Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. 2 Terms of use: Documents in AbstractWe assigned two cohorts of kindergarten students, totaling more than 24,000 children, to teachers within schools with a rule that is as-good-as-random. We collected data on children at the beginning of the school year, and applied 12 tests of math, language and executive function (EF) at the end of the year. All teachers were filmed teaching for a full day, and the videos were coded using a wellknown classroom observation tool, the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (or CLASS). We find substantial classroom effects: A one-standard deviation increase in classroom quality results in 0.11, 0.11, and 0.07 standard deviation higher test scores in language, math, and EF, respectively. Teacher behaviors, as measured by the CLASS, are associated with higher test scores. Parents recognize better teachers, but do not change their behaviors appreciably to take account of differences in teacher quality.

In low- and middle-income countries (LIMCs), measuring early childhood development (ECD) with standard tests in large scale surveys and evaluations of interventions is difficult and expensive. Multi-dimensional screeners and single-domain tests (‘short tests’) are frequently used as alternatives. However, their validity in these circumstances is unknown. We examined the feasibility, reliability, and concurrent validity of three multi-dimensional screeners (Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ-3), Denver Developmental Screening Test (Denver-II), Battelle Developmental Inventory screener (BDI-2)) and two single-domain tests (MacArthur-Bates Short-Forms (SFI and SFII), WHO Motor Milestones (WHO-Motor)) in 1,311 children 6–42 months in Bogota, Colombia. The scores were compared with those on the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley-III), taken as the ‘gold standard’. The Bayley-III was given at a center by psychologists; whereas the short tests were administered in the home by interviewers, as in a survey setting. Findings indicated good internal validity of all short tests except the ASQ-3. The BDI-2 took long to administer and was expensive, while the single-domain tests were quickest and cheapest and the Denver-II and ASQ-3 were intermediate. Concurrent validity of the multi-dimensional tests’ cognitive, language, and fine motor scales with the corresponding Bayley-III scale was low below 19 months. However, it increased with age, becoming moderate-to-high over 30 months. In contrast, gross motor scales’ concurrence was high under 19 months and then decreased. Of the single-domain tests, the WHO-Motor had high validity with gross motor under 16 months, and the SFI and SFII expressive scales showed moderate correlations with language under 30 months. Overall, the Denver-II was the most feasible and valid multi-dimensional test and the ASQ-3 performed poorly under 31 months. By domain, gross motor development had the highest concurrence below 19 months, and language above. Predictive validity investigation is needed to further guide the choice of instruments for large scale studies.

Abstract1 To make this comparison, we use nationally-representative household surveys in each of the five countries, restrict the list of assets and dwelling characteristics to those that are common to both the nationally-representative survey and the survey that was the basis for our analysis of the TVIP scores, and calculate wealth indices in the nationally-representative surveys, separately for urban and rural areas. We then re-calculate a wealth index in the surveys that we use to analyze the TVIP scores, giving each of the assets and dwelling characteristics the same weight that they receive in the calculation of the first principal component in the nationallyrepresentative survey. Finally, we graph kernel densities of the distribution of wealth in both surveys (See Online Appendix Figure 1). 2 Some examples include Schady (2011), who shows that children with low levels of TVIP scores before they enter school are more likely to repeat school grades and have lower scores on tests of math and reading in primary school in Ecuador; Case and Paxson (2008), who show that low performance on the PPVT at early ages predicts wages in adulthood in the United States; and Cunha and Heckman (2007) who use the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) to show that, by age 3 years, there is a difference of approximately 1.2 standard deviations in PPVT scores between children in the top and bottom quartiles of the distribution of permanent income in the United States, and that this difference is largely unchanged until at least 14 years of age. More generally, there is a large literature that shows that vocabulary size in kindergarten and earlier predicts reading comprehension throughout school and into early adulthood (see the discussion in Powell and Diamond 2012, and the references therein). 3 These calculations give equal weight to each month of age, thereby standardizing for possible differences across samples in the age distributions of children. The t-statistics adjust for the possible correlation of errors at the level of communities or census tract in Colombia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Peru, and at the state level in Chile. 4 We thank an anonymous referee for pointing this out to us.5 In Peru, the TVIP was translated into Quechua, an indigenous language spoken primarily in rural areas of the highlands, and children were given the option of taking the test in Spanish or Quechua. Twenty-two percent of children in rural areas, but only 0.1 percent of children in urban areas, chose to take the test in Quechua. Because children in households that speak Quechua or another indigenous language may have more limited vocabularies in any given language, and because the likelihood of being a non-Spanish speaker is correlated with household wealth, we exclude children with mothers who report they speak a language other than Spanish in Peru (56 percent and 17 percent in rural and urban areas, respectively) and Ecuador (2 percent in both urban and rural areas). 6 The TVIP has been standardized by the test developers on samples ...

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Any dispute related to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the IDB's name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB's logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC-IGO license. Terms of use: Documents inFollowing a peer review process, and with previous written consent by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), a revised version of this work may also be reproduced in any academic journal, including those indexed by the American Economic Association's EconLit, provided that the IDB is credited and that the author(s) receive no income from the publication. Therefore, the restriction to receive income from such publication shall only extend to the publication's author(s). With regard to such restriction, in case of any inconsistency between the Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license and these statements, the latter shall prevail.Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions of the license.The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Inter-American Development Bank, its Board of Directors, or the countries they represent. AbstractMany poor households in developing countries are liquidity-constrained. As a result, they may under-invest in the human capital of their children. We provide new evidence on the long-term (10-year) effects of cash transfers using data from Ecuador. Our analysis is based on two separate sources of data and two identification strategies. First, we extend the results from an experiment that randomly assigned children under the age of 6 years to "early" or "late" treatment groups. Although the early treatment group received twice as much in total transfers, we find no difference between children in the two groups on performance on a large number of tests. Second, we use a regression discontinuity design exploiting the fact that a "poverty index" was used to determine eligibility for transfers. We focus on children who were just-eligible and just-ineligible for transfers when they were in late childhood, and compare their school attainment and work status 10 years later. Transfers increased secondary school completion, but the effects are small, between 1 and 2 percentage points from a counterfactu...

Research from the United States shows that gaps in early cognitive and non-cognitive ability appear early in the life cycle. Little is known about this important question for developing countries. This paper provides new evidence of sharp differences in cognitive development by socioeconomic status in early childhood for five Latin American countries. To help with comparability, we use the same measure of receptive language ability for all five countries. We find important differences in development in early childhood across countries, and steep socioeconomic gradients within every country. For the three countries where we can follow children over time, there are few substantive changes in scores once children enter school. Our results are robust to different ways of defining socioeconomic status, to different ways of standardizing outcomes, and to selective non-response on our measure of cognitive development.