DOCSLIB.ORG

Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies Study Title: An Impact Evaluation of a Math Peer Coaching Intervention on 8th Grade Pre-Algebra and High School Algebra I Achievement (A Proving Ground Project, SY 2020-2021) Registry ID: 4680.1v1 Version History The first version of this entry was published on March 17, 2021 3:40:45 PM EDT Currently viewing this version. Section I: General Study Information PI name: Thomas Kane PI affiliation: Harvard University Co-PI name: Douglas Staiger Co-PI affiliation: Dartmouth College Primary Funding Source(s): Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Award Number(s): - IRB Name: Faster, Cheaper Evidence-Gathering for US Education IRB Approval Date: 2015-07-27 IRB Approval Number: - Other Registration Name: - Other Registration Date: - Other Registration Number: - Study Start Date: - PDF Exported September 26,2021 02:29 EDT. Page 1 Study End Date: - Intervention Start Date: 2020-11-02 Timing of entry: Prior to collection of outcome data Brief Abstract: The study district is piloting a classroom-based math intervention that pairs students together based on a skills assessment and provides them with materials to facilitate structured peer coaching. Students in 8th grade Pre-Algebra and high school Algebra I courses were randomly assigned to either participate in a set number of intervention sessions in addition to their usual math instruction or continue with business as usual. The study will measure the effect of the intervention on students' performance on formative math assessments. Keywords: K12 Proving Ground Algebra Pre-Algebra Math Mathematics High School Middle School Peer Coaching COVID Hybrid Remote Comments: This study is part of a larger project called Proving Ground, a partnership between the Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University and a network of Local Education Agencies (LEAs), and is being conducted in collaboration with Impact Florida, a nonprofit organization that supports education agencies in Florida. Section II starts on the next page. PDF Exported September 26,2021 02:29 EDT. Page 2 Section II: Description of Study Type of Intervention: Curriculum/Product Topic Area of Intervention: Mathematics and Science Education Number of intervention arms: 1 Target school level: 10, 11, 12, 8, 9 Target school type: Suburban Location of Implementation: United States : South Further description of location: Small suburban public school district Brief Description of Intervention Condition: Students assigned to treatment will be paired together based on their scores on a benchmark math skills assessment. Students will receive targeted math skills worksheets that guide them through a structured peer coaching process under the supervision of a trained teacher. Students are then assessed again and re-paired for the next session. Based on scheduling needs, some treatment students will participate in two 30-minute sessions each week during their study hall period, some treatment students will participate in three 20-minute sessions each week during their supplementary math period, and some treatment students will participate in three 15-minute sessions each week during their lunch period. Brief Description of Comparison Condition: Students assigned to control will continue with business as usual. Based on scheduling needs, some control students will use study hall in an undirected fashion, and some control students will use their supplementary math period to receive other math support as usual. Comparison condition: Business-as-usual Comments: - Section III: Research Questions Confirmatory research questions: Question 1: Does a math peer coaching intervention improve the math achievement of 8th grade Pre-Algebra and high school PDF Exported September 26,2021 02:29 EDT. Page 3 Algebra I students compared to a control group of students who continue with business as usual? Exploratory research questions: No Questions added yet. Comments: - Section IV-A: Study Design (Selection) Study Design: Randomized Trial (RT) Comments: - Section IV-B: Study Design (Input) Study Design: Input Unit of random assignment of intervention: Student Assignment within sites or blocks: Yes Define the sites or blocks: Math Class Section Probability of assignment to treatment