بهبود عملکرد دانش‌آموزان دختر از طریق ارائه بازخورد عملکرد نسبی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشکده اقتصاد و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

چکیده

بهره‌وری یکی از مهمترین مولفه‌های رشد است که در زمینه‌های مختلف عوامل متعددی بر آن تاثیر می‌گذارند. یکی از زمینه‌هایی که بهره وری در آن اخیرا توجه اقتصاددانان را به خود جلب نموده است، آموزش عمومی است. نتایج آزمونهای بین‌المللی نشان از تفاوت بازدهی آموزش در کشورهای مختلف دارد. این حقیقت که امروزه بیش از 4% درآمد سرانه کشورهای عضو OECD به آموزش عمومی اختصاص می‌یابد، نشان دهنده اهمیت این بخش در اقتصاد و افزایش بهره وری در آن است. در کشور ما نیز یک میلیون معلم مشغول به آموزش بیش از 12 میلیون دانش آموز هستند. حتی درصد کوچکی بهبود بهره وری در سیستم آموزشی موجب صرفه جویی سالانه میلیاردها تومان در اقتصاد ما خواهد شد. تا کنون عموم روش‌های پیشنهاد شده برای افزایش بهره وری از طریق بهبود امکانات مثل کاهش تعداد دانش آموزان یا افزایش کیفیت معلم‌ها بوده که به شدت هزینه بر است. در این تحقیق با استفاده از ارائه اطلاعاتی راجع به عملکرد دانش آموز نسبت به هم کلاسی‌هایش، بدون هزینه اضافی برای سیستم آموزشی، به  ایجاد انگیزه در دانش آموزان جهت تلاش بیشتر و بهبود بهره وری پیشنهاد نموده و کارایی آن را با استفاده از ابزار تحقیق میدانی در سالهای 1390 و 1391 در دو مدرسه دخترانه دولتی در مقطع راهنمایی تحصیلی در شهر مشهد به بوته آزمایش گذاشته ایم. نتایج نشان از موثر بودن این مکانیسم بر بهبود عملکرد دانش آموزان دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Improving Girl students’ Productivity via the Provision of Relative Performance Feedback

نویسنده [English]

  • Mahmoud Farrokhi Kashani
Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University
چکیده [English]

Productivity in different sections is one of the important factors which affect growth rate. One of these sectors recently absorbed economists’ attention is public education. Results of international tests shows different education systems have different returns. The fact that today’s more than 4% of national income in OECD countries is spend on public education shows the importance of this section and improving productivity in that. In Iran about one million teachers are active to teach more than 12 million students. Even tiny increase in productivity can saves millions of dollar a year. So far, the major methods suggested to improve students’ productivity is via improving the facilities such as decrease the size of classes or increase the teachers’ quality. In this research we try to improve students’ performance via providing them some information about their performance comparing to their classmates which is almost costless. We run an experiment to explore the effect of our mechanism. The results show it works.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Productivity
  • Education
  • Relative Performance Feedback
1-     Azmat, G., Iriberri, N., (2010a): "The Importance of Relative performance

2-     feedback Information: Evidence from a Natural Experiment using High School

3-     Students", Journal of Public Economics, 94(7-8), 435-452.

4-     Azmat, G., Iriberri, N., (2010b): "The Provision of Relative Performance Feed-

5-     back Information: An Experimental Analysis of Performance and Happiness", Pompeu Fabra UniversityWorking Paper, Available at: http://www.econ.upf.edu/

6-     docs/papers/downloads/1216.pdf

7-     Bandura, A., (1986): "Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory", Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.

8-     Barankay, I., (2011a): "Rankings and Social Tournaments: Evidence from a Crowd-Sourcing Experiment", Mimeo, University of Pennsylvania.

9-     Belfield, C.R., Levin, H.M., (2009a): "The Economic Losses From High School

10- Drop Outs in California", California Dropout Research Project Report no. 1.

11- Belfield, C.R., Levin, H.M., (2009b): "High School Dropouts and The Economic Losses from Juvenile Crime in California", California Dropout Research Project Report no. 16.

12- Bertrand, M., Hallock, K.F., (2001): "The Gender Gap in Top Corporate Jobs. Industrial and Labor Relations Review", ILR Review, ILR School, Cornell University, vol. 55(1), 3-21.

13- Binmore, K., (1999): "Why Experiment in Economics?", The Economic Journal, 109(453), F16-F24.

14- Blanes i Vidal, J., Nossol, M., (2009): "Tournaments without Prizes: Evidence

15- from Personnel Records", LSEWorking Paper available at http://personal.lse.ac.

16- uk/blanesiv/Tournaments5-total.pdf

17- Booth, A. L., Nolen, P. J., (2009): "Choosing to Compete: How Different Are

18- Girls and Boys?", IZA Working Paper No. 4027.

