Can we measure desired schooling?

315 M. Binder Economics of Education Review 18 1999 311–325 Table 1 Summary statistics for respondents and non-respondents standard deviation in parentheses Non- Included in determinants Respondents respondents regressions? All Not visited Visited Yes No Sample size 315 221 94 26 285 56 Children’s desired schooling 11.5 11.9 10.7 12.6 11.6 11.9 3.7 3.6 3.7 4.2 3.6 4.2 Parent’s desired schooling 12.1 12.6 11.1 NA 12.0 13.1 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.4 Household characteristics Household weekly spending a 333 379 226 NA 325 590 401 465 117 386 590 Nuclear family 0.69 0.70 0.68 0.73 0.71 0.61 Both parents present 0.84 0.84 0.83 0.81 0.86 0.71 Number of siblings 5.2 5.0 5.8 5.1 5.2 5.2 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.7 Own home 0.75 0.71 0.82 NA 0.75 0.69 Own car 0.31 0.37 0.15 NA 0.31 0.34 Parent characteristics Parents’ age 39.4 39.0 40.4 NA 39.3 41.4 7.1 6.6 7.9 7.0 8.6 Parents’ schooling 5.1 5.7 3.8 NA 5.1 5.5 3.7 3.9 2.6 3.6 4.6 Both parents native 0.13 0.17 0.03 NA 0.13 Father’s salary a 382 421 301 NA 385 362 612 727 234 627 352 Mother’s salary a 162 198 111 NA 161 166 178 218 72 183 105 Parents willing to spend on school out of extra 0.91 0.92 0.89 NA 0.91 0.89 income Parents willing to borrow to finance schooling 0.81 0.81 0.82 NA 0.81 0.77 Child characteristics Age 11.4 11.3 11.8 11.7 11.5 11.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.5 1.5 Male 0.53 0.54 0.52 0.46 0.53 0.52 Native 0.67 0.73 0.52 0.69 0.67 0.67 All statistics between 0 and 1 indicate sample proportions for this characteristic. a In nuevos pesos, which exchanged at about three per US at the time of the survey in 1993. low-income Guadalajara, Arandas and Tijuana samples are the same. But in years of desired schooling, the Tiju- ana children break ranks with the low- and low–middle- income Guadalajara children. As indicated in Table 2, the Tijuana children are very aspiring; desired schooling levels match or exceed those of middle-income Guadala- jara children. A x 2 test rejects the null hypothesis that the Tijuana samples have the same desired schooling dis- tribution as the other low-income samples. 4. Can we measure desired schooling? According to the investment framework, students may attain less than their desired schooling due to liquidity constraints. By asking how much schooling children and parents desire, I sought to capture what their schooling investments would be, absent liquidity constraints. In this section I describe the questions used to solicit infor- mation on desired schooling and explore the extent to which this information may be biased by over-reporting. I find that reported desired schooling follows ex ante notions of desired schooling. In particular, it displays considerable variation in the sample, and is positively associated with predicted eventual schooling attainment. The children in my study were interviewed at school—sometimes even in the principal’s office—and questionnaires to parents included a cover letter of sup- port from the school director. This arrangement alone may have encouraged some parents and children to over- 316 M. Binder Economics of Education Review 18 1999 311–325 Fig. 2. Frequency distribution of Mexican urban households by income level: national and schools samples. Sources: Inegi 1992b and author’s schools survey. report schooling desires in an effort to provide what might have been perceived as the socially desirable answer. In addition, survey designers are familiar with the tendency of survey participants to represent them- selves in a positive light, whatever the institutional back- ing of the survey 9 . Students and parents responded to a series of questions about their desired schooling levels. They were first asked outright the school level and grade they wanted to achieve. They were later asked what they wanted to do upon finishing their studies. The vast majority all but four who planned to work in the labor force were asked their occupational preference, and what they thought the required schooling to get a job in this occupation would be. To mitigate against the tendency to over-report, desired schooling used in the analyses to follow is the lower of the outright and occupation responses. The idea is that the more specific occupational response introduces 9 Sudman and Bradburn 1982, for example, cite consider- able over-reporting of having a public library card, in a study where responses were verified in library records. a “reality check” on children’s and parents’ true desired schooling. Twenty-two per cent of the children and 17 of the parents were ascribed their occupation responses. These children and parents also reported lower house- hold spending and parent schooling levels. The mean of the constructed desired schooling measure was lower and the standard deviation higher than the outright desired schooling response 10 . Participants were also asked if they thought their desired schooling levels were likely to be realized and what potential obstacles they expected to encounter. Close to one-half of the children and about two-thirds of parents expected financial difficulties in achieving desired schooling levels. The data in Table 1 show that there is considerable variation in reports of desired schooling. For the sample as a whole, mean desired schooling of children is 11.5 10 The means and standard deviations for children’s con- structed and outright reports of desired schooling were 11.63.7 and 12.53.4 years, respectively. For parents the figures were 12.13.6 and 12.83.4, respectively. 