the same across sites or blocks: Yes Probability of assignment to treatment: 0.5 Unit outcome data measured: Student Intermediate clusters between unit of random assignment and unit of measurement: No Comments: - Design Classification Based on the responses above, this study has been classified as: RT: Multisite (Blocked) PDF Exported September 26,2021 02:29 EDT. Page 4 Section V: Sample Characteristics Approximate number of students in the comparision condition within each block (Math Class Section): 8 Approximate number of students in the intervention condition within each block (Math Class Section): 8 Number of blocks (Math Class Section): 31 Were there certain students that were targeted for the study? No Were there certain students that were excluded from the study? Yes - Students with study hall scheduling conflicts were excluded Were there certain blocks ( Math Class Section) that were targeted for the study? Yes - 8th grade Pre-Algebra and high school Algebra I class sections were targeted Were there certain blocks ( Math Class Section) that were excluded from the study? No Comments: - Section VI: Outcomes (Input) Confirmatory question 1: Outcome Measure 1 Outcome domain: Student Achievement - Mathematics Minimum detectable effect size: Outcome measure: Formative Math Assessment Scale of outcome measure: Continuous Normed or state test: Yes Same outcome measure in treatment and comparison groups: Yes Section VII: Outcomes (Input) Baseline data collected prior to start of intervention: Yes Description of baseline data: Formative math assessment administered before the launch of the intervention, student demographic characteristics Covariates you plan to include in the model: English Language Learner Status, Gender, Grade, Race, Special Education Status, Student Pretest Analytic model: See additional materials PDF Exported September 26,2021 02:29 EDT. Page 5 Plan to handle cases with missing outcome data: Delete cases with missing data for the outcome being analyzed Comments: A hierarchical Bayesian regression model may be used for supplementary analysis. Section VIII: Additional Information Links: No links have been added yet. Files: File Name: peer_coaching_analytic_model.pdf Description: Description of analytic model used to estimate the intent-to-treat effect. Comments: - PDF Exported September 26,2021 02:29 EDT. Page 6.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Explaining Charter School Effectiveness†
    American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2013, 5(4): 1–27 http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/app.5.4.1 Explaining Charter School Effectiveness† By Joshua D. Angrist, Parag A. Pathak, and Christopher R. Walters* Lottery estimates suggest Massachusetts’ urban charter schools boost achievement well beyond that of traditional urban public schools stu- dents, while nonurban charters reduce achievement from a higher baseline. The fact that urban charters are most effective for poor nonwhites and low-baseline achievers contributes to, but does not fully explain, these differences. We therefore link school-level charter impacts to school inputs and practices. The relative efficacy of urban lottery sample charters is accounted for by these schools’ embrace of the No Excuses approach to urban education. In our Massachusetts sample, Non-No-Excuses urban charters are no more effective than nonurban charters. JEL H75, I21, I28 ( ) growing body of evidence suggests that urban charter schools have the poten- A tial to generate impressive achievement gains, especially for minority students living in high-poverty areas. In a series of studies using admissions lotteries to iden- tify causal effects, we looked at the impact of charter attendance in Boston and at a Knowledge is Power Program KIPP school in Lynn, Massachusetts Abdulkadiro g˘ lu ( ) ( et al. 2009, 2011; Angrist et al. 2010, 2012 . Boston and Lynn charter middle schools ) increase student achievement by about 0.4 standard deviations per year in math (σ) and about 0.2 per year in English Language Arts ELA . Among high school stu- σ ( ) dents, attendance at a Boston charter school increases student achievement by about 0.3 per year in math and 0.2 per year in ELA.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Benefits from KIPP?
