are there things to be done?
Resource Policies• Little evidence of success• Cross country evidence• Within country – developed• Within country – develo...
Resources and Performance across Countries3504004505005500 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000Math performance...
Resource Policies• Little evidence of successle evidence of success• Cross country evidence• Within country – developed• W...
Resource Policies• Does not say “resources never have effect”• Does not say “resources cannot have effect”No expectation w...
Teacher Quality• Teachers most important input• No identifiable characteristics• Master’s degrees• Experience*• Certificat...
Institutional Reforms Supported by Evidence• Centralized exams• Accountability• Autonomy/decentralization
Institutional Reforms Supported by Evidence• Centralized exams• Accountability• Autonomy/decentralization• Choice• Direct ...
0.000.250.500.751.000% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%s.d.performancegainPercent deselectedlow estimate of teacher effectivenessIcelan...
0.000.250.500.751.000% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%s.d.performancegainPercent deselectedhigh estimate of teacher effectiveness low ...
0.000.250.500.751.000% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%s.d.performancegainPercent deselectedhigh estimate of teacher effectiveness low ...
Key Questions1. Does achievement matter?YES2. Is Spain competitive?NO3. How is Spain doing?NOT WELL4. Are there things to ...
AustraliaAustraliaBelgiumBelgiumCanadaCanadaFinlandFinlandFranceFranceUKUKGermanyGermanyItalyItalyJapanJapanKoreaKoreaNeth...
Changes in Growth Ratesvs. Changes in Test Scores
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Schooling policies for quality and economic growth

650 views
496 views

Published on

Retos y desafíos para la economía de la educación, por Eric Hanushek, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University. Coordinator for Economics of Education of the CESifo Research Network.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
650
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Drops 7 negative including France and Norway
  • Deselect teachers at bottommean of truncated distribution = density/cum at cutoff calculate for N(0,1) and then translate into student achievement distribution 13 years times change in meanCanada approx +0.5 sd; Finland +0.75 sd
  • Deselect teachers at bottommean of truncated distribution = density/cum at cutoff calculate for N(0,1) and then translate into student achievement distribution 13 years times change in meanCanada approx +0.5 sd; Finland +0.75 sd
  • Deselect teachers at bottommean of truncated distribution = density/cum at cutoff calculate for N(0,1) and then translate into student achievement distribution 13 years times change in meanCanada approx +0.5 sd; Finland +0.75 sd
  • Schooling policies for quality and economic growth

