A Review of Persistent & Emerging Issues In Rural Education: Insights from Recent Economics of...
-
Upload
emmeline-welch -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of A Review of Persistent & Emerging Issues In Rural Education: Insights from Recent Economics of...
A Review of Persistent & Emerging Issues In Rural Education: Insights from
Recent Economics of Education Research
Elton MykereziUniversity of Minnesota
Applied EconomicsCenter for Community Vitality, UM Extension
Preview• Fundamental features of rural areas• Overview of literature on rural education• Conceptual links between “rurality” and education research• Teacher labor markets:
– How do they differ in rural areas?– Rural-urban differences in teacher career paths
• Teacher human resources reform– Measuring “teacher quality”– Pay for performance
• Political economy of school finance– Willingness to pay for schools – School consolidation
• Concluding remarks, policy implications and further research
Fundamental Features or Rural Areas
• Low population density– Economies of scale – Political economy (of school funding)– Thin/sparse labor markets– Lower returns to education– Income and poverty– General provision of public goods/services– Less diverse private sector (implications for private amenities)– Social capital & quality of life
• Distance from other population centers– Reduced competition in education (open enrollment, charter
schools, private schools)– Difficulties in collaboration– Sparse private sector
Rural-Urban Differences in Schooling
1970 1980 1990 2000 2006-10 2008-120%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Metro Non Metro
1970 1980 1990 2000 2006-10 2008-120%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Metro Non Metro
% Adults with no High School
% Adults with BS or More
Are Rural Schools Different?
• Literature is inconclusive on performance differentials in rural schools– Definitions of Rural– Heterogeneity across Rural areas
• Finding out When and Why?– Focus on fundamental features– Finding out “Why” is very demanding– When do differences in outcomes arise?
Cohort Analysis
• A view of NLSY 97– Nearly 9,000 youth of age 12-18 when first interviewed– Followed into their 30s– All took achievement tests on 2nd year
• Path of Differences in Educational Outcomes– Some achievement gaps appear early– Gaps remain the same during high school– No differences in SAT/ACT taking or scores– Lower college enrollment than predicted by achievement
gaps– Migration heavily responsible for adult education gaps
Literature on Rural Teachers• Rural schools have difficulties recruiting teachers;
rural teachers are:– Less likely to hold an MS degree or more– More likely to have a BS in teaching– Less likely to be licensed for subject– Fewer professional development opportunities– Similar tenure profiles– More likely to report high job satisfaction– Less likely to report issues with discipline
• Studies tend to compare teacher credentials, pay, attitudes, etc.
Literature Gaps on Teachers
• Very little comprehensive analysis of occupation choice differences – Only Miller (2012) with data from NY
• Little to no context on teacher labor markets in general
• Too much focus on “signals” (e.g. degrees, certificates, licenses, professional development)– These do not predict output-based teacher quality
Teacher Labor Markets
• Teacher pay is fully determined by level of education and experience in teaching
• Teachers are overwhelmingly dismissed based on seniority alone (“last in-first out” rules)
• Factors such as aptitude, creativity, patience cannot be directly considered in career paths
• Cannot consider credentials such as elite schools, double majors/minors, languages, etc.
• Naturally compressed career paths (relatively low specialization by position)
Lifetime Earnings By Major and Occupation
All
Engin
eerin
g
Math &
Tech
.
Scien
ces
Business
Soc. S
ciences
Bio. Scie
nce
Litera
ture
Libera
l Arts
/Human
ities
Psychology Art
Educati
on0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
All occupations Management Business & finance Production, etc.Education
Consequences of Wage Compression
• Individuals with more “productive” skills or desirable credentials are more difficult to recruit and easier to lose– Supply demand imbalances exist nationwide
• STEM, foreign languages, special ed. in short supply• General ed., humanities, etc., are oversupplied
• Competition on “Marginal Teacher” not possible
• Non wage job attributes become disproportionally important
Career Paths by Subject.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5D
en
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
All
Art, Literature, Language, Social Sciences
kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 1.6924
1. Liberal Arts and Social Sciences VS. All Teachers
.01
.02
.03
.04
.05
Den
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
All
Administrators
kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 1.7002
2. Exit Profile of Administrators VS. All Teachers
0.0
2.0
4.0
6D
en
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
All
Foreign Language
kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 1.7002
3. Foreign Language VS. All Teachers
.01
.02
.03
.04
.05
Den
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
Elementary
Math & Sciences
kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 2.3926
4. STEM VS. Gen. Ed./Elementary
Implications for Rural Schools
• All schools compete for “undersupplied” specializations
• Rural areas have fewer college educated adults (thin markets)
• Low returns to education in private markets is likely an advantage
• Relatively low-skill economies also likely an advantage in recruitment and retention
• Lower cost of living also likely an advantage
The marginal recruit
• Although rural schools pay less on average, absence of competition on ‘marginal recruits’ is likely a benefit– Schools cannot bid on a teacher, they have to raise
the whole salary schedule – Urban schools likely to win on individual bidding
wars due to higher budgets and economies of scale• Rural districts can use waivers to gain
flexibility; urban districts are more rigid
Non wage competition
• Well documented that senior teachers gravitate towards low-minority affluent schools
• Opportunity to compete for those who enjoy what rural areas offer (low discipline issues in school, low crime rates, social capital, natural amenities, etc.)