    Who Benefits from KIPP? Joshua Angrist, MIT Susan Dynarski, University of Michigan Thomas Kane, Harvard Graduate School of Education Parag Pathak, MIT Christopher Walters, MIT Education Policy Initiative Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy 735 S. State Street Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 EPI Working Papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by EPI co-Directors. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Education Policy Initiative or any sponsoring agency. EPI Working Paper 03-2010 | February, 2010 WHO BENEFITS FROM KIPP? Joshua D. Angrist Susan M. Dynarski Thomas J. Kane Parag A. Pathak Christopher R. Walters Originalyl posted as NBER Working Paper #15740 The authors are grateful to Josh Zoia and Esther Vargas at KIPP Academy Lynn and to Carrie Conaway at the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for data, patience and assistance. We received valuable assistance from Sarah Cohodes and Jon Fullerton. We also thank Eric Bettinger for helpful comments. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Education Policy Initiative. © 2010 by Joshua D. Angrist, Susan M. Dynarski, Thomas J. Kane, Parag A. Pathak, and Christopher R. Walters. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Who Benefits from KIPP? Joshua D. Angrist, Susan M. Dynarski, Thomas J.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads/Decoupling- Wage-Growth-And-Productivity-Growth/Decoupling of Wages and Productivity.Pdf)
    US ELECTION ANALYSIS NO. 4 Inequality and Opportunity: The Return of a Neglected Debate US income and wage inequality have risen dramatically since the 1970s. The share of the top 1% (those with incomes over $400,000) was as high in 2007 as at its historical peak in 1928. Income and wage differentials between the richest 10% and the poorest 10% have also risen in tandem. The US has the highest income inequality of all rich countries. The only OECD countries with a higher ‘Gini coefficient’ of inequality are Chile, Mexico and Turkey. Workers in the middle of the earnings distribution have fallen behind those at the top of the distribution over a period of 40 years. Those in the bottom 10% fell behind the middle until the mid-1990s. Median real hourly wages have risen by 20% since 1972, whereas productivity has risen by 85%. The difference in the growth of wages and productivity is mainly due to the rise in wage inequality and an increase in non-wage (especially healthcare) costs. But since 2000, profits have risen as a share of GDP as the growth of total labour compensation has lagged behind productivity. Social mobility over people’s lifetimes has not increased to make up for the rise in inequality. In fact, social mobility between generations is worse in the US than in most countries where it is measured. President Obama wants to allow the Bush tax cuts to elapse for households on incomes over $250,000 (which would mean, for example, that the highest federal tax rate would rise from 35% to 39.6%).
    [Show full text]
  • Joshua D. Angrist (01/2021)
    Joshua D. Angrist (01/2021) Current Positions Ford Professor of Economics, MIT, from July 2008. Professor, MIT Economics Department, July 1998-2008. Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research, from 1994. Co-Director, MIT School Effectiveness and Inequality Initiative, from Fall 2011. Previous Positions Wesley Clair Mitchell Visiting Professor, Department of Economics, Columbia, Fall 2018. Visiting Professor, Harvard Lab for Economic Applications and Policy, 2011-12. Lady Davis Fellow, Hebrew University, 2004-05. Associate Professor, MIT Economics Department, 1996-98. Associate Professor, Hebrew University Economics Department, 1995-96. Visiting Associate Professor, MIT Economics Department, 1994-95. Senior Lecturer in Economics, Hebrew University Economics Department, 1991-95. Assistant Professor, Harvard University Economics Department, 1989-91. Faculty Research Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1989-94. Education Ph.D., Economics, Princeton University, October 1989. M.A., Economics, Princeton University, May 1987. B.A., Economics with Highest Honors, Oberlin College, June 1982. Teaching, Professional Service, and Public Service Teaching, Graduate Econometrics, Columbia, Fall 2018; Graduate and Undergraduate Labor Economics and Econometrics, MIT, 1994-95, 1996-2004, 2005-20; Graduate Econometrics and Graduate and Undergraduate Labor Economics, Hebrew University, 1991-96; Graduate Labor Economics and Undergraduate Econometrics courses, Harvard University, 1989-91. Referee, Addison-Wesley, American Economic Review,
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Program
