EdSight

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
eric_hanushek

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

eric_hanushek [2026/04/15 08:11] – created duchaeric_hanushek [2026/04/20 02:59] (current) – ducha
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 Hanushek's foundational contribution, developed from his 1971 American Economic Review article through his 1986 Journal of Economic Literature synthesis and onward, was the empirical demonstration that additional educational resources — larger budgets, smaller classes, higher teacher salaries — are not consistently related to improvements in student learning. "Schools differ dramatically in 'quality,'" he argued, "but not because of the rudimentary factors that many researchers (and policymakers) have looked to for explanations of this difference." Using microdata from a large California school system and subsequently replicating the findings with larger datasets and in international comparisons, Hanushek established that state-level increases in per-pupil expenditure showed no systematic correlation with gains in NAEP achievement. The policy implication was not that resources are irrelevant, but that the debate needed to shift from how much is spent to how resources are used — introducing the analytic vocabulary of efficiency into an education sector that had largely resisted it. Hanushek's foundational contribution, developed from his 1971 American Economic Review article through his 1986 Journal of Economic Literature synthesis and onward, was the empirical demonstration that additional educational resources — larger budgets, smaller classes, higher teacher salaries — are not consistently related to improvements in student learning. "Schools differ dramatically in 'quality,'" he argued, "but not because of the rudimentary factors that many researchers (and policymakers) have looked to for explanations of this difference." Using microdata from a large California school system and subsequently replicating the findings with larger datasets and in international comparisons, Hanushek established that state-level increases in per-pupil expenditure showed no systematic correlation with gains in NAEP achievement. The policy implication was not that resources are irrelevant, but that the debate needed to shift from how much is spent to how resources are used — introducing the analytic vocabulary of efficiency into an education sector that had largely resisted it.
- 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (1971). Teacher characteristics and gains in student achievement: Estimation using micro data. American Economic Review, 60(2), 280–288. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (1986). The economics of schooling: Production and efficiency in public schools. Journal of Economic Literature, 24(3), 1141–1177. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (2003). The failure of input-based schooling policies. Economic Journal, 113(485), F64–F98. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Luque, J. A. (2003). Efficiency and equity in schools around the world. Economics of Education Review, 22(5), 481–502. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (2016). What matters for achievement: Updating Coleman on the influence of families and schools. Education Next, 16(2), 22–30. 
  
 ==== Accountability to Support Learning ==== ==== Accountability to Support Learning ====
  
 If individual teachers and principals produce the largest measurable differences in student learning, Hanushek argued, then accountability must be refocused on what happens inside classrooms rather than on inputs. He estimated that disadvantaged pupils taught by high-value-added teachers gain roughly a year and a half of learning while similar students taught by poor teachers gain only six months, and comparable magnitudes hold for principals. Acknowledging that accountability "has not been a reality … because accountability threatens many and because, even when desired, it is difficult to implement," Hanushek's empirical work and advocacy nevertheless underwrote the standards-based accountability agenda of the 1990s and 2000s. Analyzing NAEP trends across U.S. states as accountability systems were introduced, he and Margaret Raymond (2005) found that test-based accountability produced clear positive effects on achievement, particularly where the systems "incorporated consequences for schools and personnel," with no evidence of the predicted unintended outcomes in special-education placement rates. International panel analysis of six waves of PISA (Bergbauer, Hanushek, & Woessmann, 2022) extended the finding: standardized-test accountability improves outcomes in low- and medium-performing countries. If individual teachers and principals produce the largest measurable differences in student learning, Hanushek argued, then accountability must be refocused on what happens inside classrooms rather than on inputs. He estimated that disadvantaged pupils taught by high-value-added teachers gain roughly a year and a half of learning while similar students taught by poor teachers gain only six months, and comparable magnitudes hold for principals. Acknowledging that accountability "has not been a reality … because accountability threatens many and because, even when desired, it is difficult to implement," Hanushek's empirical work and advocacy nevertheless underwrote the standards-based accountability agenda of the 1990s and 2000s. Analyzing NAEP trends across U.S. states as accountability systems were introduced, he and Margaret Raymond (2005) found that test-based accountability produced clear positive effects on achievement, particularly where the systems "incorporated consequences for schools and personnel," with no evidence of the predicted unintended outcomes in special-education placement rates. International panel analysis of six waves of PISA (Bergbauer, Hanushek, & Woessmann, 2022) extended the finding: standardized-test accountability improves outcomes in low- and medium-performing countries.
- 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2001). The confusing world of educational accountability. National Tax Journal, 54(2), 365–384. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 297–327. 
-  * Finn, C. E., Jr., & Hanushek, E. A. (2020). Test-based accountability in distressed times. The State Education Standard, 20(3), 13–17. 
-  * Bergbauer, A. B., Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2022). Testing. Journal of Human Resources. 
-  * Branch, G. F., Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2013). School leaders matter: Measuring the impact of effective principals. Education Next, 13(1), 62–69. 
  
