Performance in primary schools

Journal of the Operational Research Society

Volumn 51, Issue 7, 2000, Pages 843-854

  Mancebon, M J ^a   Molinero, C Mar ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Data envelopment analysis; Education; Efficiency; OFSTED; Primary schools; Standard assessment tests

Indexed keywords

DATA ACQUISITION; DATA REDUCTION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; OPERATIONS RESEARCH; PERFORMANCE;

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS (DEA); EDUCATION MANAGEMENT; PRIMARY SCHOOLS; STANDARD ASSESSMENT TESTS;

EDUCATION;

EID: 0342572534     PISSN: 01605682     EISSN: 14769360     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600980     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Mar Molinero C (1993). Aldermoor school: the operational researcher on the side of the community. J Opl Res Soc 44: 237-245.
2. Werner A (1985). Fertility trends in the different social classes: 1970 to 1983. Popul Trends 41: 5-13.
3. Mar Molinero C (1988). Schools in Southampton: a quantitative approach to school location, closure and staffing. J Opl Res Soc 39: 339-350.
4. OFSTED and The Audit Commission (1998). Inspection of Manchester Local Education Authority. OFSTED Publications Centre: London.
5. Department for Education and Employment (1998). Setting Targets for Pupil Achievement. Guidance for governors. DfEE: London.
6. Southampton Education and Employment Committee (9 December 1997). Planning School Places. Southampton Local Education Authority.
7. Southampton Education and Employment Committee (14 April 1998). Report of the Head of Policy and Planning Manage¬ment-Education Services. Southampton Local Education Authority.
8. Southampton Education and Employment Committee (9 December 1997). Report of the Chief Inspector: Standards and Quality in Southampton Secondary and Primary Schools 1996-1997. Southampton Local Education Authority.
9. Department for Education and Employment (1997). Excellence in Schools. White Paper. The Stationary Office: London.
10. Southampton Local Education Authority (1998). Even Better Learning for All. A Strategic Education Plan for Southampton 1998-2001. Southampton City Council.
11. Goldstein H (1987). Multilevel Models in Educational and Social Research. Charles Griffin and Company: London.
12. Thanassoulis E (1999). Setting achievement targets for school children. Educ Econ 7: 101-120.
13. Thanassoulis E (1993). A comparison of regression analysis and data envelopment analysis as alternative methods for perfor¬mance assessments. J Opl Res Soc 44: 1129-1144.
14. Golany B and Roll Y (1989). An application procedure for DEA. Omega 17: 237-250.
15. Pedraja-Chaparro F, Salinas-Jimenez J and Smith P (1999). On the quality of the data envelopment analysis model. J Opl Res Soc 50: 636-644.
16. Brimblecombe N (1999). Statistics of school inspection are biased and invalid. In: Dorling D and Simpson S (eds). Statistics in Society. Arnold: London.
17. Lamdin DJ (1995). Testing for the effect of school size on student achievement within a school district. Education Economics 3: 33-42.
18. Correa H (1993). An economic analysis of class size and achievement in education. Educ Econ 1: 129-135.
19. Social Exclusion Unit (1998). Truancy and School Exclusions. DfEE: London.
20. Audit Commission and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate (1992). Getting in on the Act. Provision of Pupils with Special Educa¬tional Needs: The National Picture. HMSO: London.
21. Department for Education and Employment (1997). Excellence for all Children. Meeting Special Educational Needs. White paper. The Stationary Office: London.
22. Wamock Committee (1978). Special Educational Needs. HMSO: London.
23. Mar Molinero C (1991). On the Relationship Between Multi¬dimensional Scaling and other Statistical Techniques. Univer¬sity of Southampton, Discussion Papers in Accounting and Management Science, numbers 91-96.
24. Jolliffe IT (1972). Discarding variables in a principal compo¬nents analysis. Appl Stat 21: 160-173.
25. Dunteman GH (1989). Principal Components Analysis. Sage: London.
26. Mar Molinero C and Warocker D (1996). Data envelopment analysis: a non-mathematical introduction. Opl Res Insight 9: 22-28.
27. Ganley JA and Cubbin J (1992). Public Sector Efficiency Measurement. North Holland: Amsterdam.
28. Land A (1991). Data envelopment analysis. In: Littlechild S and Shutler M (eds). Operations Research in Management. Prentice Hall: New York.
29. Norman M and Stocker B (1991). Data Envelopment Analysis, the Assessment of Performance. John Wiley and Sons: Chichester.
