IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attainment in Secondary School


  • Feinstein, Leon
  • Symons, James


The authors estimate an education production function in which attainment depends upon parental inputs, peer group inputs, and schooling inputs. They find that parenting is much more important than schooling. The most powerful parental input is parental interest in education for which ordinary least squares does not give upward bias as B. H. Plowden (1967) suspected. The authors also find a strong peer group effect. The school pupil-teacher ratio does not enter significantly. A simulation study of the properties of their estimators indicates that the authors conclusions are robust. Copyright 1999 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Feinstein, Leon & Symons, James, 1999. "Attainment in Secondary School," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 300-321, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:51:y:1999:i:2:p:300-321

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Jamasb, Tooraj & Nillesen, Paul & Pollitt, Michael, 2004. "Strategic behaviour under regulatory benchmarking," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 825-843, September.
    2. Gasmi, F & Ivaldi, M & Laffont, Jean Jacques, 1994. "Rent Extraction and Incentives for Efficiency in Recent Regulatory Proposals," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 151-176, May.
    3. Ian M. Dobbs, 2004. "Intertemporal price cap regulation under uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 421-440, April.
    4. Colin Mayer & John Vickers, 1996. "Profit-sharing regulation: an economic appraisal," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Richard Green & Tanga McDaniel, 1998. "Competition in electricity supply: will ‘1998’ Be worth it?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 19(3), pages 273-293, August.
    6. Green, Richard, 1999. "The Electricity Contract Market in England and Wales," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 107-124, March.
    7. Newbery, David M & Pollitt, Michael G, 1997. "The Restructuring and Privatization of Britain's CEGB--Was It Worth It?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 269-303, September.
    8. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1992. "Regulation by Duopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(3), pages 507-533, Fall.
    9. Burns, Philip & Turvey, Ralph & Weyman-Jones, Thomas G, 1998. "The Behaviour of the Firm under Alternative Regulatory Constraints," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 45(2), pages 133-157, May.
    10. Amrstong, Mark & Cowan, Simon & Vickers, John, 1995. "Nonlinear pricing and price cap regulation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 33-55, September.
    11. Bernstein, Jeffrey I & Sappington, David E M, 1999. "Setting the X Factor in Price-Cap Regulation Plans," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 5-25, July.
    12. Gasmi, F & Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Sharkey, W W, 1997. "Incentive Regulation and the Cost Structure of the Local Telephone Exchange Network," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 5-25, July.
    13. Catherine D. Wolfram, 1999. "Measuring Duopoly Power in the British Electricity Spot Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 805-826, September.
    14. Mark Armstrong & Simon Cowan & John Vickers, 1994. "Regulatory Reform: Economic Analysis and British Experience," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262510790, January.
    15. Bernstein, Jeffrey I. & Sappington, David E. M., 2000. "How to determine the X in RPI-X regulation: a user's guide," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 63-68, February.
    16. Wilson, Robert, 1997. "Nonlinear Pricing," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195115826, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:oup:oxecpp:v:51:y:1999:i:2:p:300-321. 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: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.