← ireadpaper · 顶刊中的公共政策研究

评估留级影响:排除限制违反的警示案例

Assessing the impact of grade retention: A cautionary tale of exclusion restriction violations
Journal of Public Economics · 2025 · [{"name": "Jordan Berne", "affiliation": ["RAND Corporation"]}, {"name": "Brian Jacob", "affiliation": ["National Bureau of Economic Research", "University of Michigan"]}, {"name": "Christina Weiland", "affiliation": ["University of Michigan"]}, {"name": "Katharine O. Strunk", "affiliation": ["University of Pennsylvania"]}]

中文摘要

在美国,强制阅读困难学生留级的州法律十分普遍,而在许多国家,中学阶段的留级现象也很常见。研究者常用断点回归(RD)方法研究此类政策,利用严格的成绩分界点作为工具变量,估计留级对学生成绩的局部平均处理效应(LATE)。本文记录了此类研究内部有效性可能面临的一个威胁。通过考察密歇根州两个学生队列,我们发现,被标记为需留级会使阅读成绩提高约0.05个标准差,这是一个虽小但有意义的影响。然而,由于被标记仅使学生实际被留级的概率提高3.4个百分点,在标准假设下推算出的留级本身效应将高达难以置信的1.3个标准差。调查证据表明,被标记学生即使未被留级,也会获得更为密集的阅读支持,这违反了排除限制。此外,我们在没有让任何学生留级的学区中,也估计出了类似的效应。这些结果引发了对既有留级效应估计中潜在偏误的担忧,并凸显了在分析多方面教育干预措施时,审慎考虑排除性假设的重要性。

Abstract

State laws that mandate in-grade retention for struggling readers are widespread in the U.S., and retention at the secondary school level is common in many countries. Researchers often use regression discontinuity (RD) methods to study such policies, leveraging strict performance cutoffs as an instrument to estimate the Local Average Treatment Effect (LATE) of retention on student achievement. In this paper, we document a likely threat to the internal validity of these studies. Examining two cohorts of Michigan students, we find that being flagged for retention increases reading performance by roughly 0.05 SD, a modest but meaningful impact. However, because being flagged increases the likelihood of actually being retained by only 3.4 percentage points, the implied effect of retention itself under standard assumptions would be an implausibly large 1.3 SD. Survey evidence suggests that flagged students receive more intensive reading support even if they are not retained, a violation of the exclusion restriction. Moreover, we estimate similar effects in districts that did not retain any students. These results raise concerns about potential bias in previously estimated retention effects and highlight the importance of carefully considering exclusion assumptions in analyses of multifaceted education interventions.
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →