IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/iecrev/v59y2018i2p449-477.html

Retaking In High Stakes Exams: Is Less More?

Author

Listed:
  • Kala Krishna
  • Sergey Lychagin
  • Veronica Frisancho

Abstract

Placement, both in university and in the civil service, according to performance in competitive exams is the norm in much of the world. Repeat taking of such exams is common despite the private and social costs it imposes. We develop and estimate a structural model of exam retaking using data from Turkey's university placement exam. Limiting retaking results in all agents gaining ex ante and most gaining ex post. This result comes from a general equilibrium effect: Retakers crowd the market and impose negative spillovers on others by raising acceptance cutoffs.

Suggested Citation

  • Kala Krishna & Sergey Lychagin & Veronica Frisancho, 2018. "Retaking In High Stakes Exams: Is Less More?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(2), pages 449-477, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:iecrev:v:59:y:2018:i:2:p:449-477
    DOI: 10.1111/iere.12276
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/iere.12276
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/iere.12276?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bizopoulou, Aspasia & Megalokonomou, Rigissa & Simion, Stefania, 2022. "Do Second Chances Pay Off? Evidence from a Natural Experiment with Low-Achieving Students," IZA Discussion Papers 15139, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Asena Caner & Merve Derebasoglu & Cagla Okten, 2024. "Attainment and Gender Equality in Higher Education: Evidence from a Large-Scale Expansion," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 469-530.
    3. Joshua Goodman & Oded Gurantz & Jonathan Smith, 2020. "Take Two! SAT Retaking and College Enrollment Gaps," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 115-158, May.
    4. Bertola, Giuseppe, 2024. "Retake opportunities, pass probabilities and preparation for exams," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 99-114.
    5. Aspasia Bizopoulou & Rigissa Megalokonomou & Stefania Simion, 2022. "Do Second Chances Pay Off?," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 22/762, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    6. Bratti, Massimiliano & Granato, Silvia & Havari, Enkelejda, 2024. "Another Chance: Number of Exam Retakes and University Students' Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 17400, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Bizopoulou, Aspasia & Megalokonomou, Rigissa & Simion, Ştefania, 2024. "Do second chances pay off? Evidence from a natural experiment with low-achieving students," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    8. Hayri A. Arslan, 2021. "Preference estimation in centralized college admissions from reported lists," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(5), pages 2865-2911, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    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:wly:iecrev:v:59:y:2018:i:2:p:449-477. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deupaus.html .

    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.