Startseite Trading the Television for a Textbook?: High School Exit Exams and Student Behavior
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Trading the Television for a Textbook?: High School Exit Exams and Student Behavior

  • Timothy M. Diette EMAIL logo und Sara E. Helms
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 20. März 2014

Abstract

Approximately half of the states in the United States have some form of high school exit exam. One purpose of the exit exams is to create a clear bar which students must pass in order to graduate. Effective exit exams may encourage marginal students to spend additional time on schooling in order to pass the exam. This study exploits state-level variations in timing of implementation to understand how students have responded to the state exit exams. This study uses the American Time Use Survey (ATUS). The ATUS captures, in detail, how individuals spend their day. We find that exit exams are associated with an increase in the amount of time that students spend on educational activities by almost 20 minutes per day in the months in which exams are typically given. The increase comes mainly from an increase in time spent in school and not time spent outside of school on education-related activities. The additional time for education appears to be a trade-off with time spent watching television, which shows a significant drop in exam months for students facing exams.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of the International Perspectives on Time Use Conference participants, the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management conference participants, seminar participants at the University of Virginia and Samford University, Jacob Vigdor, Daniel Hamermesh, Kristin Klopfenstein, Sarah Turner, Charlene Kalenkoski, Jessica Howell, Jay Stewart, Rebecca Ryan, and the anonymous reviewers. The research was supported by the Lenfest Summer Fellowship. Any remaining errors are the responsibility of the authors.

References

Center on Education Policy. 2003. State High School Exit Exams: Put to the Test. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2004. State High School Exit Exams: A Maturing Reform. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2005. State High School Exit Exams: States Try Harder, But Gaps Persist. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2006. State High School Exit Exams: A Challenging Year. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2007. State High School Exit Exams: Working to Raise Test Scores. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2008. State High School Exit Exams: A Move toward End-of-Course Exams. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2009. State High School Exit Exams: Trends in Test Programs, Alternate Pathways, and Pass Rates. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2010. State High School Exit Exams: Exit Exams and Other Assessments. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2011. State High School Exit Exams: Changes in State Policies and the Impact of the College and Career Readiness Movement. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Center on Education Policy. 2012. State High School Exit Exams: A Policy in Transition. Washington, DC.Suche in Google Scholar

Donovan, C., D. N.Figlio, and M.Rush. 2006. Cramming: The Effects of School Accountability on College-Bound Students. Working Paper 12628. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.10.3386/w12628Suche in Google Scholar

Jacob, B. A. 2001. “Getting Tough? The Impact of High School Graduation Exams.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis23(2):99121.10.3102/01623737023002099Suche in Google Scholar

Jacob, B. A., and T. S.Dee. 2009. “Do High School Exit Exams Influence Educational Attainment or Labor Market Performance?” CLOSUP Working Paper Series, Number 18 (February 2009). http://closup.umich.edu.Suche in Google Scholar

Marcotte, D. E. 2011. “Exit Exams and High School Dropout.” IZA Discussion Paper No 5527. SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=177124910.2139/ssrn.1771249Suche in Google Scholar

Ou, D. 2010. “To Leave or Not to Leave? A Regression Discontinuity Analysis of the Impact of Failing the High School Exit Exam.” Economics of Education Review29(2):17186.10.1016/j.econedurev.2009.06.002Suche in Google Scholar

Papay, J. P., R. J.Murnane, and J. B.Willett. 2010. “The Consequences of High School Exit Examinations for Low-Performing Urban Students: Evidence from Massachusetts.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis32(1):523.10.3102/0162373709352530Suche in Google Scholar

Reardon, S. F., N.Arshan, A.Atteberry, and M.Kurlaender. 2010. “Effects of Failing a High School Exit Exam on Course Taking, Achievement, Persistence, and Graduation.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis32:498520.10.3102/0162373710382655Suche in Google Scholar

Roderick, M., and M.Engel. 2001. “The Grasshopper and the Ant: Motivational Responses of Low-Achieving Students to High-Stakes Testing.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis23(3):197227.10.3102/01623737023003197Suche in Google Scholar

