The Indigenous Test Score Gap in Bolivia and Chile
This article analyzes the magnitude and determinants of the indigenous test score gap in Bolivia and Chile (i.e., the mean difference in academic achievement between indigenous and nonindigenous children). In both countries, it finds that the gap ranges between 0.3 and 0.5 standard deviations, favoring nonindigenous children. A decomposition of achievement regressions that include classroom fixed effects suggests that 50%-70% of the difference is attributable to differences in schools and classrooms that are attended by indigenous and nonindigenous students. A smaller proportion (20%-40%) is attributable to varying endowments of family variables like parental education. The smallest proportion of the gap (10%-20%) is unexplained. Several implications for policy are discussed in light of the results.
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.
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.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Evans, William N & Oates, Wallace E & Schwab, Robert M, 1992. "Measuring Peer Group Effects: A Study of Teenage Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 966-991, October.
- World Bank, 2001. "Peruvian Education at a Crossroads : Challenges and Opportunities for the 21st Century," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 13948, February.
- Cook, Michael D & Evans, William N, 2000. "Families or Schools? Explaining the Convergence in White and Black Academic Performance," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(4), pages 729-754, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:ecdecc:y:2004:v:53:i:1:p:157-90. 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: (Journals Division)
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.