2007年-世界发展银行全球_More_Time_is_Better___An_Evaluation_of_the_Full-time_School_Program_in_Uruguay_25页_363kb

Summary of the Full-Time School Program in Uruguay: Impact Evaluation

Core Content

This paper evaluates the impact of the Full-Time School (FTS) program in Uruguay on the standardized test scores of 6th-grade students. The program was introduced in the early 1990s to improve educational outcomes in disadvantaged urban schools by extending the school day and providing additional educational resources. The study uses a rigorous methodology to address the issue of non-random program assignment and aims to isolate the program's effect on student achievement.

Main Points

• Program Overview:
  The FTS program extended the school day from half to full day and included additional inputs such as more teachers, classroom construction, and teacher training. It was primarily targeted at poor urban schools, particularly those with limited infrastructure and resources.

• Implementation Phases:
  The program was implemented in three phases:

  1. Before 1996: 52 schools converted, many of which were in very poor conditions.
  2. 1997–1998: 4 new schools were added.
  3. 1999–2005: 48 more schools converted, following the implementation of a new pedagogical model.

• Evaluation Context:
  The program was evaluated through two main approaches:

  • A fixed effects model, which accounts for time-invariant school characteristics.
  • Propensity score matching, which attempts to construct a comparable group of schools to estimate the program's impact more accurately.

• Data Sources:
  The study uses three data sources:

  1. National Evaluation of Learning Achievements for the Sixth Grade (tests in 1996, 1999, and 2002).
  2. National Census of Schools (data from 1996 to 2004).
  3. Specific program information from the Ministry of Education and ANEP.

• Sample Restrictions:
  To ensure comparability, the study excludes schools that were not tested in 1996 or did not participate in the post-baseline testing in 2002. The final sample includes 28 schools that converted to FTS between 1997 and 2002 and were tested in both years, as well as 190 schools that were tested in 1996 and 2002 but did not convert.

Key Findings

• Impact on Test Scores:
  Students in full-time schools showed improvements in test scores:

  • Mathematics: +0.07 standard deviations per year of participation.
  • Language: +0.04 standard deviations per year of participation.
    These results suggest that the program had a positive effect on student learning outcomes, particularly in language.

• Baseline Differences:
  Full-time schools were initially more disadvantaged, with lower test scores, larger class sizes, and poorer infrastructure compared to non-full-time schools. However, they had better school equipment and smaller class sizes.

• Methodological Challenges:
  The non-random assignment of schools to the program introduces potential biases. To mitigate this, the study employs propensity score matching and school fixed effects to control for both observable and unobservable school characteristics. It also uses a socio-economic index to exclude the most advantaged schools from the sample.

• Cost Considerations:
  While the FTS program is costly, it may be cost-effective if well-targeted, as the cost per student may not exceed the current spending deficit between Uruguay and other Latin American countries.

Conclusion

The FTS program in Uruguay appears to have a positive impact on student achievement, particularly in language, for students in disadvantaged schools. The study highlights the importance of careful impact evaluation when assessing educational interventions, especially those that are not randomly assigned. The findings suggest that the program could be a valuable tool for reducing educational inequalities, provided that the additional resources are effectively utilized and the program is well-targeted.

Key Information

• Target Population: Poor urban schools, especially those with inadequate infrastructure.
• Program Components: Extended school day, additional teachers, classroom construction, teacher training, and community involvement.
• Evaluation Method: Propensity score matching and fixed effects models.
• Sample Size: 28 FTS schools and 190 non-FTS schools tested in both 1996 and 2002.
• Results: Positive but modest improvements in test scores for students in full-time schools.
• Limitations: Incomplete implementation and potential biases due to non-random assignment.
• Implications: The program could help address educational inequalities if implemented effectively and targeted appropriately.