• Difficulties with public goods, private sector diversity (as an amenity), spousal opportunities, etc.
Career Paths by Subject and Location.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5D
en
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
City SuburbanTown Rural
1. All Teachers
0.0
2.0
4.0
6D
en
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
City SuburbanTown Rural
2. STEM Teachers
.01
.02
.03
.04
.05
Den
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
City SuburbanTown Rural
3. General Ed./Elementary
0.0
2.0
4.0
6D
en
sity
0 10 20 30 40Experience at exit
City SuburbanTown Rural
4. Foreign Language
Measuring teacher quality: Value Added Measures (VAM)
• Average standardized test score growth attributable to a teacher
• Output based measure, easy to compute• Only applicable to tested subjects and grades• Concerns with persistence over time and other
statistical properties (incl. variance)• “Teaching to the test” concerns• Has been found to predict success
– College, employment, wages, teen pregnancies– Teacher who is 1se above median produces $400K/year/class.
Multi-Measure Efforts
• Gates Foundation Measures of Effective Teaching (MET)
• Include peer observations– Observe practice (better than credentials)– Applicable to all teachers– Only observe maximal performance– Inter-rater reliability
• Student Surveys– College professors are familiar (with adult students)– Observe a combination of practice and outcome– Students likely not unbiased observers, and may convey
irrelevant information
Implications for Rural Areas• Nearly unstudied in a rural context• These are statistical measures, which will require
“norming”.• Not clear if peer and student observations work well in
high-social capital areas• States are starting to legislate evaluation based on these
measures (e.g. Minnesota)– Positive due to easier implementation– Negative due to thinner labor markets
• Universal signal of quality will make “poaching” more effective – Not clear how this would affect rural areas
Performance based Pay/Dismissal
• Very large increase in interest in this• Heterogeneous designs lead to very different impacts• Very few studies on it’s effects nationwide, not sure
there are any in a rural context. • Minnesota and Texas are good settings for studying P4P
in a rural context• Grantor-Grantee format, as in Race to the Top and
Teacher Incentive Fund– Contracts include individual and group bonuses, based on
standardized scores or other measures– Bonuses for “hard to staff” positions are increasingly excluded
from these
Implications for Rural Areas
• Performance-based dismissals can be hard with thin labor markets
• Performance pay can be used to ‘bid’ on marginal recruits
• Interesting to see if contract design & effect differs in rural areas:– E.g. are group-bonuses more
desirable/productive?
School Finance
• A matter of economies of scale– Raising more money– Using funds more effectively (much of the
previous literature is on this)• Research on “optimal” school size has
produced no consensus• Little consensus on even if marginal additions
to school budgets produce any results (e.g. Hanushek)
Funding Rural Schools
• Primary difficulty with looking at the impact of funds is that it cannot be separated from “community support”.
• Use of local referenda is a very promising mechanism. – Positive impact of school construction nationwide– Small positive impacts of operating budget funds
• No study focuses on rural schools– Marginal impact of extra funds is likely to differ
Willingness to Pay in MN: Referendum Results
Variable N Mean Std. Dev.
Urban
Share of districts with Ballot 243 0.251 0.435
Share Passing 61 0.639 0.484
Average 'Yes' vote share 57 0.532 0.098
Suburban
Share of districts with Ballot 809 0.299 0.458
Share Passing 242 0.607 0.489
Average 'Yes' vote share 224 0.535 0.091
Town
Share of districts with Ballot 2083 0.241 0.428
Share Passing 502 0.570 0.496
Average 'Yes' vote share 461 0.529 0.117
Rural
Share of districts with Ballot 7123 0.156 0.363
Share Passing 1113 0.664 0.473
Average 'Yes' vote share 1017 0.561 0.135
Community Support, Funding and Consolidations
Consolidate
No Yes Total
Urban 10 0 10
Suburb 33 0 33
Town 75 12 87
Rural 218 87 305
Total 336 99 435
Years before merger Obs
Share with Ballot Std. Dev.
5 82 0.098 0.299
4 100 0.090 0.288
3 100 0.172 0.379
2 100 0.139 0.347
1 100 0.110 0.314
Years After Merger ObsShare with
Ballot Std. Dev.
0 71 0.056 0.232
1 70 0.157 0.367
2 71 0.183 0.390
3 70 0.143 0.352
4 68 0.162 0.371
Remarks
• Research needs to incorporate rural viewpoints into educational analysis
• Flexibility in pay is very important– Use federal and state programs to gain flexibility (e.g. The
Rural Education Achievement Program, and The Small, Rural School Grant Program)
• Partner with non-profit sector (e.g. Teach For America; the only organization to successfully predict teacher performance)– Started a rural program recently
• Start to implement evaluation systems early, to anticipate likely effects on labor force conditions