Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Gunnarsson (Data (q p f(z , x , a , a , h ) represents the formula to…
Gunnarsson
Data
To investigate the impact of local school management on school outcomes, we use a multi-county survey carried out in 1997 over eight Latin American countries by the (LLECE). (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 32)
In addition to collecting test scores on sampled children in each school, self-applied questionnaires were given to the school principal, to the teachers, to parents (or legal guardians) of the tested children, and to the children themselves. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 33)
Such a political system is far removed from our maintained hypothesis that local principals or parents decide whether or not to manage the school or accept central authority. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 33-34)
For apparently random causes, the number of observations for children taking the mathematics and language exams differed, but sample statistics did not differ much between the groups of students taking the two exams. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 33)
q p f(z , x , a , a , h ) represents the formula to calculate educational production
-
Extensions
"When we began this study, we were concerned that we could not distinguish between management exercised by local school teachers or principals from management exercised by parents or the community." (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 45).
"We cannot control simultaneously for country fixed effects and for endogenous local school management because our source of identification is the countryspecific constitutional locus of authority over schools." (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 45).
"These results indicate why treating local school management and school inputs as endogenous may be important for correctly assessing their impacts on student outcomes."(Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 47).
"We cannot control simultaneously for country fixed effects and for endogenous local school management because our source of identification is the countryspecific constitutional locus of authority over schools."(Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 45).
Introduction
“The move toward more local control is motivated by the belief that decentralized control will result in better school outcomes, holding constant the level of resources devoted to the school. Local decision makers should have more information on local needs and conditions and can adjust resource allocations accordingly.” (Gunnarsson 25-26).
This quote is a lot of information within two sentences. For this quote I ha to break it down piece by piece. It is saying that the movement towards local control and decentralization of education is motivated by the decentralization being a direct link to the control and outcomes of education. It continues by saying that when local government and decision makers have more control over education they are better able to provide what is needed for that school to succeed. I believe that though all schools need to be on the same page, local government can better say and conduct the needs of their schools and people. I also believe that as a future teacher, teachers are better able to talk to local government officials on creating change.
“Local officials should respond better to local needs because they are more exposed to pressure from constituents and because they may use quality public services to attract or retain residents.” (Gunnarsson 26).
This quote further expands on my belief that the local government officials are better able to say what school needs based off of its location. In addition to the local officials knowing more of what a school in their area needs it also can be used to more so control that areas population. Their decisions may also determine government officials based on their decisions.
“The local decision maker could be the principal, teachers, parents, members of the community, or some combination of the four.” (Gunnarsson 26)
I see upsides and downsides to having these people in charge of the schools. It is nice knowing that people who directly interact with certain schools are able to decide what is best for that district or a specific school. The downside of that is that parents do not look at the need and concerns of all students, rather their own.
Regression Analysis
The individual effects have mixed signs, but the summed effect of the three measures consistently shows that centralized locus of power is correlated with lower reported local effort to manage schools. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 40)
Rural schools are also less likely than metropolitan schools to experience supply shortages, although schools in the central cities are supplied better than those in other urban environs. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 41)
The joint test of the hypothesis that the three measures of parental attributes have no impact is strongly rejected in each equation. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 40)
Conclusions
"Parental participation and school autonomy are not random occurences. They are positively influenced by parental human capital and the size and the remoteness of the community" (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 47).
"A sample encompassing eight Latin American countries shows no evidence that more autonomous schools perform better than less autonomous schools" (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 47).
For the majority of schools that would choose not to manage locally, centralized managerial decisions regarding the allocation of school resources and other administrative decisions may yield the best results. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 48)
Background
"In Latin America, as many of the developing regions of the world, efforts to encourage school autonomy and/or community participation are aimed at making schools more productive" (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 25).
"In Argentina, schools that adopted local control earlier appear to have superior outcomes" (Gunnarsson, 2009, p. 30).
Estimation Issues
two components: a1jk is the autonomous managerial effort exercised by the school principal, and a2jk is the parental and local community participation in the management of the school.(Gunnarson 2009, p7)
“In principle, one could estimate a linearized form of equation (1) using ordinary least squares. However, the principal and the parents will be deciding whether to exert managerial effort in the school, in part, based on their anticipated impacts on school outputs.(Gunnarson 2009, p10)
The principal and the parents will be deciding whether to exert managerial effort in the school, in part, based on their anticipated impacts on school outputs. (Gunnarsson 2009, p. 32)