A review of the literature suggests that choice of control group may have affected the
policy implications of the major evaluations of governmental training programs. It is
argued that the usual evaluation designs underadjust for preprogram differences between
trainees and the control group and thus yield biased estimates of program impact. At
tempts to statistically correct for such bias are presented and assessed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashenfelter, O. (1976) "Estimating the effect of training programs on earnings with longitudinal data." Paper presented to the Conference on Evaluating Manpower Training Programs, Princeton University. (mimeo)
2.
——— (1974) "The effect of manpower training on earnings," Proceedings: The Industrial Relations Research Association 1974 annual meeting.
3.
Barnow, B.S. (1977) "Bias in estimates of treatment effects," Technical Assistance Paper No. 53, A.S.P.E.R. U.S. Department of Labor.
4.
Borus, M.E. (1967) "Time trends in the benefits from retraining in Connecticut," Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Winter Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association, 20: 36-46.
5.
Cain, G.G. and E.W. Stromsdorfer (1968) "An economic evaluation of government retraining programs in West Virginia," pp. 299-335 in G. G. Somers (ed.) Retraining the Unemployed . Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press .
6.
Campbell, D.T. and R.F. Boruch (1975) "Making the case for random assignments" in C. A. Bennett and A. Lumsdaine (ed.) Evaluation and Experiment. New York: Academic Press.
7.
Cooley, T.F., T.W. McGuire, and E.C. Prescott (1976) "The effects of MDTA manpower training programs " Carnegie-Mellon University Working Paper 85-75-76.
8.
Director, S.M. (1974) "Underadjustment bias in the quasi-experimental evaluation of Manpower Training." Ph.D. dissertation. Northwestern University. (unpublished)
9.
Farber, D.J. 91971) "Highlights: some findings from a follow-up study of pre- and post-training earnings histories of 215,000 trainees participating in two 1964 and four 1968 training programs." U.S. Department of Labor study. (unpublished)
10.
Fine, R.E. (1972) "A.F.D.C. employment and referral guidelines," Final Report submitted to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare under contract SRS-69-59.
11.
Gibbard, H.A. and G.G. Somers (1968) "Government Retraining of the Unemployed in West Virginia," pp. 17-124 in G. G. Somers (ed.) Retraining the Unemployed. Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press.
12.
Goldberger, A.S. (1972a) Selection bias in evaluating treatment effects: Some formal illustrations. Madison: University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, Discussion Paper 123-72.
13.
——— (1972b) Selection bias in evaluating treatment effects: The case of interaction. Madison: University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, Discussion Paper 129-72.
14.
Hardin, E. and M.E. Borus (1971) Economic Benefits and Costs of Retraining, Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
15.
Humphreys, L.G. (1960) "Investigations of the simplex," Psychometrika25 (4).
16.
Johnston, J. (1963) Econometric Methods. New York : McGraw-Hill.
17.
Kiefer, N.M. (1976) "The economic benefits of four Manpower Training programs," Paper presented to the Conference on Evaluating Manpower Training Programs, Princeton University . (mimeo)
18.
Lawley, D.N. and A.E. Maxwell (1973) "Regression and factor analysis." Biometrika60: 331-338.
19.
Magidson, J. (1977) "Toward a causal model approach for adjusting for preexisting differences in the nonequivalent control group situation," Evaluation Q.1, 3 (August).
20.
Main, E.D. (1968) "A nationwide evaluation of MDTA institutional job training," J. of Human Resources, 3: 159-170.
21.
McNemar, Q. (1962) Psychological Statistics. New York: John Wiley.
22.
National Council on Employment Policy (1976 ) "The impact of employment and training programs," Washington, DC.
23.
Pacific Consultants (1976) "The impact of WIN II," prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor under contract No. 53-3-013-06, September.
24.
Porter, A.C. (1967) "The effects of using fallible variables in the analysis of covariance," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
25.
Prescott E.C. and T.F. Cooley (1972) "Evaluating the impact of MDTA programs on earnings,"report prepared for Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor.
26.
Riecken, E. and R. Boruch (1974) Social Experimentation. New York: Academic Press.
27.
Sewell, D.O. (1971) Training the Poor: A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Manpower Programs in the U.S. Antipoverty ProgramKingston, Ontario : Queen's University Industrial Relations Centre.
28.
Solie, R.J. (1968) "An evaluation of the effects of retraining in Tennessee," pp. 193-211 in G. G. Somers (ed.) Retraining the Unemployed. Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press.
29.
Somers, G.G. (1965) "Retraining: an evaluation of gains and costs," pp. 271-298 in A. M. Ross, (ed.) Employment Policy and the Labor Market, Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
30.
Somers, G.G. and J.L. Warlick (1975) An Evaluation of Manpower Programs for Young Men . Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Institute.
31.
Stigler, G.J. (1962) "Information in the labor market," J. of Political Economy (October): 96.
32.
Warren, R.D., J.K. White, and W.A. Fuller (1974) "An errors-in-variables analysis of managerial role performance." J. of the American Statistical Association69: 886-893.
33.
Williams, E.J. (1968) "Retraining in Tennessee," pp. 171-192 in G. G. Somers (ed.) Retraining the Unemployed . Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press .