    Honoring the Class of 2017 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Spring Commencement April 29, 2017 | Michigan Stadium Honoring the Class of 2017 SPRING COMMENCEMENT UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN April 29, 2017 10:00 a.m. This program includes a list of the candidates for degrees to be granted upon completion of formal requirements. Candidates for graduate degrees are recommended jointly by the Executive Board of the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies and the faculty of the school or college awarding the degree. Following the School of Graduate Studies, schools are listed in order of their founding. Candidates within those schools are listed by degree then by specialization, if applicable. Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies .....................................................................................................26 College of Literature, Science, and the Arts ..............................................................................................................36 Medical School .........................................................................................................................................................55 Law School ..............................................................................................................................................................57 School of Dentistry ..................................................................................................................................................59 College of Pharmacy ................................................................................................................................................60
    [Show full text]
  • Marshall Memo 629 a Weekly Round-Up of Important Ideas and Research in K-12 Education March 21, 2016
    Marshall Memo 629 A Weekly Round-up of Important Ideas and Research in K-12 Education March 21, 2016 In This Issue: 1. Preparing children to start school ready to learn and thrive 2. Counteracting stereotype threat in urban seventh graders 3. Ten highly effective classroom practices from Down Under 4. Close reading 101 5. Words from other languages that might enrich English 6. Harvard’s “Best Foot Forward” classroom video project 7. Teaching students mathematical argumentation 8. Getting students engaged in advanced math problem-solving 9. What’s the ideal ratio of computer time in blended learning classes? 10. Questions principals might ask in the hallway 11. Are KIPP schools’ results explained by selection and attrition? 12. Short items: (a) Unite for Literacy website; (b) Retrieval practice website Quotes of the Week “If the central purpose of education research is to identify solutions and provide options for policymakers and practitioners, one would have to characterize the past five decades as a near- complete failure. There is little consensus among policymakers and practitioners on the effectiveness of virtually any type of educational intervention.” Thomas Kane in “Connecting to Practice” in Education Next, Spring 2016 (Vol. 16, #2, p. 80-87), http://bit.ly/1RcQ2FE “So often we use assessment in schools to inform students of their progress and attainment. Of course this is important, but it is more critical to use this information to inform teachers about their impact on students. Using assessments as feedback for teachers is
    [Show full text]
  • Kirsten Slungaard Mumma
    Kirsten Slungaard Mumma Harvard Graduate School of Education Email: [email protected] Gutman Library, 6 Appian Way Phone: (651) 331-1130 Cambridge, MA 02138 Website: www.slungaardmumma.com Education Harvard University, Cambridge, MA PhD Candidate, Education, Expected May 2021 Concentration: Education Policy and Program Evaluation Dissertation Committee: David Deming (Chair), Martin West, Thomas Kane Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA Ed.M., Education Policy and Management, 2015 Harvard College, Cambridge, MA A.B., cum laude and high honors in the field, English Language and Literature, 2010 Research Interests Economics of education, immigration and immigrants, language skills, school choice Research In Progress “English language skills and naturalization: evidence using an age-at-arrival instrument.” (Coming Soon). “Language skills and immigrant success.” With Blake Heller*. (Coming Soon). “The effect of charter openings on traditional public schools in Massachusetts and North Carolina.” Revise and resubmit requested. Working Paper: Link. Who benefits from the GED? New regression discontinuity evidence from Massachusetts. With Blake Heller*. Working Paper: Link. Technical Reports Charter school authorizing in California. Technical Report. Getting Down to Facts II. With Martin West. (2018). Link. Access to postsecondary schooling and the GED: new regression discontinuity evidence from Massachusetts. (2017). With Blake Heller. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Education Policy Briefs. Link.
