Programs that reduce the costs of education increase student enrollment and attendance. However, there is considerable variation in the cost effectiveness of different programs.A classroom in Kenya. Photo: Aude Guerrucci | J-PAL
Summary:From 2000 to 2015, the portion of primary and secondary school age children enrolled in school worldwide rose from 83 to 91 percent and 55 to 65 percent, respectively [1]. However, pockets of low enrollment remain and millions of children who are enrolled are not attending regularly. Education requires an investment of time, money, and effort with many benefits coming far in the future. A range of programs have been evaluated which aim to reduce the financial and non-financial costs of attending school.J-PAL recently reviewed 31 randomized evaluations of programs which sought to increase student attendance by reducing costs. Lowering school fees, providing cash transfers and small incentives to parents, reducing child morbidity, and shortening distance to schools consistently increased school attendance and enrollment. These programs addressed the barriers to participating in school by reducing financial and non-financial costs. The most cost-effective programs addressed health problems (such as intestinal worms and chronic anemia) or reduced the distance to school by leveraging existing resources to create low-cost schools in communities where no school existed previously.
Supporting Evidence:Where school fees do exist, eliminating them can lead to large increases in participation. Most countries now provide free primary education, but in low-income countries, annual public secondary school fees can cost as much as one-third of an average family's yearly income. A program in Ghana offered full scholarships to academically qualified students who did not immediately enroll in secondary school. Roughly 80 percent of these students enrolled in secondary school after receiving the scholarship compared to only 20 percent enrollment in the comparison group at the beginning of the first academic year. Eight years on, the majority of the scholarship winners had completed senior high school [2]. [20]. Given the expense of CCT programs, they should primarily be viewed as social assistance programs that also increase attendance, rather than the most efficient solutions to increase school participation. Furter discussion of CCT cost-effectiveness can be found in our policy found that, in areas where anemia or worm infections are prevalent, addressing these conditions with iron pills and school-based deworming increased school attendance.The most cost-effective programs to increase student participation referenced above are those that addressed child morbidity (such as intestinal worms and chronic anemia) or reduced the distance to school through the creation of lowcost schools in areas where few schools exist. Some programs may be effective at increasing schooling but may also be expensive. Therefore, where authors have provided J-PAL with cost data, we compare the cost-effectiveness of the...