Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.
Instruction Time, Classroom   Quality, and Academic        AchievementSteven G. Rivkin and Jeffrey C. Schiman            F...
Policy Background• Increase in the quantity of an input would be  expected to increase output in virtually all  circumstan...
Longer Instruction Time and Higher             Achievement• Poland substantially increased time devoted  to 9th grade math...
Existing Literature• Supports positive effect of instructional time• Most research designs fail to account for the  non-ra...
Conceptual Framework• Allocation of instruction time depends upon  many factors including ability• Benefit of additional t...
Empirical Framework• Use panel data methods to account for  differences in ability and quality of instruction  that could ...
Structure of 2009 PISA data• Tests in mathematics and language arts• 15 year old students are in multiple grades• School r...
Empirical model   A sgjc    M sgjc                  sgjcsgjc     s    g       j          c          sgc        sj     gj  ...
School by grade Fixed Effects• School by grade fixed effects accounts for  student and school differences common  across s...
Accounting for subject specific factors• Country by grade by subject fixed effects  account for factors such as national c...
Identification with school by subject              fixed effects• Cumulative nature of learning attenuates  estimates  – A...
Presentation of Results• Distribution of instructional time and  corresponding test score differences• OLS and Fixed Effec...
Joint Distribution of Classes Per Week                               MathematicsLanguage Arts    0-2       3       4      ...
Mathematics minus reading score differenceby numbers of classes                               MathematicsLanguage Arts   0...
Table 3. Estimated Effects of Weekly Instructional Minutes andClasses per Week on AchievementPanel A:Weekly Minutes ofInst...
Table 4. Estimated Effects of Weekly MinutesWeekly Minutes                 0.069***         0.108***                      ...
Table 6. Estimated Effects of Classes per Week on              Achievement, By Class Length               40      3.251***...
Variation in benefits of instructional      time by classroom quality• Hindrances to learning  – Disruption  – Lower teach...
Measurement of Learning Hindrances  Teachers’ low expectations of students  Student absenteeism  Poor student-teacher-rela...
Table 8. Estimated Effects of Instructional Time, by                Classroom HindrancesWeekly Minutes ofInstruction      ...
Summary and Policy Implications• Evidence supports the hypothesis that  additional instructional time raises  achievement ...
Determinants of return to instructional                time• Quality of learning environment• Opportunity costs in terms o...
Próxima SlideShare
Cargando en…5
×

INEE. Ponencia Prof. Rivkin. Universidad Ilinois. Horas clase en materias instrumentales y resultados PISA.

1.040 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Publicado en: Educación
  • Sé el primero en comentar

  • Sé el primero en recomendar esto

INEE. Ponencia Prof. Rivkin. Universidad Ilinois. Horas clase en materias instrumentales y resultados PISA.