    [Show full text]
  • Christopher R. Walters
    CHRISTOPHER R. WALTERS Department of Economics Phone: (540) 392-5641 University of California, Berkeley E-mail: [email protected] 657 Evans Hall Berkeley, CA 94704 Current Position 2013 – Assistant Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley Affiliations 2012 – Research Associate, MIT School Effectiveness and Inequality Initiative (SEII) Education 2008 – 2013 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ph.D. in Economics 2004 – 2008 University of Virginia, B.A. with Highest Distinction, Economics and Philosophy Research Interests Labor Economics, Applied Econometrics, Economics of Education Fellowships, Honors and Awards 2012 – 2013 National Academy of Education/Spencer Dissertation Fellowship 2008 – 2012 National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship 2008 Sheri Gayle Richman Memorial Scholarship 2008 Edgar F. Shannon Award for Best UVA Arts and Sciences Student 2008 Outstanding Major Award, UVA Economics Department 2008 Outstanding Major Award, UVA Philosophy Department 2008 Best Thesis Award, UVA Economics Department 2007 Phi Beta Kappa (junior year) Publications “Explaining Charter School Effectiveness” (with Joshua Angrist and Parag Pathak), American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, forthcoming. “Who Benefits from KIPP?” (with Joshua Angrist, Susan Dynarski, Thomas Kane, and Parag Pathak), Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 31(4), 2012. “Inputs and Impacts in Charter Schools: KIPP Lynn” (with Joshua Angrist, Susan Dynarski, Thomas Kane, and Parag Pathak), American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 100(2), 2010. “Do Subsidized Housing Units Depreciate Faster than Unsubsidized Ones?” Journal of Housing Economics 18(1), 2009. Working Papers “A Structural Model of Charter School Choice and Academic Achievement.” “Inputs in Early Childhood Human Capital Production: Evidence from Head Start.” “Stand and Deliver: Post-Secondary Outcomes at Boston’s Charter High Schools” (with Joshua Angrist, Sarah Cohodes, Susan Dynarski, and Parag Pathak).
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE Thomas J. Kane Office Address: Harvard
    CURRICULUM VITAE Thomas J. Kane Office Address: Harvard Graduate School of Education Center for Education Policy Research 50 Church St., 4th Floor Cambridge, MA 02138 (617) 496-4359 [email protected] Education: PhD in Public Policy Harvard University, 1991. Dissertation: “College Entry by Blacks Since 1970: The Role of College Cost, Local Economic Conditions and Family Background” Master in Public Policy Harvard University, 1988. MA, Economics University of Michigan, 1986. BA, Economics University of Notre Dame, Summa Cum Laude, 1983. Fields: Education Policy, Labor Economics, Applied Econometrics. Employment: Walter H. Gale Professor of Education 7/2013-Present Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University Faculty Director of Harvard Center for Education Policy Research 7/2005-Present Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University Non-Resident Senior Fellow 3/2013-Present Brookings Institution 6/2001-6/2003 Professor of Education and Economics 7/2005-6/2013 Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University Deputy Director, U.S. Education 11/2008-5/2012 Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Professor of Policy Studies and Economics 7/2001-6/2005 University of California- Los Angeles Vice Chair of the Department of Policy Studies 7/2002-6/2004 University of California- Los Angeles National Fellow 9/2000-7/2001 Hoover Institution, Stanford University Associate Professor of Public Policy 7/1997-6/2001 Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Assistant Professor of Public Policy 7/1991-6/1997 Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Senior Economist for Labor, Education and Welfare 8/1995-6/1996 Council of Economic Advisers, Executive Office of the President of the United States Visiting Fellow 9/1994-7/1995, 6/1996-8/1996 Brookings Institution Faculty Research Fellow 1/1992-Present National Bureau of Economic Research Research Assistant, Research Fellow and Teaching Fellow 1986-1991 Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Books and Reports: Thomas J.
