Relationship between private schooling and achievement: Results from rural and urban India

Economics of Education Review

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 376-390

  Chudgar, Amita ^a   Quin, Elizabeth ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

India; Private school; Propensity Score matching; Student performance

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE; EDUCATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RURAL AREA; STUDENT; URBAN AREA;

INDIA;

EID: 84860884723     PISSN: 02727757     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.12.003     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bettinger E. The effect of charter schools on charter students and public schools. Economics of Education Review 2005, 24:133-147.
2. Cohen-Zada D. An alternative instrument for private school competition. Economics of Education Review 2009, 28:29-37.
3. Desai S., Dubey A., Vanneman R., Banerji R. Private schooling in India: A new educational landscape 2008, Brookings-NCAER India Policy Forum.
4. Doyle W.R. The effect of community college enrollment on bachelor's degree completion. Economics of Education Review 2009, 28:199-206.
5. French R., Kingdon G. The relative effectiveness of private and government schools in Rural India: Evidence from ASER data. DoQSS Working Paper No. 10-03, June 2010 2010, University of London Institute of Education, London.
6. Goldhaber D. Public and private high schools: Is school choice an answer to the productivity problem?. Economics of Education Review 1996, 15:93-109.
7. Government of India Annual Report 2009-2010. New Delhi: Department of Elementary Education and Literacy, Department of Secondary and Higher Education 2009, Ministry of Human Resource Development.
8. Goyal S. 'Inside the house of learning': The relative performance of public and private schools in Orissa. Education Economics 2009, 17(3):315-327.
9. Goyal S., Pandey P. How do government and private schools differ? Findings from two large Indian states. Report No. 30, South Asia Human Development Sector 2009, The World Bank, Washington. DC.
10. Guo S., Fraser M.W. Propensity score analysis: Statistical methods and applications 2010, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
11. Heckman J.J., Ichimura H., Todd P.E. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training program. The Review of Economic Studies 1997, 64(4):605-654.
12. Imai Kosuke Do get-out-the-vote calls reduce turnout? The importance of statistical methods for field experiments. American Political Science Review 2005, 99(May (2)):283-300.
13. Kingdon G. The progress of school education in India. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 2007, 23(2):168-195.
14. Kingdon G. The quality and efficiency of public and private education: A case study of Urban India. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 1996, 58(1):57-82.
15. Long Scott J. Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables 1997, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
16. Mehta A. C. (2011). Elementary Education in India: Analytical Report 2008-2009. New Delhi: National University of Educational Planning and Administration and Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development Government of India.
17. Muralidharan, K., and M. Kremer (2006). Public and private schools in rural India. Unpublished report. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
18. Rosenbaum P.R., Rubin D.B. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983, 70(1):41-55.
19. Rosenbaum P.R., Rubin D.B. Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 1983, 45(2):212-218.
20. Rouse C. Private school vouchers and student achievement: An evaluation of the Milwaukee parental choice program. Quarterly Journal of Economics 1998, 113:553-602.
21. Rubin D.B. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Annals of Internal Medicine, Part 2 1997, 127:757-763.
22. Rubin D.B., Thomas N. Matching using estimated propensity scores, relating theory to practice. Biometrics 1996, 52:249-264.
23. Smith J.A., Todd P.E. Reconciling conflicting evidence on the performance of propensity score methods. American Economic Review 2001, 91(2):112-118.
24. Stolzenberg R.M., Relles D.A. Tools for intuition about sample selection bias and its correction. American Sociological Review 1997, 62(3):494-507.
25. The Gazette of India. (2009). The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. http://education.nic.in/Elementary/free%20and%20compulsory.pdf.
26. Tooley J., Dixon P. Private schools in India: A case study from India 2003, CfBT Research and Development, UK.
27. Tooley J., Dixon P., Shamsan Y., Schagenb I. The relative quality and cost-effectiveness of private and public schools for low-income families: A case study in a developing country. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 2010, 21(2):117-144.
28. Wadhwa W. (2009). Are private schools really performing better than goverment schools? In Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) New Delhi: Pratham.
29. Witte J. Private school versus public school achievement: Are there findings that should affect the educational choice debate?. Economics of Education Review 1992, 11:371-394.
30. Zanutto E.L. A comparison of propensity score and linear regression analysis of complex survey data. Journal of Data Science 2006, 4:67-91.
31. Zimmer, R., Gill, B., Booker, K., Lavertu, S., & Witte, J. Examining charter student achievement effects across seven states, Economics of Education Review, Available online 17 May 2011, ISSN 0272-7757, . doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.05.005.