Jeffery H. Marshall

Why does academic achievement vary across countries? Evidence from Cuba and Mexico

International assessments of academic achievement are common. They are usually accompanied by attempts to infer the determinants of cross‐country achievement gaps, but these inferences have little empirical foundation. This paper applies the Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition to the problem of explaining why primary students in Cuban schools score than Mexican students, on average, 1.3 standard deviations higher. The results suggest that no more than 30% of the difference can be explained by differing endowments of family, peer, and school variables. Of these, peer‐group variables and, to a lesser extent, family variables explain the largest portion of the gap.

Cuba’s Academic Performance in Comparative Perspective

Students in Cuban primary schools have been found to score much higher on standardized mathematics and language tests than students elsewhere in Latin America. To examine possible reasons for Cuba’s exceptional performance, in this article we investigate the roles that may be played by international differences in students’ family resources, school resources, and the social context of schools. First, we must recognize that resources from students’ individual families explain much of the variation both between and within developed and developing countries. Thus, one possibility is that Cuba’s children today benefit from two generations of sustained investment in education because their parents have higher levels of schooling than parents in the rest of Latin America. Beyond the additional human capital that more educated Cuban parents bring to their children’s school performance, Cuban families may also put greater effort into their children’s academic achievement, may expect greater academic achievement from them, and may move (and change their children’s schools) less often as compared with other Latin American families. James Coleman has characterized these inputs as family “social capital.” A second explanation we must consider is based on a possible Cuban advantage in school quality, especially teacher quality, which also may boost students’ academic performance. Cuban schools may be more effective be-

Decentralization and educational performance: evidence from the PROHECO Community School Program in rural Honduras

We analyze the effectiveness of the Programa Hondureño de Educación Comunitaria (PROHECO) community school program in rural Honduras. The data include standardized tests and extensive information on school, teacher, classroom and community features for 120 rural schools drawn from 15 states. Using academic achievement decompositions we find that PROHECO schools do a better job of maximizing teacher effort and involving parents in the school, both of which translate into higher levels of achievement. But these efficiency advantages are offset (to some degree) by lower levels of teacher experience, training, parental education, as well as a reliance on smaller class sizes. The results help extend the community school and school based management (SBM) literatures by identifying plausible mechanisms in the chain linking increased community involvement with better student outcomes, while also highlighting the importance of local capacity.

Quality and Efficiency in a Complementary Middle School Program: The Educatodos Experience in Honduras

UNESCO estimates that 85 percent of school-aged children are currently enrolled in primary school in the developing world (UNESCO 2006). A significant number of countries have already achieved universal primary schooling or are expected to do so by 2015. But for middle schooling (and beyond), the story is very different, with limited places in the “formal” public system and extensive rationing based on fees and entrance exams. One potential mechanism for expanding access—the alternative school—has been in place for more than 30 years, mainly at the primary level (Coombs 1976). The expansion of these programs into postprimary schooling means greater access to an increasingly important level of schooling. It is also a natural consequence of earlier successes in getting children through the primary cycle. Discussions of alternative schools and their impact are complicated by the diversity of programs and program goals. Some represent truly alternative approaches to public education—complete with their own curriculum—while others serve a more complementary role that borrows heavily from the public school script (Farrell and Mfum-Mensah 2002; Balwanz et al. 2006). Their reach into the most isolated areas also complicates systematic counts of total participation globally. What is certain is that in individual contexts these programs are playing a critical role in providing opportunities to learn. This admittedly basic measure of effectiveness (participation) has been buttressed by generally positive program evaluation evidence. This includes signs of