    [Show full text]
  • David M. Quinn Curriculum Vitae Page 1
    DAVID M. QUINN University of Southern California [email protected] Rossier School of Education 3470 Trousdale Parkway 904E Waite Phillips Hall Los Angeles, CA 90089 ACADEMIC POSITIONS Assistant Professor of Education 2016-Present University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education EDUCATION Harvard Graduate School of Education 2016 Ed.D., Education Policy, Leadership, and Instructional Practice Harvard Graduate School of Education 2013 Ed.M., Education Policy and Management University of Nevada-Las Vegas 2007 M.Ed., Curriculum and Instruction Boston University 2003 B.S., Film and Television RESEARCH ARTICLES Peer-reviewed Publications Quinn, David M. and James S. Kim. (in press). “Experimental Effects of Program Management Approach on Teachers’ Professional Ties and Social Capital.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Quinn, David M. (2017). “Racial Attitudes of PreK-12 and Postsecondary Educators: Descriptive Evidence from Nationally-representative Data.” Educational Researcher, 46, 397-411. doi:10.3102/0013189X17727270 Quinn, David M. and James S. Kim. (2017). “Scaffolding Fidelity and Adaptation in Educational Program Implementation: Experimental Evidence from a Literacy Intervention.” American Educational Research Journal. doi: 10.3102/0002831217717692 Quinn, David M. and Joe McIntyre. (2017). “Do Learning Rates Differ by Race/ethnicity over Kindergarten? Reconciling Results across Gain Score, First-Difference, and Random Effects Models.” Economics of Education Review, 59, 81-86. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.06.006 Kim, James S., Mary A. Burkhauser, David M. Quinn, Jonathan Guryan, Helen Chen Kingston, and Kirsten Aleman. (2017). “Effectiveness of Structured Teacher Adaptations to an Evidence-based Summer Literacy Program.” Reading Research Quarterly, 52, 443-467. doi:10.1002/rrq.178 David M.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining Charter School Effectiveness†
    American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2013, 5(4): 1–27 http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/app.5.4.1 Explaining Charter School Effectiveness† By Joshua D. Angrist, Parag A. Pathak, and Christopher R. Walters* Lottery estimates suggest Massachusetts’ urban charter schools boost achievement well beyond that of traditional urban public schools stu- dents, while nonurban charters reduce achievement from a higher baseline. The fact that urban charters are most effective for poor nonwhites and low-baseline achievers contributes to, but does not fully explain, these differences. We therefore link school-level charter impacts to school inputs and practices. The relative efficacy of urban lottery sample charters is accounted for by these schools’ embrace of the No Excuses approach to urban education. In our Massachusetts sample, Non-No-Excuses urban charters are no more effective than nonurban charters. JEL H75, I21, I28 ( ) growing body of evidence suggests that urban charter schools have the poten- A tial to generate impressive achievement gains, especially for minority students living in high-poverty areas. In a series of studies using admissions lotteries to iden- tify causal effects, we looked at the impact of charter attendance in Boston and at a Knowledge is Power Program KIPP school in Lynn, Massachusetts Abdulkadiro g˘ lu ( ) ( et al. 2009, 2011; Angrist et al. 2010, 2012 . Boston and Lynn charter middle schools ) increase student achievement by about 0.4 standard deviations per year in math (σ) and about 0.2 per year in English Language Arts ELA . Among high school stu- σ ( ) dents, attendance at a Boston charter school increases student achievement by about 0.3 per year in math and 0.2 per year in ELA.
    [Show full text]
  • Choosing the Right Parents: Changes in the Intergenerational Transmission of Inequality Between the 1970S and the Early 1990S
    IRLE IRLE WORKING PAPER #72-99 November 1999 Choosing the Right Parents: Changes in the Intergenerational Transmission of Inequality Between the 1970s and the early 1990s David I. Levine Cite as: David I. Levine. (1999). “Choosing the Right Parents: Changes in the Intergenerational Transmission of Inequality Between the 1970s and the early 1990s.” IRLE Working Paper No. 72-99. http://irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/72-99.pdf irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers Institute for Research on Labor and Employment UC Berkeley Title: Choosing the Right Parents: Changes in the Intergenerational Transmission of Inequality Between the 1970s and the early 1990s Author: Levine, David I., University of California, Berkeley Publication Date: 11-19-1999 Series: Working Paper Series Publication Info: Working Paper Series, Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, UC Berkeley Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/9r45b10r Abstract: This paper uses the General Social survey and the comparison between the National Longitudinal Survey of Young Men and of Youth to measure how returns to young men's family background have changed from the late 1970's to the late 1980's and early 1990's. Coming from a wealthy family and having a well-educated father who worked in a high-prestige occupation were much more powerful predictors of a young man's success in the later period. In contrast, maternal education was less important in determining a young man's income and educational attainment. Rising returns to education coupled with a constant relation between family background and education explains most of the rising importance of family background. Copyright Information: All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
    [Show full text]