Using Quantile Regression to Estimate Intervention Effects Beyond the Mean

Abstract

This study discusses quantile regression methodology and its usefulness in education and social science research. First, quantile regression is defined and its advantages vis-à-vis vis ordinary least squares regression are illustrated. Second, specific comparisons are made between ordinary least squares and quantile regression methods. Third, the applicability of quantile regression to empirical work to estimate intervention effects is demonstrated using education data from a large-scale experiment. The estimation of quantile treatment effects at various quantiles in the presence of dropouts is also discussed. Quantile regression is especially suitable in examining predictor effects at various locations of the outcome distribution (e.g., lower and upper tails).

Keywords

quantile regression instrumental variables interim assessments achievement gap field experiment OLS regression

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abadie

Angrist

Imbens

(2002). Instrumental variables estimates of the effect of subsidized training on the quantiles of trainee earnings. Econometrica, 70, 91-117.

Angrist

J. D.

Pischke

J.-F.

(2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Bitler

Domina

Penner

Hoynes

(2015). Distributional analysis in educational evaluation: A case study from the New York City Voucher Program. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 8, 419-450.

Black

Wiliam

(1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Educational Assessment: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 7-74.

Boruch

Weisburd

Berk

(2010). Place randomized trials. In Piquero

Weisburd

(Eds.), Handbook of quantitative criminology (pp. 481-502). New York, NY: Springer.

Bracey

G. W.

(2005, June). No child left behind: Where does the money go? (Policy Brief No. EPSL-0506-114-EPRU). Tempe: Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Arizona State University.

Buchinsky

(1998). Recent advances in quantile regression models: A practical guideline for empirical research. Journal of Human Resources, 33, 89-126.

Cameron

A. C.

Trivedi

P. K.

(2010). Microeconometrics using Stata (rev. ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.

Datnow

Hubbard

(2015). Teachers’ use of assessment data to inform instruction: Lessons from the past and prospects for the future. Teachers College Record, 117, 1-26.

10.

Efron

(1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. Annals of Statistics, 7, 1-26.

11.

Frolich

Melly

(2010). Estimation of quantile treatment effects with STATA. STATA Journal, 3, 423-457.

12.

Hahn

(1995). Bootstrapping quantile regression estimators. Econometric Theory, 11, 105-121.

13.

Hao

Naiman

D. Q.

(2007). Quantile regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

14.

Imbens

Angrist

J. D.

(1994). Identification and estimation of local average treatment effects. Econometrica, 62, 467-476.

15.

Indiana State Board of Education. (2006). A long-term assessment plan for Indiana: Driving student learning. Indianapolis, IN: Author.

16.

Koenker

Bassett

(1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46, 33-50.

17.

Kolenikov

(2010). Resampling variance estimation for complex survey data. Stata Journal, 10, 165-199.

18.

Konstantopoulos

Miller

S. R.

van der Ploeg

(2016). Effects of interim assessments across the achievement distribution: Evidence from an experiment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76, 587-608.

19.

Konstantopoulos

Miller

van der Ploeg

(2013). The impact of Indiana’s system of Interim assessments on mathematics and reading achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35, 481-499.

20.

Parente

P. M.

Santos Silva

(2016). Quantile regression with clustered data. Journal of Econometric Methods, 5, 1-15.

21.

Perie

Marion

Gong

Wurtzel

(2007). The role of interim assessments in a comprehensive assessment system: A policy brief. Dover, NH: National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.

22.

Porter

S. R.

(2015). Quantile regression: Analyzing changes in distributions instead of means. In Paulsen

M. B.

(Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 30, pp. 335-381). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

23.

Sawchuk

(2009, May 12). Testing faces ups and downs amid recession. Education Week, 28, pp. 1, 16-17.

24.

Slavin

R. E.

Cheung

Holmes

G. C.

Madden

N. A.

Chamberlain

(2013). Effects of a data-driven district reform model on state assessment outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 371-396.

25.

Tomlinson

C. A.

(2000). Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades. Champaign: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education, University of Illinois.

26.

White

(1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817-838.