Category: Education

MRU videos on poverty and health

A new set of MRU videos is up.  In these videos, we cover:

·      How the poor spend their money

·      How stress can create a “tax” on the poor’s decision-making, focus, and cognitive abilities

·      Causes of “missing women” in developing countries and what is really the bottom line on this claim

·      The economics of child labor, and what is the nature of the potential market failure when sending children to work

·      How a test involving a pregnant mare’s urine illustrates the value of randomized controlled trials

·      Why private health insurance is relatively rare in poorer developing countries (hint: it’s not adverse selection)

·      Can cash transfers help with low birth weight?

·      How community participation can affect the success of health care programs

·      And finally, the ugly effects of cholera, diarrhea, worms, and HIV/AIDS in developing countries

Click here to get started on these videos, with an introduction to randomized control trials.  Or browse the whole list at MRUniversity.com, click on the Course section on the right to see the menu.

Elephants engage in Mengerian indirect exchange

At the main Pondicherry temple, an elephant will bless you — by tapping its trunk on your head — if you hand it some money.  Of course this is a temple elephant and it is also a Mengerian elephant.  The elephant has no use for money but understands that it is a general medium of exchange.  The elephant hands the money over to the temple authority and is later rewarded with food.

The elephant is not merely trading, but it is engaged in indirect exchange and thus in monetary economics.

There is in fact a sign up forbidding such Mengerian transactions, but the elephant seems not to notice it.

And yet this is not the end of the story.  In many parts of Tamil Nadu, temple elephants have attained so much prosperity through Mengerian indirect exchange, and been able to consume so much leisure, that now elephant obesity is a more serious problem than elephant malnutrition.

Albert O. Hirschman: Life and Work

Albert O. Hirschman has passed away. Hirschman was a deep thinker whose work has been influential in many fields. Most famously with the must-read Exit, Voice and Loyalty. I am also a fan of The Passions and the Interests his study of ideological transformations in the 17th and 18th century which promoted the pursuit of material interests as a way to tame the passions and thus opened the way to capitalism (profitably read alongside McCloskey’s Bourgeois Virtues). Hirschman’s early work in development, on backwards and forwards linkages, is now being rediscovered and formalized. Tyler looks at Hirschman’s work as it relates to development in a video at MRUniversity. Tyler also wrote in 2006:

Albert Hirschman deserves a Nobel Prize in economics.  His early work on the unbalanced nature of economic development was pathbreaking.  The Rhetoric of Reaction is a brilliant study in intellectual self-deception.  As a historian of thought he integrates wonderfully, such as in his study of how commerce shapes mores.

But he would win the Prize for focusing the attention of economists and political scientists on the phenomenon of voice: the ability of consumer or voter complaints to induce improvements in supply.  Hirschman was the first modern social scientist to think about this mechanism systematically.

Hirschman first suggested voice gets stronger and more effective when exit is limited.  In his (earlier) vision, if you can leave you won’t complain.  Fidel Castro understood this and let many Cubans go, although of course they complained from Florida.  It is sometimes suggested that in a world of school vouchers fewer parents would show up at the school board meeting.  Don’t yap, just yank your kid.

In reality voice often works best when competitive pressures are strong.  HBO is more responsive than was East Germany.  You are not wasting your time to complain at Wegman’s, or for that matter at this blog.  Competition and voice are more likely complements than substitutes.  Hirschman admitted and indeed emphasized this point in his later writings.

Here is Paul Krugman on Hirschman….Here is Alex on the topic of voice.

Hirschman also led a fascinating life. He became a professor only late in life after fighting in the Spanish Civil War, volunteering in the French Army and working in Marseilles to help refugees escape the Nazis. His work in development economics was based on field work when field work still meant working in fields.

As he once said of his work and perhaps also of his life:

Attempts to confine me to a specific area make me unhappy.

Daniel Drezner at the FP annually gives out an award he affectionately calls the Albie. It’s an award for

…any book, journal article, magazine piece, op-ed, or blog post published in the [last] calendar year that made you rethink how the world works in such a way that you will never be able “unthink” the argument.

It’s a fitting award to be named for Albert Hirschman whose simple but powerful ideas do indeed cause you to rethink the world and never to see it the same again.

India, India, India!

Today at MRUniversity we release the first of our country sections, India. In nearly 50 videos we cover key aspects of India’s history, economics, politics and culture from the viewpoint of development economics. Among the topics are India’s Early Growth History, Gandhi and the Salt March, the Green Revolution, Food Crises and the Media, the Rise of Private Education in India, and the Economics of Bollywood.

Tyler and I will both be in Delhi on Thursday December the 20th to talk to students of MRUniversity and others about economics, development and the future of online education. Information on times and places to follow.

By the way, for those of you taking the Development Economics course the India material is bonus to be sampled at will – this won’t be on the exam!

MRU also introduces new features this week including user contributions of links, videos and other materials directly from the video pages, ordering of questions by votes or recency and easier ways to see and access related materials and user contributions.

How much do charter schools really matter?

I’ve seen so many people discuss this topic, but Yusuke Jinnai seems to be making progress on the question.  Here is part of his abstract:

In this paper, I propose a new empirical approach to identify the impact of charter schools on local traditional schools. Specifically, I define direct impact as the effect of introducing charter schools on traditional-school students in grades that overlap with charter schools’ grades, while indirect impact is defined as the effect on students in non-overlapping grades. Unlike prior research work, which estimates the effects of charter school entry at the school level, I examine the impact at the grade level by exploiting the variation in gaps between grades offered by charter schools and grades at nearby traditional schools.

