19 de Enero de 2018
Portal Educativo de las Américas
 Imprima esta Página  Envie esta Página por Correo  Califique esta Página  Agregar a mis Contenidos  Página Principal 
¿Nuevo Usuario? - ¿Olvidó su Clave? - Usuario Registrado:     


La Educación
Número: (132-133) I,II
Año: 1999

1. Colbert, Chiappe, and Arboleda (1993, 53). Years of attendance, especially in rural areas, are higher due to high rates of repeating.
2. Colombia, Ministerio de Educación Nacional (1993: 63, 71, 78, 85). The department is the administrative unit of organization in Colombia.

3.See, for example, Colbert, Chiappe, and Arboleda (1993, 53) and McGinn and Loera (1992).

4.This section draws on the work of Colbert (1987), Colbert and O. Mogollón (1987), Colbert, Chiappe, and Arboleda (1993), and Schiefelbein (1992).

5.A recreational guide is given to teachers (Hernandez 1986).

6. Colbert and Mogollón (1987).

7. The latter study is summarized in Rojas (1991).

8. Instituto SER de Investigación (1993).

9. Surveys in 1991 and 1993, covering most Colombian departments, were conducted in A calendar primary schools.

10. Rojas and Castillo (1988) find that 94% of New Schools in their sample had libraries, consistent with the conjecture that their sample is more representative of the ideally implemented New School.

11. Due to the presence of “heteroskedasticity,” standard errors of coefficient estimates in all models were calculated with White’s Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix (White 1980).

12. Both studies used as dependent variables achievement test scores standardized to a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10.

13. For a comprehensive review of the educational production function literature in developing countries, see Fuller and Clarke (1994).

14. Colombia, Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística.

15. See Fuller and Clarke (1994).

16. These coefficients should be interpreted cautiously, given that repeating is probably correlated with omitted variables like innate ability.  They are also likely endogenously determined, which could bias coefficients.

17. The teacher/textbook ratio is measured from 0 to 4, with 4 meaning that all students in that subject have textbooks, 3 meaning that three-quarters have them, etc.  Other variable definitions are in the Appendix.

18. Finding no positive effect is not necessarily an indictment of group learning if two requirements are met: (1) its use is not negatively related to student achievement or other unmeasured outputs, and (2) its use in lieu of lecturing gives teachers more time to concentrate on other tasks which bolster achievement.  It then represents a gain in efficiency with educational inputs are allocated.