IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa14p711.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Impact of School Quality on Educational Attainment - Evidence from Finnish High Schools

Author

Listed:
  • Heikki Pursiainen
  • Mika Kortelainen
  • Jenni Pääkkönen

Abstract

We analyze differences in school quality using a comprehensive panel data set covering all upper secondary school graduates in Finland during the years 2002-2013. School quality is defined as the effect of the school on matriculation exam results controlling for quality of student intake. In other words, the quality difference between two schools is the expected difference in exam results for a randomly chosen student switching schools. Using methods similar to Chetty, Friedman and Rockoff (2013) we are able to measure both cross-sectional differences in school quality and the persistence of these differences over time. We also control for the uncertainty inherent in assessing the quality of smaller schools with a relatively low number of graduates. We use each pupil's comprehensive school grades to control for previous education / pupil quality. Also, comprehensive school fixed effects are used to control for differences in comprehensive school grading as well as unobserved socioeconomic factors. The method is potentially sensitive to bias induced by school selection. To assess the potential bias we partially match our student sample to a spatial database by home address and use this to assess bias. We find no evidence of significant bias. Our first result is that there are significant cross-sectional differences in school quality even after controlling for student intake quality. The quality difference between the top schools and bottom schools each year measured in average matriculation score points is around one grade point in a scale of 1 to 7. In Finland university entry is partly controlled by these matriculation exam results. A one-point difference in grade averages will significantly affect the chances of entry into the most competitive university curricula. This result must, however, be qualified in a number of ways. First, large differences are observed only between the very top and bottom institutions. Most schools are much closer to each other in quality: the interquartile range each year is only about a fifth of a grade average point. Most schools are thus clustered quite close to each other in quality. Also, while there is persistence over time in school quality, this is far from complete. This means that the ranking of the middling-quality majority of schools is highly unstable over time, making any yearly league tables highly suspect. There is more persistence in the very top and bottom institutions, which are roughly the same during the whole period under consideration. Finally, school quality seems to be for the most part evenly distributed regionally. While there are certainly good schools in the largest cities, the success of the most selective institutions is mostly explained by quality of intake rather than teaching.