Using student-level panel data from North Carolina, this paper shows that the introduction of charter schools does not induce any significant indirect impact but generates a positive and significant direct impact on student achievement. Distinguishing between the two distinct impacts and taking into consideration both traditional-school and charter-school students, my study finds overall positive effects of introducing charter schools on student achievement. I also demonstrate that such overall effects would have been underestimated by 85% in the literature, since previous work identifies the impact of charter school entry at a moment when the direct and indirect impacts are likely to be mixed.

Finally, I argue that the direct impact consists of student sorting effects and competitive effects and, by controlling for unobserved peer characteristics, demonstrate one-quarter of the positive direct impact is driven by the former while three-quarters result from the latter.

The paper is here, and Yusuke is on the job market from Rochester this year.  His entire portfolio of papers on education appears to be quite interesting.

Here is a related post on school choice in Sweden, from Modeled Behavior.

Ideology, Motivated Reasoning, and Cognitive Reflection: An Experimental Study

That is a new paper by Dan M. Kahan, at Yale Law School, and it has to do with what I call “mood affiliation”:

Social psychologists have identified various plausible sources of ideological polarization over climate change, gun violence, national security, and like societal risks. This paper reports a study of three of them: the predominance of heuristic-driven information processing by members of the public; ideologically motivated cognition; and personality-trait correlates of political conservativism. The results of the study suggest reason to doubt two common surmises about how these dynamics interact. First, the study presents both observational and experimental data inconsistent with the hypothesis that political conservatism is distinctively associated with closed-mindedness: conservatives did no better or worse than liberals on an objective measure of cognitive reflection; and more importantly, both demonstrated the same unconscious tendency to fit assessments of empirical evidence to their ideological predispositions. Second, the study suggests that this form of bias is not a consequence of overreliance on heuristic or intuitive forms of reasoning; on the contrary, subjects who scored highest in cognitive reflection were the most likely to display ideologically motivated cognition. These findings corroborated the hypotheses of a third theory, which identifies motivated cognition as a form of information processing that rationally promotes individuals’ interests in forming and maintaining beliefs that signify their loyalty to important affinity groups. The paper discusses the normative significance of these findings, including the need to develop science communication strategies that shield policy-relevant facts from the influences that turn them into divisive symbols of identity.

To put that in Cowenspeak, both sides are guilty, the smart are guiltiest of them all, and the desire for group loyalty is partially at fault.  Is it possible you have seen these propensities in the economics blogosphere?

Here is a related blog post by Kahan, here is another on how independents do somewhat better than you might think, here is Kahan’s blog.

I would stress the distinction between epistemic process and being more right about the issues at a given point in time.  Even if various groups of individuals are epistemically similar in terms of how they process information, at some point in time some groups still will be more right than others, just as some sports fans, every now and then, are indeed backing the winning teams.  It’s less a sign of virtue than you might think.

For the pointer I thank Jonas Kathage.

Sentences to ponder

Fewer children in the United States grow up with both biological parents than in any other affluent country for which data are available.

Here is another bit:

Genuine progress probably hinges on poor or less-educated women delaying childbirth. Eventually, this will happen; the teen birthrate has already been dropping for nearly two decades, albeit slowly. For its part, Washington (or any other government) has only limited tools to speed it up.

That is from Lane Kenworthy, from his article on why opportunity has slowed down in the United States, hat tip Brad DeLong.

“The Myth of American Meritocracy: How corrupt are Ivy League admissions?”

There is a new and stimulating piece by Ron Unz, in The American Conservative.  The article covers plenty of ground, but I took away two main points.  The first is that there is massive and quite unjustified bias against Asian and Asian-American students in the U.S. admissions process.  Yes, I already thought that but it turns out it is much worse than I had thought.  Yet many people support this aspect of our current admissions systems, either directly or indirectly.

The second point is the claim that Jewish academic achievement in America is collapsing at the top end, in relative terms at least.

For reasons which are possibly irrational on my end, but perhaps not totally irrational, I am not entirely comfortable with the religious and ethnic and racial “counting” methods applied in this piece (blame me for mood affiliation if you wish).  Still, it is an interesting read and after some internal debate I thought I would pass it along, albeit with caveats.

In any case, the link to the article is here.

The dangers of “early intervention”

An Australian psychologist says smartphone apps allowing parents to send their naughty children phone calls from Santa “are not useful” and “could be abused.”

Dr. John Irvine said the smartphone apps — including the free “Fake Call From Santa” app and the $1.99 “Parents Calling Santa” app — are “not productive” methods of behavior correction, The Courier-Mail, Brisbane, reported Wednesday.

“These kinds of apps have made the Santa threat much more real and immediate and they could be abused by some parents in the lead-up to Christmas Day,” he said. “What is the point in threatening something that you are not going to carry out? Is mum really going to cancel presents on Christmas Day?
“Empty threats are not useful as kids soon realize that there are no consequences,” he said.

The “Fake Call from Santa” app includes an incoming call with audio, but the “Parents Calling Santa” app allows parents to choose from three recorded messages — a “well done call,” a “could do better” call, or a “must improve or you will get a lump of coal for Christmas” call.

The link is here.

More on Online Education

At Cato Unbound I respond to some of the critics of my article Why Online Education Works. Here is one bit:

We do need more studies of offline, online, and blended education models, but the evidence that we do have is supportive of the online model. In 2009, The Department of Education conducted a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies and found:

  • Students in online conditions performed modestly better, on average, than those learning the same material through traditional face-to-face instruction.
  • Instruction combining online and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to purely face-to-face instruction than did purely online instruction.
  • Effect sizes were larger for studies in which the online instruction was collaborative or instructor-directed than in those studies where online learners worked independently.
  • The effectiveness of online learning approaches appears quite broad across different content and learner types. Online learning appeared to be an effective option for both undergraduates (mean effect of +0.30, p < .001) and for graduate students and professionals (+0.10, p < .05) in a wide range of academic and professional studies.