IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxford/v20y2004i2p198-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

American Education Research Changes Tack

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua D. Angrist

Abstract

For a quarter century, American education researchers have tended to favour qualitative and descriptive analyses over quantitative studies using random assignment or featuring credible quasi-experimental research designs. This has now changed. In 2002 and 2003, the US Department of Education funded a dozen randomized trials to evaluate the efficacy of pre-school programmes, up from one in 2000. In this essay, I explore the intellectual and legislative roots of this change, beginning with the story of how contemporary education research fell out of step with other social sciences. I then use a study in which low-achieving high-school students were randomly offered incentives to learn to show how recent developments in research methods answer ethical and practical objections to the use of random assignment for research on schools. Finally, I offer a few cautionary notes based on results from the recent effort to cut class size in California. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua D. Angrist, 2004. "American Education Research Changes Tack," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 20(2), pages 198-212, Summer.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxford:v:20:y:2004:i:2:p:198-212
    as

    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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Puhani, Patrick A. & Weber, Andrea Maria, 2005. "Does the early bird catch the worm? Instrumental variable estimates of educational effects of age of school entry in Germany," Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics 151, Darmstadt University of Technology, Department of Law and Economics.
    2. Maresa Sprietsma, 2010. "Effect of relative age in the first grade of primary school on long-term scholastic results: international comparative evidence using PISA 2003," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 1-32.
    3. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    4. Thomas D. Cook & Dominique Foray, 2007. "Building the Capacity to Experiment in Schools: A Case Study of the Institute of Educational Sciences in the US Department of Education," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 385-402.
    5. Larissa Zierow, 2017. "Economic Perspectives on the Implications of Public Child Care and Schooling for Educational Outcomes in Childhood and Adult Life," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 76.
    6. Kossova, Elena & Kosorukova, Mariia, 2023. "Estimation of the treatment effect of higher education on health: Comparison of the multivariate recursive probit model and matching," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 69, pages 65-90.
    7. Kugler Franziska & Schwerdt Guido & Wößmann Ludger, 2014. "Ökonometrische Methoden zur Evaluierung kausaler Effekte der Wirtschaftspolitik," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 105-132, June.
    8. Vivian C. Wong & Peter M. Steiner & Kylie L. Anglin, 2018. "What Can Be Learned From Empirical Evaluations of Nonexperimental Methods?," Evaluation Review, , vol. 42(2), pages 147-175, April.
    9. Dolores Messer & Stefan C. Wolter, 2009. "Money Matters - Evidence from a Large-Scale Randomized Field Experiment with Vouchers for Adult Training," CESifo Working Paper Series 2548, CESifo.
    10. Lisa Barrow & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 2005. "Causality, causality, causality: the view of education inputs and outputs from economics," Working Paper Series WP-05-15, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    11. Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 2006. "Teacher characteristics and student performance in India: A pupil fixed effects approach," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-059, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    12. Boris Salazar-Trujillo & Daniel Otero Robles, 2019. "La revolución empírica en economía," Apuntes del Cenes, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, vol. 38(68), pages 15-48, July.
    13. Gerhardts, Ilka & Sunde, Uwe & Zierow, Larissa, 2016. "Denominational Schools and Returns to Education - Gender Socialization in Multigrade Classrooms?," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145762, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Christopher Rhoads, 2017. "Coherent Power Analysis in Multilevel Studies Using Parameters From Surveys," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 42(2), pages 166-194, April.
    15. Karthik Muralidharan & Paul Niehaus, 2017. "Experimentation at Scale," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 103-124, Fall.

    More about this item

    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:oup:oxford:v:20:y:2004:i:2:p:198-212. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oxrep .

    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.