跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确使用潜在结果与倾向得分进行政策效应识别,并允许同伴处理影响结果,直接涉及因果推断和干扰。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Guanglei Hong

幼儿园留级政策的评估

研究问题
儿童自身留级、学校留级政策与同伴处理如何共同影响学习结果,忽略这些相互影响是否会遗漏政策效应?
方法与思路
作者允许学校与同伴处理影响潜在结果,以标量函数汇总同伴处理,并用多层倾向得分分层近似两阶段实验。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称高、低留级率学校中留级儿童平均学习较少;对低风险学生未检出同伴处理效应,并定义了跨政策效应。
阅读关注点
核对同伴处理汇总函数、识别假设与分层平衡,以及学校和学生两阶段比较如何处理混杂与不确定性。
阅读边界
仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明;这是观察资料对实验的近似,未检出同伴效应不能解释为效应不存在。

原文摘要

This article considers the policy of retaining low-achieving children in kindergarten rather than promoting them to first grade. Under the stable unit treatment value assumption (SUTVA) as articulated by Rubin, each child at risk of retention has two potential outcomes: Y(1) if retained and Y(0) if promoted. But SUTVA is questionable, because a child's potential outcomes will plausibly depend on which school that child attends and also on treatment assignments of other children. We develop a causal model that allows school assignment and peer treatments to affect potential outcomes. We impose an identifying assumption that peer effects can be summarized through a scalar function of the vector of treatment assignments in a school. Using a large, nationally representative sample, we then estimate (1) the effect of being retained in kindergarten rather than being promoted to the first grade in schools having a low retention rate, (2) the retention effect in schools having a high retention rate, and (3) the effect of being promoted in a low-retention school as compared to being promoted in a high-retention school. This third effect is not definable under SUTVA. We use multilevel propensity score stratification to approximate a two-stage experiment. At the first stage, intact schools are blocked on covariates and then, within blocks, randomly assigned to a policy of retaining comparatively more or fewer children in kindergarten. At the second stage, “at-risk” students within schools are blocked on covariates and then assigned at random to be retained. We find evidence that retainees learned less on average than did similar children who were promoted, a result found in both high-retention and low-retention schools. We do not detect a peer treatment effect on low-risk students.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文