The Role and Impact of Public-Private Partnerships in Education

More documents

Recommendations

Info

36 THE ROLE AND IMPACT OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS IN EDUCATION involved in the PPP. Our analysis is limited to those evaluation studies that address selfselection through one of six strategies— randomization, regression discontinuity analysis, instrumental variables, Heckman correction models, difference in difference estimators, and propensity score matching (see appendix B for detailed description of these evaluation methods). Besides the manner in which endogeneity is addressed, our analysis also takes into account the type of PPP contract used. To this end, this chapter evaluates nine studies of vouchers, three studies of subsidies, four studies of private management contracts, and one study of private finance initiatives. Because we discussed the details of these programs in chapter 2, this chapter focuses only on the results of the studies. Vouchers There are numerous studies of the education effects of vouchers, especially in the United States (Gill et al. 2007) but also in other parts of the world (Barrera-Osorio and Patrinos 2009). Table 3.3 briefly summarizes these studies. Colombia’s Programa de Ampliación de Cobertura de la Educación Secundaria was a voucher program launched in large cities in 1991 by the national government. Its main objective was to increase access to secondary education for low-income families, and it assisted 125,000 such students. It targeted neighborhoods classified as falling into the two lowest socioeconomic strata and children who attended public primary schools, offering the families of these children a voucher worth approximately $190 to use at the school of their choice. Families could supplement the value of the voucher if their chosen school charged more than its value, but not all private schools accepted the vouchers. The majority of cities and towns allocated vouchers through a lottery when demand exceeded supply, which enabled Angrist et al. (2002); Angrist, Bettinger, and Kremer (2006); and Bettinger, Kremer, and Delivered Saavedra by (2008) The World to evaluate Bank e-library the to: unknown program using randomization IP : 192.86.100.35 techniques. Angrist et al. (2002) Mon, 30 Mar and 2009 Angrist, 12:16:23 Bettinger, and Kremer (2006) found that Colombia’s voucher program had positive effects on several outcomes over both the short and long term. Recipients of the vouchers attended private schools 15 percent more than nonrecipients did. Beneficiaries had 0.1 more years of education than nonrecipients did as well as lower repetition rates. They were also more likely than nonrecipients to complete the eighth grade, and they scored 0.2 standard deviations higher on standardized tests than nonrecipients did—a significant finding. The evaluations did not identify any short-term effects on enrollment. In a complementary paper, Bettinger, Kremer, and Saavedra (2008) present evidence in opposition to the hypothesis that vouchers succeed only through peer effects. Moreover, they show that private vocational institutions teach more relevant skills than public voucher establishments do, which confirms the theory that flexibility in school management is a key to better education outcomes. The evidence on vouchers in Chile is mixed and controversial. Chile’s experience dates from the 1980s, and any control group is likely to be subject to competition effects and thus would contaminate the effects of the voucher system (Bellei 2005). Disentangling these effects is difficult, especially because of the lack of randomized assignment and limited baseline information (Hoxby 2003). Presumably, this is the reason why different studies have yielded such different results. Examples of early studies of the voucher system in Chile include Rodriguez (1988), Aedo and Larranaga (1994), and Aedo (1997). In general, these studies compared the outcomes of beneficiaries with those of nonbeneficiaries and are thus prone to bias in their estimates. A second generation of studies used better data and more sophisticated estimation methods (Bravo, Contreras, and Santhueza 1999; Carnoy and McEwan 2000; Mizala and Romaguera 2000; Vegas 2002). Nevertheless, these studies were still prone to selection bias. Our review of the empirical literature includes the most recent studies of the program’s effects on education outcomes, including (c) The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank
What Do We Know About Public-Private Partnerships in Education? 37 Table 3.3 Studies of vouchers Empirical strategy Country and study Data: type and year Outcome variables Results Randomization Instrumental variable Heckman correction model Colombia (Angrist, Bettinger, and Kremer 2006) Colombia (Angrist et al. 2002) Republic of Korea (Kang 2007) Chile (Hsieh and Urquiola 2006) Chile (Hsieh and Urquiola 2006) Chile (Gallegos 2004) Chile (Contreras, Bettinger, and Sepulveda 2008) Sweden (Sandström and Bergström 2004) Netherlands (Himmler 2007) Chile (McEwan 2001) Chile (Sapelli and Vial 2004) Chile (Elacqua, Contreras, and Salazar 2008) 1999-2001 ICFES (National exam, grade 11) records student level 1995; Cross-section, student level 1995 TIMSS (International test in math and science); Cross-section, student level Cross-sections, different sources, 1982, 1970, 1999 TIMSS; student level 1983–96 SIMCE (National exam, different grades); student level Cross-section, 1994–97, student level Cross-section, 2005, student level National achievement