The Effects of Class Size on Student Achievement: New Evidence from Population Variation

By C. Hoxby. 2000

1,103 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7727782c23dcab203feabf5400ee2d0e73ff1e91

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

WORKING PAPER SERIES BETTER LATE THAN NOTHING : SOME COMMENTS ON DEATON ( 2009 ) AND HECKMAN AND URZUA (methodology): “Returning to the class size example from Section 2, Angrist and Lavy (1999), Hoxby (2000), and Krueger (1999) do not study the effect of class size as a historical phenomenon: they want to inform the policy debate on class size.”
Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non‐technical guide (2011, methodology): “For examples of such combinations from the education area, see, for example, Lavy (2009) and Machin and McNally (2008). Galindo-Rueda and Vignoles (2007) is an example of applying matching techniques to the estimation of the effects of comprehensive versus selective schooling; evidence provided in M”
Parental Effort, School Resources, and Student Achievement (2008, background): “…allowing researchers to focus on the role of specific characteristics, for instance, teacher characteristics (for example, Rivkin, Hanushek, and Kain 2005), peer effects (Hanushek et al. 2003), class size (Angrist and Lavy 1999 and Hoxby 2000), and birth order and family size (Hanushek 1992).”
Better Late than Nothing: Some Comments on Deaton (2009) and Heckman and Urzua (2009) (2010, methodology): “Returning to the class size example from Section 2, Angrist and Lavy (1999), Hoxby (2000), and Krueger (1999) do not study the effect of class size as a historical phenomenon: they want to inform the policy debate on class size.”
Peer Effects in Education: How Might They Work, How Big Are They and How Much Do We Know Thus Far? (2011, methodology): “Within elementary and secondary schools, many studies find modestly large effects of peer backgroundonown test scores (Hoxby (2000b),Vigdor (2006),Vigdor andNechyba (2007), Betts and Zau (2004), Boozer and Cacciola (2001), Hanushek, Kain, Markman, and Rivkin (2003)).”
Identification of binary choice models with social interactions (2007, methodology): “This is the key idea used to identify peer effects in Hoxby (2000b); here we provide a formalization and generalization of her argument.”
Peer Effects in European Primary Schools: Evidence from Pirls (2006, positive): “Our estimate is at the upper end of that range but well below the highest estimates reported in studies by Hoxby (2000) and McEwan (2003).”
Field experiments in labor economics (2010, background): “…the effects of school competition, school choice, 35 school vouchers, school accountability and the presence of relatively autonomous public schools, such as charter schools (Clark 2009, Cullen et al. 2006, Hoxby 2000, Jacob 2004, Rouse 1998, Angrist et al. 2002, Abdulkadiroglu et al. 2009).”
Nature and Nurture Effects On Children’s Outcomes: What Have We Learned From Studies of Twins And Adoptees? (2011, background): “See Hoxby and Murarka[2007], Evans and Schwab [1995], and Neal[1997].”
Estimating Teacher Effectiveness From Two-Year Changes in Students' Test Scores (2010, background): “…favor teacher quality still more if the benefits of class size reductions are smaller than the estimates of Krueger (1999) (e.g. Hanushek, 1998; Hoxby, 2000 find zero or negligible benefits of across-the-board class size reductions); or if large-scale class size reductions have the effect of…”