This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
SCHOOL QUALITY, CLUSTERING, AND GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY 51 and


∆Yjk = γ0 + γ1 ln pjkt + γ2 ln gjkt + γ3∆Ljk + γ4 ln pjkt∆Ljk + γ5 ln gjkt∆Ljk + z′jkζ + ∆ξj,


(3.3)


where ∆ is the difference operator, Yjk is the number of educators, Ljk is the number of learners, yjk is the LER, and gjkt is the per-learner subsidy from the government. Here zjk includes indicators of former departments. In both specifications, we take the first difference between two periods to eliminate school- and location-specific unobserved fixed effects.


The LER is used as a measure of school quality. However, we also admit that this measure can only partially capture overall school quality, which is determined by such other measures as teaching facilities (classroom condi- tions) and quality of school administration. I constructed the LER from two school censuses in 1996 and 2000, which focus on school facilities.12 Since the government subsidy allocation had in principle not changed before 2000, we assume that the subsidy reported for 2000 was basically applied to the period before 2000.


To supplement the limited number of subsidized educators, community members can collect school fees and employ educators privately. I therefore also test whether a change in the number of learners induces a change in the number of educators who are privately employed in the community. If the government allocates subsidy more to disadvantaged schools (that is, a smaller number of educators relative to the number of learners), poten-


tial bias in γ2 would be upward since differenced ξjt are positively correlated with per-learner subsidy gjkt. On the other hand, if government subsidy allo- cation increases inequality in the number of educators, we expect a down-


ward bias in the estimate. However, since fixed unobservables are already differenced out, the systematic component of endogenous subsidy allocation has no impact on our estimates.


Finally, the determination of per-learner subsidy is also of interest in the empirical analysis. Though one possible way to eliminate the bias mentioned


earlier is to use instruments for gjkt, we lack identifying instruments in the available data. Therefore I simply examine the effects of school fees, the initial LER, former departments, and school type and location fixed effects.


12 Since measurement errors are reported on number of learners in the Annual School Surveys, we decided to use the 1996 and 2000 SRNs. These have a simplified questionnaire structure focusing on school facility information. Therefore, they are likely to have smaller measurement errors.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150