IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The case for evaluating training programs with randomized trials

Listed author(s):
  • Ashenfelter, Orley

This brief paper presents the reasons that I have come to conclude that the evaluation of the economic benefits of training programs will be greatly enhanced by the use of classical experimental methods. In particular, I am convinced that some of these training programs should be operated so that control and experimental groups are selected by ran- dom assignment (randomized trials). It follows that a simple comparison of earnings, employment, and other outcomes as between control and experimental groups subsequent to participation in the experimental program will provide a simple and credible estimate of program success (or failure). The principal reason why randomized trials should be used in this field is that too much of the non-experimental estimation of the effects of training programs seems dependent on elements of model specification that cannot be subjected to powerful statistical tests. Moreover, these specification tests are merely necessary and not sufficient for the acceptability of a particular non-experimental estimation method, as an extensive example due to LaLonde demonstrates.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Economics of Education Review.

Volume (Year): 6 (1987)
Issue (Month): 4 (August)
Pages: 333-338

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:6:y:1987:i:4:p:333-338
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:6:y:1987:i:4:p:333-338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.