Aliprantis, Dionissi (2007): A Note on Why Quarter of Birth is Not a Valid Instrument for Educational Attainment.
Preview |
PDF
MPRA_paper_5168.pdf Download (91kB) | Preview |
Abstract
In their justification for using entrance cutoff dates and compulsory education laws as a natural experiment, the authors of Angrist and Krueger (1991) rightly give much attention to the effectiveness of compulsory attendance laws. However, the authors do not give proper attention to the decisions made by parents. If redshirting is commonplace and nonrandom, as it is in the ECLS-K data set, then the identifying assumption of monotonicity does not hold, and their identification scheme does not work. This problem is distinct from those discussed in Bound and Jaeger (2000).
| Item Type: | MPRA Paper |
|---|---|
| Institution: | University of Pennsylvania |
| Original Title: | A Note on Why Quarter of Birth is Not a Valid Instrument for Educational Attainment |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Institutions > I20 - General I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Institutions > I21 - Analysis of Education |
| Item ID: | 5168 |
| Depositing User: | Dionissi Aliprantis |
| Date Deposited: | 06 Oct 2007 |
| Last Modified: | 27 Sep 2019 00:09 |
| URI: | https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/5168 |
All papers reproduced by permission. Reproduction and distribution subject to the approval of the copyright owners.
 |
View Item |
