Upload
genero
View
45
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The Role of Credit Constraints in Educational Choices. Evidence from two British cohorts. Lorraine Dearden, Leslie McGranahan and Barbara Sianesi IFS. Research questions. Extent to which short-term ‘credit constraints’ affect individual educational choices Staying on in FT education past 16 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
IFSThe Role of Credit Constraints
in Educational Choices
Lorraine Dearden, Leslie McGranahan and Barbara Sianesi
IFS
Evidence from two British cohorts
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Research questions
1. Extent to which short-term ‘credit constraints’ affect individual educational choices– Staying on in FT education past 16– Completing HE
2. Has this changed over time?– 1958 cohort (NCDS) – 1970 cohort (BCS)
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Who stays on in school?
Proportion staying on by parental income quartiles – BCS70
Females Males
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Who completes HE?
Females Males
Proportion achieving HE by parental income quartiles – BCS70
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Is this evidence of credit constraints?
Family Income
Education
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Is this evidence of credit constraints?
Family Income
Education
Credit Constraints
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Is this evidence of credit constraints?
Family Income
Education
Credit Constraints
Cognitive abilityNon-cognitive ability
ExpectationsTastes …
Early + long-term factors- Family inputs- Environmental inputs
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Is this evidence of credit constraints?
• Observed correlation between family income and educational outcomes could be due to:
a) short-run credit constraints
b) long-run family background and environmental effects correlated with family income and educational outcomes
• Our aim is to single out a)
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
How do we do this?
• Apply methodology of Carneiro and Heckman (2003) to the UK
• To estimate the share of individuals affected by short-term ‘credit constraints’
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Operational definition of ‘credit constrained’
• Individuals from the top quartile of the income. distribution are not, by assumption, credit constrained
• All others are potentially credit constrained.
• Share who is credit constrained = Any residual gap in educational attainment between top income children and all other children with the same ability and the same early family and environmental factors
• NB: if we don’t manage to capture all family effects, estimates will be an upper bound.
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Approach
• Split family income at 16 into quartiles• Split ability at 10/11 into tertiles
– math, verbal and non-cognitive measures
• Within each ability group work out the proportion of ‘credit constrained’ individuals after controlling for long-run family background characteristics: – mother’s and father’s education, family size and
structure, father’s social status at 16, race and region of residence at 16
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – BCS
Males
Raw 22.0%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – BCS
Males
Raw 22.0%
+ Ability 13.1%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Stay On Rates: Males – BCS70
Males
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Unadjusted
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Adjusted
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – BCS
Males
Raw 22.0%
+ Ability 13.1%
+ Fam. background, region 7.2%
Only stat. significant gaps 7.0%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – BCS
Males Females
Raw 22.0% 19.8%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – BCS
Males Females
Raw 22.0% 19.8%
+ Ability 13.1% 14.0%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Stay On Rates: Females – BCS70
Females
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Unadjusted
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Adjusted
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – BCS
Males Females
Raw 22.0% 19.8%
+ Ability 13.1% 14.0%
+ Fam. background, region 7.2% 7.1%
Only stat. significant gaps 7.0% 6.2%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – NCDS
Males
Raw 15.0%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – NCDS
Males
Raw 15.0%
+ Ability 8.9%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Stay On Rates: Males – NCDS
Males
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Unadjusted
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Adjusted
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – NCDS
Males
Raw 15.0%
+ Ability 8.9%
+ Fam. background, region 1.3%
Only stat. significant gaps 0.0%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – NCDS
Males Females
Raw 15.0% 14.2%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – NCDS
Males Females
Raw 15.0% 14.2%
+ Ability 8.9% 9.3%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Stay On Rates: Females – NCDS
Females
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Unadjusted
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
.6.7
.8.9
1
Bottom Middle Top
Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top Low 2nd 3rd Top
Adjusted
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Results: Staying On – NCDS
Males Females
Raw 15.0% 14.2%
+ Ability 8.9% 9.3%
+ Fam. background, region 1.3% 2.3%
Only stat. significant gaps 0.0% 0.0%
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
HE Completion
• Target groups:– HE vs Anything Less– HE vs at least Level 2
• key marginal group who could access / would benefit from HE
• Attainment– Credit constraints might affect dropping out
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Summary (stat. significant gaps - pp)
1958 1970
Stay-on – Males 0 7
Stay-on – Females 0 6
Males
HE vs Less 0 <3
HE vs ≥Level 2 0 <2
Females
HE vs Less <3 <2
HE vs ≥Level 2 6 3
© Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2005
Conclusions
• Short term ‘credit constraints’ have more impact on staying-on decisions for our younger cohort– Is 6-7% a large fraction?
• Upper bound• Conceptual policy experiment
– But: emerged between the two cohorts
• Less evidence of effect on HE completion– ‘Convergence’ for males and females to 2-3%
• Reduced for females• Emerged for males
• Policies earlier on may be well placed.