317 M. Binder Economics of Education Review 18 1999 311–325 Table 2 Summary statistics by school standard deviations in parentheses City Guadalajara Arandas Tijuana School ID 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 Income level Low Low Low Low–mid Middle High Low Low Low Special features Night Private school school Studentsclass a 43.2 49.3 45.3 39.1 35.0 24.8 37.6 40.5 34.3 Students surveyed b 37 40 38 36 37 31 43 41 38 Children’s characteristics Age 11.5 11.6 13.9 11.1 10.7 11.1 11.5 10.8 10.8 1.1 1.3 2.1 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.2 1.1 1.0 Per cent native 91.7 74.4 73.7 72.2 91.9 45.2 83.7 31.7 34.2 Desired schooling children 9.8 9.7 8.6 11.4 13.6 15.3 10.0 13.8 13.0 3.4 3.3 3.0 3.4 2.7 1.8 3.0 3.1 3.2 Per cent working c 35.1 35.0 69.4 25.0 19.4 12.9 44.2 26.8 23.7 Parent and household characteristics Weekly household spending 204 188 219 339 350 1488 204 275 286 62 86 106 289 219 1187 93 110 137 Mothers’ schooling 3.9 2.9 2.7 5.6 8.0 12.2 3.2 6.0 5.2 3.1 1.7 2.3 4.0 3.8 2.9 2.7 2.9 3.3 Desired schooling parents 10.3 10.2 10.7 12.2 14.5 16 10.8 14.0 12.7 3.3 3.3 3.6 3.6 2.7 3.7 2.7 3.2 Households with benefits d 18.9 25.0 27.7 24.2 39.4 42.1 14.6 45.0 39.5 Census-tract population characteristics proportions Nine years or more schooling 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.54 0.49 0.74 0.23 0.32 0.32 Earning 2 minimum 0.70 0.70 0.69 0.45 0.55 0.35 0.69 0.53 0.53 salaries Children 6–14 in school 0.85 0.85 0.87 0.90 0.93 0.96 0.86 0.77 0.78 a This is an average for all classes in the school. b In the private school, children are a sample from two classes. In all other schools, all children in one fifth-grade class were inter- viewed. c Or actively seeking work. d Benefits received through employment of either or both parents. years, with a standard deviation of 3.7 years. For parents, the mean and standard deviation are 12.1 years and 3.6 years, respectively. In Table 2, reports of desired school- ing vary considerably among the sampled schools, with means of 15 and 16 years for children and parents, respectively, in the private school, compared with 10 and 11 years in Arandas. This is particularly reassuring given that parents chose a response from a list of possible attainments that culminated at the university level 11 . From the framework set out in Section 2, schooling attainment should be positively associated with desired schooling and negatively associated with measures of liquidity constraints. Analysis of the available data sug- gests that this is the case. Since the sample children are 11 Reported desired schooling levels were translated into years as follows: primary school 5 6 years; middle school 5 9 years; high school 5 12 years; university 5 16 years. still in school, their eventual schooling attainment is not known. However, the survey also reported the age, sex and schooling attainment for siblings, many of whom have completed their schooling 12 . A Tobit analysis can use information from both the completed schooling of older siblings and the right-censored schooling of sample children and siblings still in school to assess the determi- nants of eventual schooling attainment. Table 3 presents the results of a Tobit that models schooling attainment as a function of desired schooling, income and wealth measures and family background traits. Estimates of the effect of desired schooling are likely to be noisy, since the model implicitly ascribes the desired schooling of parents for the sample child to all their other children, 12 Ninety-six per cent of the surveyed children have siblings and 41 of all siblings had completed their schooling at the time of the survey. 318 M. Binder Economics of Education Review 18 1999 311–325 Table 3 Models of expected schooling using current attainment of all siblings in a Tobit model a standard errors in parentheses Dependent variable Current attained schooling for all siblings Tobit Desired schooling of: Children Parents Desired schooling of parent or child 0.040 0.140 0.028 0.028 Log of household spending 0.536 0.317 0.181 0.181 No response for household spending 0.737 1.058 0.328 0.345 Parent schooling 0.121 0.097 0.038 0.038 Home-owners without legal title 2 0.731 2 0.586 0.234 0.225 Siblings 2 0.342 2 0.340 0.042 0.042 Nuclear 0.941 0.821 0.194 0.193 Log likelihood 2 1441 2 1399 N 1531 1509 Average gap standard deviation 4.24.3 4.94.0 a Models also include dummy variables for renters and those living in rent-free arrangements with relatives or others, so that coefficients for home-owners without legal title are relative to home-owners with legal title. Models also control for age, age-squared and gender. Significant at the 5 level. Significant at the 10 level. Significant at the 20 level. and, worse, the sample child’s desired schooling for him- or her self to his or her siblings. Nevertheless, parents’ desired schooling is a significant and positive predictor of schooling attainment 13 ; children’s desired schooling is a positive but weak predictor. Likely measures of bind- ing liquidity constraints are negatively associated with schooling attainment. Spending a proxy for permanent income enters the model positively and significantly at the 5 and 10 confidence levels for children and par- ents, respectively. Dummy variables for homeowners without legal title–who would presumably be unable to use their property as collateral for loans—have a statisti- 13 The relationship between aspirations and attainment has been studied widely in the sociological literature. In US data, schooling “aspirations” are found to be statistically significant predictors of eventual educational attainment Portes Wilson, 1976; Thomas, 1980; Sewell, Hauser Wolf, 1980. Jamison and Lockheed 1987, in a rare study that considers the effect of desired schooling and attitudes on schooling in a developing country, find that parents’ desired schooling has a significant effect on their children’s school enrollment in Nepal. cally negative effect at standard confidence levels 14 . In sum, the model performs as expected, with desired schooling of parents playing a significant positive role in determining eventual schooling attainment.

5. School sample fixed effects and community effects