Conducting meta-analyses of evaluations of government-funded training programs

Review of Policy Research

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 345-367

  Greenberg, David H ^a   Robins, Philip K ^b,c,d   Walker, Robert ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EMPLOYMENT; LABOR PARTICIPATION; LABOR POLICY; TRAINING;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

EID: 18944376162     PISSN: 1541132X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00140.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ashworth, K., Cebulla, A., Greenberg, D., & Walker, R. (2004). Meta-Evaluation: Discovering what works best in welfare provision. Evaluation, 10(2), 193-216.
2. Beecher, H. K. (1955). The powerful placebo. Journal of the American Medical Association, 159, 1602-1606.
3. Bloom, H. S. (2004). Randomizing groups to evaluate: Place-based programs. Retrieved November 18, 2004 from http:// www.wtgrantfoundation.org/newsletter3039/ newsletter_show.htm?doc_id=215108.
4. Bloom, H. S., Hill, C. J., & Riccio, J. (2003). Linking program implementation and effectiveness: Lessons from a pooled sample of welfare-to-work experiments. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(4), 551-575.
5. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (Eds.). (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
7. Friedlander, D., Greenberg, D. H., & Robins, P. K. (1997). Evaluating government training programs for the economically disadvantaged. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 1809-1855.
8. Glass, G. (1976). Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Education Research, 5, 3-8.
9. Greenberg, D., Ashworth, K., Cebulla, A., & Walker, R. (2004). Do welfare-to-work programmes work for long? Fiscal Studies, 25(1), 27-53.
10. Greenberg, D., Ashworth, K., Cebulla, A., & Walker, R. (2005). When welfare-to-work programs seem to work well: Explaining why Riverside and Portland shine so brightly. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, forthcoming.
11. Greenberg, D., Mandell, M., & Onstott, M. (2000). The dissemination and utilization of welfare-to-work experiments in state policymaking. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19(3), 367-382.
12. Greenberg, D., Michalopoulos, C., & Robins, P. K. (2003). A Meta-analysis of government-sponsored training programs. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 57(1), 31-53.
13. Greenberg, D., Michalopoulos, C., & Robins, P. K. (2004). What happens to the effects of government-funded training programs over time? Journal of Human Resource, 39(1), 277-293.
14. Greenberg, D., & Wiseman, M. (1992). What did the OBRA demonstrations do? In C. F. Manski & I. Garfinkel (Eds.), Evaluating welfare and training programs (pp. 25-75). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15. Gueron, J. M., & Pauly E. (1991). From welfare to work. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
16. Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
17. Lødemel, I., & Trickey, H. (2000). An offer you can't refuse: Workfare in an international perspective. Bristol, United Kingdom: Policy Press.
18. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Manski, C. (2001). Designing programs for heterogeneous populations: The value of covariate information. American Economic Review, 91(2), 103-106.
20. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Panel of Data and Methods for Measuring the Effects of Changes in Social Welfare Programs. (2001). Evaluating welfare reform in an era of transition , In R. A. Moffitt & M. Ver Ploeg (Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
21. Pearson, K. (1904). Report on certain enteric fever inoculation statistics. British Medical Journal, 3, 1243-1246.
22. Performance and Innovation Unit, British Cabinet Office. (2001). Adding it up: Improving analysis and modeling in central government. London: Author.
23. Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-193, 104th Cong., 2nd Sess. (1996)
24. Raudenbush, S. W. (1994). Random effects models. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 301-321). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
25. Walker, R., Greenberg, D., Ashworth, K., & Cebulla, A. (2003). Successful welfare-to-work programs: Were Riverside and Portland really that good? Focus, Journal of the Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Madison-Wisconsin, 22(3), 1-8.