30. Rhodes E (1978). Data Envelopment Analysis and Related Approaches for Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units with an Application to Program Follow Through. Unpub¬lished Ph.D. School of Urban and Public Affairs. Carnegie- Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
31. Charnes A, Cooper WW and Rhodes E (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: an application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Mgmt Sci 27: 668-697.
32. Bessent AM and Bessent EW (1980). Determining the comparative efficiency of schools through data envelopment analysis. Educ Admin Q 16: 57-75.
33. Bessent AM, Bessent EW, Kennington EW and Reagan B (1982). An application of mathematical programming to assess the productivity in the Houston independent school district. Mgmt Sci 28: 1355-1367.
34. Bessent AM, Bessent EW, Elam J and Long D (1984). Educa¬tional productivity council employs management science meth¬ods to improve educational quality. Interfaces 14: 1-8.
35. Smith P and Mayston D (1987). Measuring efficiency in the public sector. Omega 15: 181-189.
36. Mayston D and Jesson D (1988). Developing models of educa¬tional accountability. Oxford Rev Educ 4: 321-339.
37. Fare R, Grosskoft S and Weber WL (1989). Measuring school district performance. Public Finance Q 17: 409-428.
38. Jesson D, Mayston D and Smith P (1987). Performance assess¬ment in the education sector: educational and economic perspectives. Oxford Rev Educ 13: 249-267.
39. Ray SC (1991). Resource use efficiency in public schools: a study of Connecticut data. Mgmt Sci 37: 1620-1628.
40. McCarty TA and Yaisawarng S (1993). Technical efficiency in New Jersey school districts. In: Fried HO, Lovell CAK and Schmidt SS (eds). The Measurement of Productive Efficiency, Techniques and Applications. Oxford University Press: New York, pp 271-287.
41. Lovell CAK, Walters LC and Wood LL (1994). Stratified models of education production using modified DEA and regression analysis. In: Charnes A, Cooper WW, Lewin AY and Seiford LM (eds). Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. Kluwer: Massachussets, pp 329-351.
42. Thanassoulis E and Dunstan P (1994). Guiding schools to improved performance using data envelopment analysis. J Opl Res Soc 45: 1247-1262.
43. Chalos P and Cherian J (1995). An application of data envelop¬ment analysis to public sector performance measurement and accountability. J Account and Public Pol 14: 143-160.
44. Mancebon MJ and Bandres E (1998). Efficiency evaluation in secondary schools: the key role of model specification and ex¬post analysis of results. Educ Econ 7: 131-152.
45. Banker R, Charnes A and Cooper WW (1984). Models for estimating technical and scale efficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Mgmt Sci 30: 1078-1092.
46. Charnes A, Cooper WW and Rhodes E (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Opl Res 2: 429-444.
47. Banker R and Morey RC (1986). Efficiency analysis for exogenously fixed inputs and output. Opns Res 34: 513-521.
48. Pastor JT, Ruiz JL and Sirvent I (2000). A statistical test for nested radial DEA models. Opns Res Forthcoming.
49. Hanusek EA (1986). The economics of schooling: production and efficiency in public schools. J Econ Liter 24: 1141-1177.
50. Aitkin M and Longford N (1986). Statistical modelling issues in school effectiveness studies (with discussion) J Roy Statist Soc, A 149: 1-43.
51. Chubb JE and Moe TM (1990). Politics, Markets, and the American School. The Brookings Institution, Washington DC.
52. Silvey SD (1970). Statistical Inference. Chapman and Hall: London.
53. Fogelman K (1984). Assessment of examination performance in different types of schools. J Roy Statist Soc, A 147: 569-581.
54. Marks J (1984). Assessment of examination performance in different types of schools. J Roy Statist Soc, A 147: 569-581.
55. Akeman C et al (1983). Conditional correlation phenomena with applications to university admission strategies. J Educ Stat 8: 4-44.
56. Goldstein H and Thomas S (1996). Using examination results as indicators of school and college performance. J Roy Statist Soc, A 159: 149-163.
57. Purkey SC and Smith MS (1983). Effective schools: a review. Element School J 83: 47-452.
58. Bevan RG and Bryer RA (1987). On measuring the contribution of Operational Research. J Opl Res Soc 29: 409-418.
59. Rosenhead J and Thunhurst C (1982). A materialist view of Operational Research. J Opl Res Soc 33: 111-122.
60. Ashford JR, Butts MS and Bailey TC (1981). Is there still a place for independent research into issues of public policy in England and Wales in the 1980s? A case study from the field of health care: modelling hospital costs. J Opl Res Soc 32: 851-864.