 ==== Teacher Quality and the Education Production Function ==== ==== Teacher Quality and the Education Production Function ====
Line 38: Line 26:
  
 **4. Innate student ability:** a student-level component that must be accounted for to identify the school's contribution. **4. Innate student ability:** a student-level component that must be accounted for to identify the school's contribution.
- 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (1971). Teacher characteristics and gains in student achievement. American Economic Review, 60(2), 280–288. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy, 100(1), 84–117. 
-  * Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 466–479. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (2020). Education production functions. In S. Bradley & C. Green (Eds.), The economics of education: A comprehensive overview (pp. 161–170). Academic Press. 
  
 ==== Knowledge Capital and Economic Growth ==== ==== Knowledge Capital and Economic Growth ====
Line 49: Line 31:
 Hanushek's most influential extension of his work beyond the schoolhouse was to growth economics. The dominant tradition — from Mincer (1974) through Barro (1991) — measured human capital by years of schooling, implicitly assuming that a year of secondary schooling in the United States was equivalent to a year at the same grade level elsewhere. Hanushek rejected the assumption and, with Dennis Kimko and later with Ludger Woessmann, adapted the standard growth model to include direct measures of cognitive skills drawn from a half-century of international assessments (PISA, TIMSS, and their predecessors). Once this adjustment was made, years of schooling lost its predictive power for growth rates of real GDP per capita; the "knowledge capital" measured by test scores became the dominant correlate. The implication was both methodological and substantive: growth analysis had been misspecified, and the economic returns to improving the quality of schooling were far larger than previously estimated — a finding whose projections have been used by the OECD and others to quantify the stakes of universal basic skills. Hanushek's most influential extension of his work beyond the schoolhouse was to growth economics. The dominant tradition — from Mincer (1974) through Barro (1991) — measured human capital by years of schooling, implicitly assuming that a year of secondary schooling in the United States was equivalent to a year at the same grade level elsewhere. Hanushek rejected the assumption and, with Dennis Kimko and later with Ludger Woessmann, adapted the standard growth model to include direct measures of cognitive skills drawn from a half-century of international assessments (PISA, TIMSS, and their predecessors). Once this adjustment was made, years of schooling lost its predictive power for growth rates of real GDP per capita; the "knowledge capital" measured by test scores became the dominant correlate. The implication was both methodological and substantive: growth analysis had been misspecified, and the economic returns to improving the quality of schooling were far larger than previously estimated — a finding whose projections have been used by the OECD and others to quantify the stakes of universal basic skills.
  
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Kimko, D. D. (2000). Schooling, labor force quality, and the growth of nations. American Economic Review, 90(5), 1184–1208. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2012). Do better schools lead to more growth? Cognitive skills, economic outcomes, and causation. Journal of Economic Growth, 17(4), 267–321. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015a). The knowledge capital of nations: Education and the economics of growth. MIT Press. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015b). Universal basic skills: What countries stand to gain. OECD. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., Link, S., & Woessmann, L. (2013). Does school autonomy make sense everywhere? Panel estimates from PISA. Journal of Development Economics, 104, 212–232. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., Piopiunik, M., & Wiederhold, S. (2019). Do smarter teachers make smarter students? International evidence on teacher cognitive skills and student performance. Education Next, 19(2), 56–64. 
  
 ==== Legacies: Four Propositions That Reshaped Education Policy ==== ==== Legacies: Four Propositions That Reshaped Education Policy ====
Line 68: Line 44:
 **4. Quality education drives growth and well-being:** improvements in cognitive skills, not in years of schooling, produce substantial long-run economic gains, both for developing countries reaching basic proficiency and for developed countries that close gaps with high performers. **4. Quality education drives growth and well-being:** improvements in cognitive skills, not in years of schooling, produce substantial long-run economic gains, both for developing countries reaching basic proficiency and for developed countries that close gaps with high performers.
  
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (2003). The failure of input-based schooling policies. Economic Journal, 113(485), F64–F98. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A. (2010). The difference is teacher quality. In K. Weber (Ed.), Waiting for "Superman": How we can save America's failing public schools (pp. 81–100). PublicAffairs. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 297–327. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015a). The knowledge capital of nations. MIT Press. 
-  * Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015b). Universal basic skills: What countries stand to gain. OECD. 
  
 ==== Hanushek's Works ==== ==== Hanushek's Works ====
Line 98: Line 69:
   * Hanushek, E. A. (2020). Education production functions. In S. Bradley & C. Green (Eds.), The economics of education: A comprehensive overview (pp. 161–170). Academic Press.   * Hanushek, E. A. (2020). Education production functions. In S. Bradley & C. Green (Eds.), The economics of education: A comprehensive overview (pp. 161–170). Academic Press.
   * Bergbauer, A. B., Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2022). Testing. Journal of Human Resources.   * Bergbauer, A. B., Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2022). Testing. Journal of Human Resources.
-  * Coleman, J. S., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. U.S. Government Printing Office. 
-  * Barro, R. J. (1991). Economic growth in a cross section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 407–443. 
-  * Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, experience, and earnings. NBER. 
-  * Woessmann, L. (2016). The importance of school systems: Evidence from international differences in student achievement. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(3), 3–32. 
eric_hanushek.txt · Last modified: by ducha