An attempt is made to explore the production set for educational achievement for both “efficient” and “inefficient” schools. The inefficient or average production relationship is obtained by estimating a reduced-form equation for all schools among a sample drawn from a large Eastern city. The efficient set is derived by using a linear programming approach to yield coefficients for those schools that show the largest student achievement output relative to their resource inputs. A comparison of the two sets of technical coefficients suggests that the relative marginal products are probably different. Because of such differences, the optimal combination of inputs for producing educational achievement relative to a given budget constraint will probably vary between achievement-efficient and inefficient schools, and may even vary from school to school. The result is that the use of such production-function estimates for attempting to improve the efficiency of the educational sector may have far less utility than its advocates imply.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AignerD. J.ChuS. F. (1968) “On estimating the industry production function.”Amer. Economic Rev. 58 (September): 826–839.
2.
AverchH.CarrollS.DonaldsonT.KieslingH.PincusJ. (1972) How Effective is Schooling? A Critical Review and Synthesis of Research Findings. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation.
3.
BaumolW. (1967) “Macroeconomics of unbalanced growth: The anatomy of urban crisis.”Amer. Economic Rev. 52 (June): 415–426.
4.
BowlesS. S. (1973) “Understanding unequal economic opportunity.”Amer. Economic Rev. Papers and Proceedings63 (May): 346–356.
5.
BowlesS. S. (1972) “Unequal education and the reproduction of the social division of labor,” pp. 36–66 in CarnoyM., Schooling in a Corporate Society. New York:David McKay.
6.
BowlesS. S. (1970) “Towards an educational production function,” pp. 11–60 in HansenW. L. (ed.) Education, Income, and Human Capital. New York:National Bureau of Economic Research.
7.
BowlesS. S. (1970) “Towards an educational production function,” pp. 11–60 in HansenW. L.LevinH. M. (1968) “The determinants of scholastic achievement–a critical appraisal of some recent evidence.”J. of Human Resources3 (Winter): 3–24.
8.
BurkheadJ. (1967) Input and Output in Large City High Schools. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse Univ. Press.
9.
CarlsonR. C. (1970) “Educational efficiency and effectiveness.” Presented at the Stanford University Seminar in Economics of Education, May.
10.
CarlsonS. (1956) A Study on the Pure Theory of Production. New York: Kelley & Millman.
11.
FarrellM. (1957) “The measurement of productive efficiency.”J. of the Royal Statistical Society120, 3: 253–281.
12.
GintisH. (1972) “Toward a political economy of education.”Harvard Educ. Rev.42 (February): 70–96.
13.
GintisH. (1971) “Education, technology and the characteristics of worker productivity.”Amer. Economic Rev. 61 (May): 266–279.
14.
GrilichesZ.MasonW. (1972) “Education, income, and ability.”J. of Pol. Economy (May/June Supplement): S.74–S.103.
15.
HanushekE. (1972) Education and Race. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath.
16.
HirschW. Z. (1973) Urban Economic Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.
17.
KatzmanM. (1971) The Political Economy of Urban Schools. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.
18.
KieslingH. J. (1967) “Measuring a local government service: A study of school districts in New York State.”Rev. of Economics and Statistics49 (August): 356–367.
19.
LeibensteinH. (1966) “Allocative efficiency vs. ‘X-efficiency.’”Amer. Economic Rev. 56: 392–415.
20.
LevinH. M. (1971) “Frontier functions: an econometric approach to the evaluation of educational effectiveness.”Stanford, Calif.:Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching R. and D. Memo 80.
21.
LevinH. M. (1970a) “A cost-effectiveness analysis of teacher selection.”J. of Human Resources5, 1: 24–33.
22.
LevinH. M. (1970b) “A new model of school effectiveness,” ch. in Do Teachers Make a Difference? Washington, D.C.:U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Office of Education.
23.
LevinH. M. (1968) “Recruiting teachers for large-city schools.”Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, (mimeo).
24.
LevinH. M.MullerM. (1973) “The meaning of technical efficiency.”Stanford University, (unpublished).
25.
MichelsonS. (1970) “The association of teacher resourcefulness with children's characteristics,” ch. 6 in Do Teachers Make a Difference?Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Office of Education.
26.
MushkinS. [ed.] (1972) Public Prices for Public Products. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.
27.
PerlL. J. (1973) “Family background, secondary school expenditure, and student ability.”J. of Human Resources (Spring): 156–180.
28.
PfoutsR. W. (1961) “The theory of cost and production in the multi-product firm.”Econometrica29: 650–658.