  1. 1. Instruction Time, Classroom Quality, and Academic AchievementSteven G. Rivkin and Jeffrey C. Schiman February 2013
  2. 2. Policy Background• Increase in the quantity of an input would be expected to increase output in virtually all circumstances – Evidence on school resources suggests the presence of extensive inefficiencies in public schools – Raises questions about the benefits of increased instructional time
  3. 3. Longer Instruction Time and Higher Achievement• Poland substantially increased time devoted to 9th grade mathematics instruction in 2001 by over 80 minutes per week on average• Instruction time at KIPP Charter schools is 60% higher than the US average• In each case a number of other factors also differ, raising uncertainty about the effects of instructional time
  4. 4. Existing Literature• Supports positive effect of instructional time• Most research designs fail to account for the non-random allocation of instructional time• Higher achieving students attend schools with a greater emphasis on academics• Lavy (2010) is an exception – Method uses within student and school time variation by subject – Deficiencies of 2006 categorical time data
  5. 5. Conceptual Framework• Allocation of instruction time depends upon many factors including ability• Benefit of additional time likely depends on classroom quality – Teacher skills – Curriculum – Student behavior• Behavior and instruction quality may vary with time
  6. 6. Empirical Framework• Use panel data methods to account for differences in ability and quality of instruction that could be related to instructional time• Aggregate instructional time information to the school-grade-subject level to mitigate problems introduced by student class assignments• Use survey questions to generate measures of learning environment that will be used to investigate heterogeneity in time effects
  7. 7. Structure of 2009 PISA data• Tests in mathematics and language arts• 15 year old students are in multiple grades• School representative reports class length – Typically samefor all grades and subjects• Students report number of classes attended• School representative answers questions on classroom environment
  8. 8. Empirical model A sgjc M sgjc sgjcsgjc s g j c sgc sj gj sgjc
  9. 9. School by grade Fixed Effects• School by grade fixed effects accounts for student and school differences common across subjects (similar to student fixed effects)• Subject specific factors that vary at the individual or school level could introduce bias
  10. 10. Accounting for subject specific factors• Country by grade by subject fixed effects account for factors such as national curricula, investments, or emphasis• School by subject fixed effects account for differences among subjects in ability, teacher skill, or quality of curriculum
  11. 11. Identification with school by subject fixed effects• Cumulative nature of learning attenuates estimates – Assumption that 9th grade instructional time has no effect on 10th grade achievement likely violated• Uses within subject instructional time differences between grades – Assumes cohort differences in ability and grade differences in the quality of instruction are not related to grade differences in instructional time
  12. 12. Presentation of Results• Distribution of instructional time and corresponding test score differences• OLS and Fixed Effect Estimates of weekly minutes and weekly classes effects• Non-linear estimates of instructional time effects• Construction of classroom quality variable• Estimates of interaction with quality
  13. 13. Joint Distribution of Classes Per Week MathematicsLanguage Arts 0-2 3 4 5 6+0-2 15,776 7,690 3,943 2,580 1,6873 6,565 32,226 19,054 6,942 2,3854 5,433 20,260 68,412 23,464 5,6235 1,930 4,410 27,530 62,870 11,3846+ 1,081 1,586 9,746 16,800 36,011
  14. 14. Mathematics minus reading score differenceby numbers of classes MathematicsLanguage Arts 0-2 3 4 5 6+0-2 -2.3 3.5 -2.2 5 11.53 1.4 -1 4.6 3.2 6.64 -4.3 -1.4 0.4 0 9.25 -12.2 -3.7 -9.6 -1.3 5.66+ -14.7 3.1 -0.2 0.2 10.5
  15. 15. Table 3. Estimated Effects of Weekly Instructional Minutes andClasses per Week on AchievementPanel A:Weekly Minutes ofInstruction 0.072*** 0.030*** 0.018*** 0.006 (0.008) (0.005) (0.007) (0.009)Panel B:Weekly Number ofClasses 5.597*** 2.426*** 1.142*** 0.270 (0.495) (0.335) (0.482) (0.482)School-by-gradefixed effects N Y N Y
  16. 16. Table 4. Estimated Effects of Weekly MinutesWeekly Minutes 0.069*** 0.108*** (0.014) (0.018)Weekly Minutes Squared -0.00006*** -0.00013*** (0.00002) (0.00002)School-by-grade fixedeffects Y NSchool-by-subject fixedeffects N Y
  17. 17. Table 6. Estimated Effects of Classes per Week on Achievement, By Class Length 40 3.251*** 0.905 (0.821) (0.644) 45 1.850*** 1.071* (0.531) (0.564) 50 3.263*** 1.910*** (0.60) (0.58) 55 4.017*** 1.988*** (0.94) (0.64) 60 3.250*** 0.946 (1.11) (0.74)School-by-gradefixed effects Y N
  18. 18. Variation in benefits of instructional time by classroom quality• Hindrances to learning – Disruption – Lower teacher quality – Ineffective curriculum• Quality of learning environment might decrease as class length increases
  19. 19. Measurement of Learning Hindrances Teachers’ low expectations of students Student absenteeism Poor student-teacher-relations Disruption of classes by students Teachers not meeting individual student needs Teacher absenteeism Students skipping classes Students lacking respect for teachers
  20. 20. Table 8. Estimated Effects of Instructional Time, by Classroom HindrancesWeekly Minutes ofInstruction 0.080*** 0.051* (0.017) (0.028)Weekly minutes-by-Classroom Hindrances -0.020*** -0.013 (0.006) (0.010)Weekly Number of Classes 4.560*** 3.338** (1.033) (1.692)Weekly Classes-by-Classroom Hindrances -0.824** -0.819 (0.369) (0.607)School-by-grade fixedeffects Y NSchool-by-subject fixedeffects N Y
  21. 21. Summary and Policy Implications• Evidence supports the hypothesis that additional instructional time raises achievement – Significant school by subject estimates likely provide a lower bound on effects• Modest diminishing returns to additional time• Evidence that benefits depend on quality of learning environment
  22. 22. Determinants of return to instructional time• Quality of learning environment• Opportunity costs in terms of other subjects foregone or financial cost of additional time at school• Return also depends on other benefits of longer time in school potentially including – reduced crime and deviant behavior – Improvements in other valued outcomes

×