Suggested Citation

  • Heikki Pursiainen & Mika Kortelainen & Jenni Pääkkönen, 2014. "Impact of School Quality on Educational Attainment - Evidence from Finnish High Schools," ERSA conference papers ersa14p711, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p711
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa14/e140826aFinal00711.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jesse Rothstein, 2010. "Teacher Quality in Educational Production: Tracking, Decay, and Student Achievement," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(1), pages 175-214.
    2. Brian A. Jacob & Lars Lefgren & David P. Sims, 2010. "The Persistence of Teacher-Induced Learning," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 45(4), pages 915-943.
    3. Thomas J. Kane & Douglas O. Staiger, 2008. "Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 14607, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Thomas J. Kane & Douglas O. Staiger, 2002. "The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 91-114, Fall.
    5. Jesse Rothstein, 2009. "Student Sorting and Bias in Value-Added Estimation: Selection on Observables and Unobservables," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 537-571, October.
    6. Daniel F. McCaffrey & Tim R. Sass & J. R. Lockwood & Kata Mihaly, 2009. "The Intertemporal Variability of Teacher Effect Estimates," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 572-606, October.
    7. Harvey Goldstein & Michael J. R. Healy, 1995. "The Graphical Presentation of a Collection of Means," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 158(1), pages 175-177, January.
    8. repec:mpr:mprres:7333 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Kirjavainen, Tanja, 2009. "Essays on the efficiency of schools and student achievement," Research Reports P53, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Dan Goldhaber & Michael Hansen, 2013. "Is it Just a Bad Class? Assessing the Long-term Stability of Estimated Teacher Performance," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(319), pages 589-612, July.
    11. Dan Goldhaber & Duncan Dunbar Chaplin, "undated". "Assessing the "Rothstein Falsification Test": Does It Really Show Teacher Value-Added Models Are Biased?," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 93f34c834817419a9efccecdf, Mathematica Policy Research.
    12. Cory Koedel & Julian R. Betts, 2011. "Does Student Sorting Invalidate Value-Added Models of Teacher Effectiveness? An Extended Analysis of the Rothstein Critique," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 6(1), pages 18-42, January.
    13. repec:mpr:mprres:7330 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. C. Kirabo Jackson & Jonah E. Rockoff & Douglas O. Staiger, 2014. "Teacher Effects and Teacher-Related Policies," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 801-825, August.
    15. Derek C. Briggs & Jonathan P. Weeks, 2011. "The Persistence of School-Level Value-Added," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 36(5), pages 616-637, October.
    16. Daniel F. McCaffrey & J. R. Lockwood & Daniel Koretz & Thomas A. Louis & Laura Hamilton, 2004. "Models for Value-Added Modeling of Teacher Effects," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 29(1), pages 67-101, March.
    17. Thomas J. Kane & Douglas O. Staiger, 2001. "Improving School Accountability Measures," NBER Working Papers 8156, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Harvey Goldstein & David J. Spiegelhalter, 1996. "League Tables and Their Limitations: Statistical Issues in Comparisons of Institutional Performance," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 159(3), pages 385-409, May.
    19. Kirjavainen, Tanja, 2009. "Essays on the efficiency of schools and student achievement," Research Reports 53, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    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. Koedel, Cory & Mihaly, Kata & Rockoff, Jonah E., 2015. "Value-added modeling: A review," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 180-195.
    2. Stacy, Brian & Guarino, Cassandra & Wooldridge, Jeffrey, 2018. "Does the precision and stability of value-added estimates of teacher performance depend on the types of students they serve?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 50-74.
    3. Goldhaber, Dan & Cowan, James & Walch, Joe, 2013. "Is a good elementary teacher always good? Assessing teacher performance estimates across subjects," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 216-228.
    4. Koedel Cory & Leatherman Rebecca & Parsons Eric, 2012. "Test Measurement Error and Inference from Value-Added Models," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, November.
    5. M. Caridad Araujo & Pedro Carneiro & Yyannú Cruz-Aguayo & Norbert Schady, 2016. "Teacher Quality and Learning Outcomes in Kindergarten," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(3), pages 1415-1453.
    6. Dan Goldhaber & Michael Hansen, 2013. "Is it Just a Bad Class? Assessing the Long-term Stability of Estimated Teacher Performance," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(319), pages 589-612, July.
    7. Dan Goldhaber & Duncan Chaplin, "undated". "Assessing the Rothstein Test: Does It Really Show Teacher Value-Added Models Are Biased?," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 77f489fc94a34a0e96a42c419, Mathematica Policy Research.
    8. Araujo P., Maria Daniela & Quis, Johanna Sophie, 2021. "Parents can tell! Evidence on classroom quality differences in German primary schools," BERG Working Paper Series 172, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    9. Allison Atteberry & Susanna Loeb & James Wyckoff, 2013. "Do First Impressions Matter? Improvement in Early Career Teacher Effectiveness," NBER Working Papers 19096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    11. Sean Corcoran & Dan Goldhaber, 2013. "Value Added and Its Uses: Where You Stand Depends on Where You Sit," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 8(3), pages 418-434, July.
    12. Eric Isenberg & Heinrich Hock, 2010. "Measuring School and Teacher Value Added for IMPACT and TEAM in DC Public Schools," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 42dd1ff2d7eb46948f98d8e9c, Mathematica Policy Research.
    13. repec:mpr:mprres:7333 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Nirav Mehta, 2014. "Targeting the Wrong Teachers: Estimating Teacher Quality for Use in Accountability Regimes," University of Western Ontario, Centre for Human Capital and Productivity (CHCP) Working Papers 20143, University of Western Ontario, Centre for Human Capital and Productivity (CHCP).
    15. Seth Gershenson & Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2016. "Linking Teacher Quality, Student Attendance, and Student Achievement," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 11(2), pages 125-149, Spring.
    16. repec:mpr:mprres:7019 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Araujo P., María Daniela & Quis, Johanna Sophie, 2021. "Teacher Effects in Germany: Evidence from Elementary School," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242457, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    18. Stacy, Brian, 2014. "Ranking Teachers when Teacher Value-Added is Heterogeneous Across Students," EconStor Preprints 104743, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    19. Raymundo M. Campos-Vázquez & Freddy Damián Romero Urbina, 2010. "Desempeño educativo en México: la prueba ENLACE," Serie documentos de trabajo del Centro de Estudios Económicos 2010-19, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos.
    20. repec:mpr:mprres:8135 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Sass, Tim R. & Semykina, Anastasia & Harris, Douglas N., 2014. "Value-added models and the measurement of teacher productivity," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 9-23.
    22. Dhushyanth Raju, 2017. "Public School Teacher Management in Sri Lanka," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 18(1), pages 39-63, March.
    23. Azam, Mehtabul & Kingdon, Geeta Gandhi, 2015. "Assessing teacher quality in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 74-83.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    education; school ranking; regional differences in education provision;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p711. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.