19- Bretz, R.D., Milkovich, G.T., Read, W., (1992): "The Current State of Performance Appraisal Research and Practice: Concerns, Directions, and Implications", Journal of Management, 18, 312-352.

20- Cabus, S.J., De Witte, K., (2011): "Does School Time Matter? On the Impact of Compulsory Education Age on School Dropout", Economics of Education Review. 30(6), 1384-1398.

21- Castillo, M., Ferraro, P.J., Jordan, J.L., Petrie, R., (2011): "The Today and Tomorrow of Kids: Time preferences and educational outcomes of children?", Journal of Public Economics, 95(11).

22- Chak Fu Lam, C.F., DeRue, D.S., Karam, E.P., Hollenbeck, J.R., (2011): "The Impact of Feedback Frequency on Learning and Task Performance: Challenging the "More Is Better" Assumption", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 217-228.

23- Cherry, T.D., Larry, V.E., (2005): "Does Rank-Order Grading Improve Student Performance? Evidence from a Classroom Experiment", International Review of Economics Education, 4(1),9-19.

24- Clark, A.E., Oswald, A.J., (1996): "Satisfaction and Comparison Income", Journal of Public Economics. 61(3), 359-381.

25- Coley, R.J., (1995): "Dreams Deferred: High School Dropouts in the United States", Princeton: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center.

26- Coleman, J.S., (1988): "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital", American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.

27- Croson, R., Gneezy, U., (2009), "Gender Differences in Preferences", Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 1-27.

28- Delfgaauw, J., Dur, R., Sol, J., Verbeke, W., (2009), "Tournament Incentives in the Field: Gender Differences in the Workplace", IZA Working Paper No. 4395.

29- Easterlin, R.A., (1995): "Will Raising the Incomes of All Increase the Happiness of All?", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27(1), 35-47.

30- Ericsson, T., Poulsen, A., Villeval, M., (2009): "Feedback and Incentives: Experimental Evidence", Labour Economics, 16(6), 679-688.

31- Falk, A., Ichino, A., (2006): "Clean Evidence on Peer Effects", Journal of Labor Economics, 24(1), 39-57.

32- Gneezy, U., Meier, S., Rey-Biel, P., (2011): "When and Why Incentives (Don't) Work to Modify Behavior", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(4), 191210.

33- Gneezy, U., Niederle, H., Rustichini, A., (2003): "Performance in Competitive Environments: Gender Differences", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 1049-1074.

34- Gneezy, U., Rustichini, A., (2000): "Pay Enough or Don't Pay at All", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 3, 791-810.

35- Gneezy, U., Rustichini, A., (2004): "Gender and Competition at a Young Age", American Economic Review Papers and Proceeding, 94(2), 377-381.

36- Harrison G.W., List, J.A., (2004): "Field Experiments", Journal of Economic Literature, 42(4), 1009-1055.

37- Hannan, R.L., Krishnan, R., Newman, D., (2008): "The Effect of Disseminating Relative Performance Feedback in Tournaments and Individual Performance Compensation Plans", The Accounting Review, 83(4), 893-913.

38- Kluger, A.N., DeNisi, A., (1996): "The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory", Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.

39- Kosefeld, M., Neckermann, S., (2010): "Working for Nothing? Symbolic Awards and Worker Performance", IZA Working Paper No. 5040.

40- Kuhnen C.M., Tymula, A., (2009): "Rank Expectations, Feedback and Social Hierarchies", MPRAWorking Paper No.13428, Available at: http://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/13428.

41- Leuven, E., Osterbeek, H., van der Klaauw, B., (2010): "The Effect of Financial Rewards on Students' Achievement: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment", Journal of the European Economic Association December, 8(6), 12431265.

42- Lewin, K.M., Little, A.W., (2011): "Access to Education Revisited: Equity, Drop Out and Transitions to Secondary School in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa", International Journal of Educational Development, 31, 333-337.

43- Luttmer, E.F.P., (2005): "Neighbors as Negatives: Relative Earnings and Well-Being", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(3), 963-1002. Mas, A., Moretti, E., (2009): "Peers at Work", American Economic Review, 99(1), 112-145.

44- Milkovich, G.T., Newman, J.M., (1996): "Compensation", 5th Edition. Homewood. IL: Irwin.

45- Niederle, M., Vesterlund, L., (2007): "Do Women Shy Away from Competition? Do Men Compete too Much?", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1067-1101.

46- OECD (2010):"PISA 2009 at a Glance", OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264095298-en

47- Slavin, R.E., (2010): "Can Financial Incentives Enhance Educational Outcomes? Evidence from International Experiments", Educational Research Review, vol.5, 2010, p. 68-80.

48- Tran, A., Zeckhauser, R., (2009): "Rank as an Incentive. Harvard Kennedy SchoolWorking Paper", Available at:

web.hks.harvard.edu/publications/Id=375.

49- Vandegrift, D., Yavas, A., (2009): "Men, women, and competition: An experimental test of behavior", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72, 554-570.