Warren, J. R., K. N.Jenkins, and R. B.Kulick. 2006. “High School Exit Examinations and State-Level Completion and GED Rates, 1975–2002.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis28:13152.10.3102/01623737028002131Suche in Google Scholar

Warren, J. R., and M. R.Edwards. 2005. “High School Exit Examinations and High School Completion: Evidence from the Early 1990s.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis27(1):5374.10.3102/01623737027001053Suche in Google Scholar

Warren, J. R., and R. B.Kulick. 2007. “Modeling States’ Enactment of High School Exit Examination Policies.” Social Forces86(1):21529.10.1353/sof.2007.0114Suche in Google Scholar

  1. 1

    See Chapter 7 of the American Time Use Survey User’s Guide: Understanding ATUS 2003–2011 for more information. It is available at http://www.bls.gov/tus/atususersguide.pdf.

  2. 2

    These students would not be captured by our analysis as we only include 15- to 18-year-old individuals who report being high school students.

  3. 3

    We find that family income matters in a predictable way – an additional $1,000 increases student time on education by 0.3 minutes per day. Controlling for all other factors, we find that minority students spend less time, on average, on educational activity, but that students living in a metropolitan area spend more time on it.

  4. 4

    In contrast, we find that most of the effect of demographic control variables operates through out-of-school educational activities. Intuitively, this makes sense, as out-of-school activity is more likely to be influenced by family characteristics instead of state policy.

  5. 5

    We also estimated the model using switcher states only. That is, we included only those seven states which had observations both before and after the implementation of an exit exam. We do not include the results, but they are available upon request. When we do not include state fixed effects, we find that, using states with a change in policy, students facing an exit exam spend an additional 72 minutes on educational activity during testing months, relative to students who do not face an exit exam, but who are also observed during testing months. In-school educational activity accounts for 47 of those minutes. Once we include state fixed effects, no policy estimate maintains statistical significance, though the magnitude of the effect is consistent with other specifications (32 additional minutes on all educational activity and 27 additional minutes on in-school educational activity).

  6. 6

    In contrast to our findings in Table 3, when we focus on switcher states only we find that in addition to more minutes spent on in-school educational activity (not statistically significant), we also find an approximately 30-minute increase in out-of-school educational activity during typical testing months for students facing exit exams. Our results using switcher states only are available upon request.

Published Online: 2014-3-20
Published in Print: 2014-7-1

©2014 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin / Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Advances
  3. Preferential Admission and MBA Outcomes: Mismatch Effects by Race and Gender
  4. Quantity Uncertainty and Demand: The Case of Water Smart Reader Ownership
  5. Contributions
  6. Employment Effects of the 2009 Minimum Wage Increase: New Evidence from State-Based Comparisons of Workers by Skill Level
  7. Introducing Carbon Taxes in Russia: The Relevance of Tax-Interaction Effects
  8. Estimating Parents’ Valuations of Class Size Reductions Using Attrition in the Tennessee STAR Experiment
  9. Local Option, Alcohol and Crime
  10. To Work or Not to Work? The Effect of Childcare Subsidies on the Labour Supply of Parents
  11. Understanding Ransom Kidnappings and Their Duration
  12. Screening Stringency in the Disability Insurance Program
  13. Sticks and Carrots in Procurement: An Experimental Exploration
  14. Peer Effects and Policy: The Relationship between Classroom Gender Composition and Student Achievement in Early Elementary School
  15. Topics
  16. Competition and Innovation in Product Quality: Theory and Evidence from Eastern Europe and Central Asia
  17. Trading the Television for a Textbook?: High School Exit Exams and Student Behavior
  18. The Effect of Parental Migration on the Educational Attainment of Their Left-Behind Children in Rural China
  19. Do Parents’ Social Skills Influence Their Children’s Sociability?
  20. The Role of Infrastructure in Mitigating Poverty Dynamics: The Case of an Irrigation Project in Sri Lanka
  21. Congestion of Academic Journals Under Papers’ Imperfect Selection
  22. Endogenous Merger with Learning
  23. Do Low-Skilled Migrants Contribute More to Home Country Income? Evidence from South Asia
  24. The Minimum Wage and Crime
Heruntergeladen am 21.10.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/bejeap-2012-0052/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen