IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/atlecj/v37y2009i2p135-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disaggregating Education Production

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Dickey
  • Robert Houston Jr.

Abstract

A particular weakness of the education production function literature is that production is measured after a long series of treatments have been administered and reflects the effects of aggregation. This study meets a need to extend the perspective of this literature to a disaggregated view. We directed our inquiry toward a traditional set of production stages: the reading assignment, the lecture, after the lecture study and preparation for the exam. Our experimental design was constructed to measure student performance before and after each stage of production. We found that production varied significantly across stages. The reading assignment and lecture stages were productive. The post lecture stage exhibited negative but insignificant productivity. The test preparation stage also exhibited negligible productivity. Copyright International Atlantic Economic Society 2009

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Dickey & Robert Houston Jr., 2009. "Disaggregating Education Production," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(2), pages 135-144, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:atlecj:v:37:y:2009:i:2:p:135-144
    DOI: 10.1007/s11293-009-9171-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11293-009-9171-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11293-009-9171-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Watts, Michael & Bosshardt, William, 1991. "How Instructors Make a Difference: Panel Data Estimates from Principles of Economic Courses," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(2), pages 336-340, May.
    2. Paul W. Grimes & Paul S. Nelson, 1998. "The Social Issues Pedagogy vs. The Traditional Principles of Economics: An Empirical Examination," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 42(1), pages 56-64, March.
    3. Mary O. Borg & Stephen L. Shapiro, 1996. "Personality Type and Student Performance in Principles of Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 3-25, January.
    4. Gregory A. Krohn & Catherine M. O'Connor, 2005. "Student Effort and Performance over the Semester," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 3-28, January.
    5. Schmidt, Robert M, 1983. "Who Maximizes What? A Study in Student Time Allocation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 23-28, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Göke, Michael, 2008. "Homo oeconomicus im Hörsaal: Die Rationalität studentischer Nebengespräche in Lehrveranstaltungen," Arbeitspapiere der FOM 9, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management.
    2. Robert Metcalfe & Simon Burgess and Steven Proud, 2011. "Student effort and educational attainment: Using the England football team to identify the education production function," Economics Series Working Papers 586, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    3. Zimmermann, Klaus F. & Bauer, Thomas K., 1998. "Learning Efficiency of Economics Students," IZA Discussion Papers 23, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Hans Bonesrønning & Leiv Opstad, 2012. "How Much is Students' College Performance Affected by Quantity of Study?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 11(2), pages 46-63.
    5. Ambrose & Cheryl A. Kier, 2017. "On Students’ Perception of a Multi-Scheme Assessment Method," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 17(1), pages 40-52, Spring.
    6. Semeijn,J. & Velden,R.,Van der, 1999. "Aspects of learning style and labour market entry an explorative study," ROA Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    7. Dey, Ishita, 2018. "Class attendance and academic performance: A subgroup analysis," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 29-40.
    8. Hadsell, Lester, 2020. "Not for want of trying: Effort and Success of women in principles of microeconomics," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    9. Arthur Caplan & John Gilbert, 2008. "'D' is for dilly-dally?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(14), pages 1085-1088.
    10. Afrogha, Olufolakemi & Oladele, Femi & Wright, Olatunde, 2020. "Influencing Factors On Academic Performance In Bowen University: The Perceptions Of Accounting Undergraduate Students," International Journal of Contemporary Accounting Issues-IJCAI (formerly International Journal of Accounting & Finance IJAF), The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN), vol. 9(2), pages 120-140, September.
    11. Arulampalam, Wiji & Naylor, Robin A. & Smith, Jeremy, 2012. "Am I missing something? The effects of absence from class on student performance," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 363-375.
    12. Erlane K Ghani & Jamaliah Said & Kamaruzzaman Muhammad, 2012. "The Effect of Teaching Format, Students¡¯ Ability and Cognitive Effort on Accounting Students¡¯ Performance," International Journal of Learning and Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 2(3), pages 81-98, June.
    13. Oskar Harmon & William Alpert & Joseph Histen, 2014. "Online Discussion and Learning Outcomes," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 20(1), pages 33-44, February.
    14. repec:zbw:rwirep:0235 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Roger B. Butters & Carlos J. Asarta & Tammie J. Fischer, 2011. "Human Capital in The Classroom: The Role of Teacher Knowledge in Economic Literacy," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(2), pages 47-57, November.
    16. Chadi, Adrian & de Pinto, Marco & Schultze, Gabriel, 2019. "Young, gifted and lazy? The role of ability and labor market prospects in student effort decisions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 66-79.
    17. Dobkin, Carlos & Gil, Ricard & Marion, Justin, 2010. "Skipping class in college and exam performance: Evidence from a regression discontinuity classroom experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 566-575, August.
    18. Massimiliano Bratti & Stefano Staffolani, 2013. "Student Time Allocation and Educational Production Functions," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 111-112, pages 103-140.
    19. Charles H. Breeden & Noreen Lephardt, 2005. "Changes in Student Attitudes toward the Market System and the Introductory Microeconomics Course," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 21(Fall 2005), pages 164-179.
    20. Hart Hodges & Yvonne Durham & Steve Henson, 2018. "Economic Education Production Functions for the Principles of Macroeconomics and the Principles of Microeconomics: Is There a Difference?," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 18(2), pages 22-41, Fall.
    21. Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Education production functions; Student effort; A22; C52; D24; I21;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:atlecj:v:37:y:2009:i:2:p:135-144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.