Mixing versus sorting in schooling: Evidence from the equalization policy in South Korea

Economics of Education Review

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 697-711

  Kim, Taejong ^a   Lee, Ju Ho ^a   Lee, Young ^b  

^a Korea Development Institute   (South Korea)

^b Hanyang University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Mixing; Peer effect; Public education; Sorting; South Korea

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE; EDUCATION POLICY; SECONDARY EDUCATION; STUDENT;

ASIA; EURASIA; FAR EAST; KOREA; SOUTH KOREA;

EID: 56149092028     PISSN: 02727757     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.07.014     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Abadie, A., Angrist, J. D., & Imbens, G. W. (1998). Instrumental variables estimation of quantile treatment effects. NBER Technical Working Papers 229.
2. Abadie A., Angrist J.D., and Imbens G.W. Instrumental variables estimates of the effect of subsidized training on the quantiles of trainee earnings. Econometrica 70 (2002) 91-117
3. Angrist J.D., and Krueger A.B. Empirical strategies in labor economics. In: Ashenfelter O.C., and Card D. (Eds). Handbook of labor economics Vol. 3A (1999), North-Holland 1277-1357
4. Angrist, J.D., & Lang, K. (2002). How important are classroom peer effects? Evidence from Boston's Metro Program. NBER Working paper 9263.
5. Argys L.M., Rees D.I., and Brewer D.J. Detracking America's schools: Equity at zero cost. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 15 4 (1996) 623-645
6. Bedard K. School quality and the distribution of male earnings in Canada. Economics of Educational Review 22 (2003) 395-407
7. Benabou, R. (1994). Education, income distribution, and growth: The local connection. NBER Working Paper 4798.
8. Betts J.R., and Grogger J. The impact of grading standards on student achievement, educational attainment, and entry-level earnings. Economics of Educational Review 22 (2003) 343-352
9. Buchinsky M. Changes in the US wage structure 1963-1987: Application of quantile regression. Econometrica 62 (1994) 405-458
10. Campbell D.T. Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist XXIV (1969) 409-429
11. Card D.E. The impact of the Mariel boatlift on the Miami labor market. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 43 (1990) 245-257
12. Eissa, N. (2001). Taxation and labor supply of married women: the 1986 Tax Reform Act as a natural experiment. NBER working paper 5023.
13. Hanushek E.A. Publicly provided education. In: Auerbach A.J., and Feldstein M. (Eds). Handbook of public economics Vol. 4 (2002), Elsevier
14. Hanushek E.A., Kain J.F., Markman J.M.Y., and Rivkin S.G. Does peer ability affect student achievement?. Journal of Applied Econometrics 18 5 (2003) 527-544
15. Hanushek E.A., and Luque J.A. Efficiency and equity in schools around the world. Economics of Education Review 22 4 (2003)
16. Hoxby, C.M. (2000). Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation. NBER Working Paper 7867.
17. Hoxby C.M. All schools finance equalizations are not created equal?. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 4 (2001) 1189-1231
18. Hoxby, C.M. (2003). School choice and school competition: Evidence from the United States, unpublished manuscript.
19. Kim S., and Lee J.H. The secondary school equalization policy in South Korea. KDI School Working Paper 02-05 (2002)
20. Koenker R., and Basset G. Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46 (1978) 33-50
21. Korean Ministry of Education. Fifty years in modern education (1998)
22. OECD. (2002). Worldwide learning at age 15: First results from PISA 2000.
23. Sacerdote, B. (2000). Peer effects with random assignment: Results for Dartmouth roommates. NBER Working Paper 7469.
24. US Department of Education. Digest of education statistics (2001)