test, 1997–98, student and municipal level National data, 2002–03, student level Cross-section, 1997, student level Cross-section, 1998 and 1999, student level Sources: Authors’ compilation; Barrera-Osorio and Patrinos 2009. Standardized test scores (math, reading), completion, cost Standardized test scores (math, reading, writing) Standardized test scores (math), 7th and 8th grades Standardized test scores (language, math), 4th and 8th grades; repetition rate; years of schooling; sorting measure of scores Average of the math and Spanish portions of test scores in 4th and 8th grades Selection of schools (parents’ questionnaire), standardized test, math reading and science, 4th grade No failing grades Secondary school grades, per student spending, grade inflation Standardized test scores (language, math) 8th grade Standardized test scores, language Delivered by The World Bank e-library to: Cross-section, 2002 Standardized unknown test student level IP scores, : 192.86.100.35 language Mon, and 30 Mar math, 2009 4th, 12:16:23 8th, and 10th grades Math and reading scores generate a voucher effect of 0.2 standard deviations. Improves test scores for both average students and those over the 90th percentile. Voucher recipients scored 0.2 standard deviations higher than nonrecipients. Voucher recipients’ 8th grade completion rates were 10 percentage points higher, and their private school attendance rates were 15 percentage points higher. 1 standard deviation increase in mean quality of peers enhances math scores at the 0.25 and 0.5 quantiles by 0.47 and 0.42 standard deviations. Students above the 0.75 quantile are not affected by the mean quality of their peers, but weak and median students around and below the 0.5 quantile are strongly affected by it. Increase in 1 standard deviation of private enrollment decreases change in sorting measure (language) by 1.21–0.19 standard deviations without pre-trend control for different instrumental variables. When controlling for pre-trend changes in standard deviation, goes in same direction. Same pattern observed when sorting measure is mathematics. 1 increase in standard deviation of private enrollment increases standard deviation in sorting measure of repetition rate by 0.50–1.62 using different instruments without pretrend and with pre-trend goes from 0.47–1.71 standard deviations change. 1 standard deviation in private enrollment generates about 0.20 standard deviation in test scores and 0.24 in productivity. 1 standard deviation of number of priests per person boosts private enrollment by 8 percentage points. After controlling for self-selection, no differences between public and private schools. Greater competition improves the standards of public schools. Positive link between intensity of competition and academic achievement in secondary school. Adjusted differences in test scores between public corporations, Catholic voucher, Protestant voucher, nonreligious voucher, private nonvoucher schools and public schools show differences of –0.16, 0.35, –0.18, 0.002, and 0.62. Similar results emerge for Spanish. Large positive effects; 0.5 standard deviation. Effects not due to sorting or peers. Franchise schools scores were between 0.20 and 0.50 standard deviation higher than private independent schools. No differences between private independent and public schools. (c) The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank
Page 1 and 2: The Role and Impact of Public-Priva
Page 7 and 8: Contents Foreword ix Acknowledgment
Page 9 and 10: Contents vii Boxes 1.1 Sources of c
Page 11 and 12: Foreword Education is widely believ
Page 13 and 14: Acknowledgments We acknowledge the
Page 15 and 16: Abbreviations AVEC BRAC BTL CARE ES
Page 17 and 18: Introduction Despite recent increas
Page 19 and 20: Introduction 3 schools (for example
Page 21 and 22: Introduction 5 PPPs may face resist
Page 23 and 24: Introduction 7 recent (such as thos
Page 25 and 26: Understanding Public-Private Partne
Page 31 and 32: International Experience While gove
Page 33 and 34: International Experience 17 Countri
Page 35 and 36: International Experience 19 BOX 2.1
Page 37 and 38: International Experience 21 of stud
Page 39 and 40: International Experience 23 of trad
Page 41 and 42: International Experience 25 to prov
Page 43 and 44: International Experience 27 allocat
Page 45 and 46: International Experience 29 student
Page 47 and 48: What Do We Know about Public-Privat
Page 49 and 50: What Do We Know About Public-Privat
Page 51: What Do We Know About Public-Privat
Page 59 and 60: Designing a Conducive Environment f
Page 75 and 76: Conclusions Despite recent increase
Page 77 and 78: Conclusions 61 for providing educat
Page 79 and 80: Conclusions 63 The United States ha
Page 81 and 82: Conclusions 65 limited data, and, t
Page 83 and 84: Conclusions 67 funding system shoul
Page 85 and 86: Conclusions 69 system is a persiste
Page 87 and 88: Public-Private Partnerships: Progra
Page 99 and 100: appendix BMethods for Evaluation of
Page 101 and 102: References Aedo, C. 1997. “Organi
Page 103 and 104:
References 87 in Emerging Economies
Page 105 and 106:
References 89 Discussion Paper 2003
Page 107 and 108:
References 91 ———. 2003b. Par
Page 109 and 110:
Index Boxes, figures, and tables ar
Page 111 and 112:
Index 95 H Haiti, 18, 19b, 73 Heckm
Page 113 and 114:
Index 97 schools. See also charter
Page 115 and 116:
Delivered by The World Bank e-libra
show all

The Role and Impact of Public-Private Partnerships in Education

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?