    1. 1. SCHOOLING POLICIESFOR QUALITY ANDECONOMIC GROWTHEric A. HanushekStanford UniversityMay 2013
    2. 2. Key Questions1. Does achievement matter?YES2. Is Spain competitive?NO3. How is Spain doing?NOT WELL4. Are there things to be done?YES
    3. 3. Does achievement matter?andIs Spain competitive?
    4. 4. Cognitive Skills and Long Run Economic Growth
    5. 5. Years of Schooling and Economic GrowthWithout quality controlWith quality control
    6. 6. PISAMathematicsAchievement, 20090100200300400500600ShanghaiSingaporeHongKongKoreaTaiwanFinlandLiechtensteinSwitzerlandJapanCanadaNetherlandsMacaoNewZealandBelgiumAustraliaGermanyEstoniaIcelandDenmarkSloveniaNorwayFranceSlovak_RepublicAustriaPolandSwedenCzech_RepublicUnited_KingdomHungaryLuxembourgUnited_StatesIrelandPortugalSpainItalyLatviaLithuaniaRussian_FedGreeceCroatiaDubai(UAE)IsraelTurkeySerbiaAzerbaijanBulgariaRomaniaUruguayChileThailandMexicoTrinidad_TobagoKazakhstanMontenegroArgentinaJordanBrazilColombiaAlbaniaTunisiaIndonesiaQatarPeruPanamaKyrgyzstan
    7. 7. PISAMathematicsAchievement, 20090100200300400500600ShanghaiSingaporeHongKongKoreaTaiwanFinlandLiechtensteinSwitzerlandJapanCanadaNetherlandsMacaoNewZealandBelgiumAustraliaGermanyEstoniaIcelandDenmarkSloveniaNorwayFranceSlovak_RepublicAustriaPolandSwedenCzech_RepublicUnited_KingdomHungaryLuxembourgUnited_StatesIrelandPortugalSpainItalyLatviaLithuaniaRussian_FedGreeceCroatiaDubai(UAE)IsraelTurkeySerbiaAzerbaijanBulgariaRomaniaUruguayChileThailandMexicoTrinidad_TobagoKazakhstanMontenegroArgentinaJordanBrazilColombiaAlbaniaTunisiaIndonesiaQatarPeruPanamaKyrgyzstan
    8. 8. PISAMathematicsAchievement, 20090100200300400500600ShanghaiSingaporeHongKongKoreaTaiwanFinlandLiechtensteinSwitzerlandJapanCanadaNetherlandsMacaoNewZealandBelgiumAustraliaGermanyEstoniaIcelandDenmarkSloveniaNorwayFranceSlovak_RepublicAustriaPolandSwedenCzech_RepublicUnited_KingdomHungaryLuxembourgUnited_StatesIrelandPortugalSpainItalyLatviaLithuaniaRussian_FedGreeceCroatiaDubai(UAE)IsraelTurkeySerbiaAzerbaijanBulgariaRomaniaUruguayChileThailandMexicoTrinidad_TobagoKazakhstanMontenegroArgentinaJordanBrazilColombiaAlbaniaTunisiaIndonesiaQatarPeruPanamaKyrgyzstan
    9. 9. 020004000600080001000012000Iceland Finland EU 2020billion€Improvement in AchievementPresent Value of Gains to GDP for Spain
    10. 10. 020004000600080001000012000Iceland Finland EU 2020billion€Improvement in Achievement6.2% 5.0%20.2%Present Value of Gains to GDP for Spain
    11. 11. How is Spain doing?
    12. 12. 0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%5.0%LatviaChileBrazilPortugalHongKongGermanyPolandLiechtensteinSloveniaColombiaLithuaniaUnitedKingdomSingaporeSwitzerlandGreeceMexicoIsraelFinlandItalyNewZealandDenmarkKorea,Rep.HungaryIranUnitedStatesTaiwan…BelgiumCanadaCyprusAustraliaJordanRussianFed.IndonesiaAustriaSpainIcelandJapanNetherlandsTunisiaArgentinaAchievement Growth, 1995-2009
    13. 13. Are there things to be done?
    14. 14. Resource Policies• Little evidence of success• Cross country evidence• Within country – developed• Within country – developing
    15. 15. Resources and Performance across Countries3504004505005500 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000Math performance in PISA 2003Cumulative educational expenditure per studentMexicoBelgiumIcelandFranceSwedenSwitzerlandDenmarkAustriaNorwayUSAItalyPortugalSpainKoreaGermanyIrelandCzech Rep.HungaryPolandSlovak Rep.GreeceFinlandNetherlandsCanadaJapanAustraliaR 2 = 0.01R 2 = 0.15
    16. 16. Resource Policies• Little evidence of successle evidence of success• Cross country evidence• Within country – developed• Within country – developing• Consistent with detailed analysis• class size• school characteristics
    17. 17. Resource Policies• Does not say “resources never have effect”• Does not say “resources cannot have effect”No expectation within current incentivestructure
    18. 18. Teacher Quality• Teachers most important input• No identifiable characteristics• Master’s degrees• Experience*• Certification• Preparation• Professional development• Observable through both student performance andsupervisor ratings• Cannot regulate and pay on characteristics
    19. 19. Institutional Reforms Supported by Evidence• Centralized exams• Accountability• Autonomy/decentralization
    20. 20. Institutional Reforms Supported by Evidence• Centralized exams• Accountability• Autonomy/decentralization• Choice• Direct performance incentives
    21. 21. 0.000.250.500.751.000% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%s.d.performancegainPercent deselectedlow estimate of teacher effectivenessIcelandAlternative Estimates of Least Effective Teachers(United States distribution)
    22. 22. 0.000.250.500.751.000% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%s.d.performancegainPercent deselectedhigh estimate of teacher effectiveness low estimate of teacher effectivenessIcelandAlternative Estimates of Least Effective Teachers(United States distribution)
    23. 23. 0.000.250.500.751.000% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%s.d.performancegainPercent deselectedhigh estimate of teacher effectiveness low estimate of teacher effectivenessIcelandFinlandAlternative Estimates of Least Effective Teachers(United States distribution)
    24. 24. Key Questions1. Does achievement matter?YES2. Is Spain competitive?NO3. How is Spain doing?NOT WELL4. Are there things to be done?YES
    25. 25. AustraliaAustraliaBelgiumBelgiumCanadaCanadaFinlandFinlandFranceFranceUKUKGermanyGermanyItalyItalyJapanJapanKoreaKoreaNetherlandsNetherlandsN. ZealandN. ZealandNorwayNorwaySwedenSwedenUSAUSA4604805005205405601975 2000Trends inTest Scores
    26. 26. Changes in Growth Ratesvs. Changes in Test Scores

    ×