Luis E. VILA*, C. Delia DÁVILA** and José-Ginés MORA***
The development of competences at Latin-American universities: A multi-level production function approach
*University of Valencia**University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria
*** Institute of Education, University of London
Ljubiana, Slovenia
24-26, September 2009
Outline
1. Introduction
2. Production of competences in H.E.
3. Proflex data
4. Modeling strategies
5. Some estimation results
6. Concluding remarks
1. Introduction
H.E. & the economy’s potential for innovation
• Individual and aggregate productivity gains, and
therefore growth and development, emerge from
using in production newly available knowledge
– Schultz (1975) ‘allocative ability’
– Lucas (2009) in (t)/t = (t)
• H.E. contributes to build innovation potential in the
economy via the supply of new H.E. graduates
1
Innovative role of graduates
• Fresh HEGs bring into the workplace (among other
forms of human capital) their capacity to innovate:
– Ability to mobilize in their jobs already-available
knowledge/resources not utilized previously
– Ability to continuously create or adapt, and use,
newly-available knowledge or resources while
developing tasks and responsibilities in their jobs
1
Competences to innovate (CTIs)
• Innovative behavior implies a sequence of activities
• Detection, acquisition, evaluation, reallocation
• Specific competences are needed to perform well in
the activities leading to productive innovation
• We will call them “competences to innovate” (CTIs)
1
Detection of opportunity
Innovative behavior and competences
E.S.Resource
reallocation
1
Idea creation or acquisition
Evaluation of new ideas
Alertness to new opportunities
Come up with new ideas, solutions
Mobilization of capacities of others
Willingness to question ideas
Activities Competences
Objective and approach
• To explore production function relationships
between the development of innovation-related
competences and the prevalence of diverse
teaching and learning modes in H.E. studies
• Production of education theoretical framework
• Model-based general approach
• Data Proflex ( 8,700 graduates from 33 Latin-
American universities in 9 countries)
1
Motivation
• Stronger emphasis in ‘the right T&L modes’ would -
ceteris paribus- increase the contribution of Higher
Education to economic growth and general
wellbeing in Latin-American countries by improving
aggregate innovation potential through a more
effective development of CTIs by graduates
1
2. Production of competences in HE
Literature: two main views of learning
• Early Childhood Development: Knowledge
acquisition as a cumulative process starting in
early childhood at the household
• Education Production Function: Cognitive
achievement as the result of applying diverse
combinations of educational inputs to students
2
Competence
development
( C )
Educational resources ( R )
Programme characteristics
Teaching & learning modes
A model for competence production
E.S.Higher
education
studies
Prior investments
Dedication, effort
Ability
Student resources ( R )
2
3. Proflex data
Table 1
Field of study (ISCED 2000). Descriptive statistics
N = 8301 records
3
PercentEducation 7,2Humanities and arts 5,2Social sciences, business and law 41,9Science 6,1Engineering, manufacturing and construction 29,0Agriculture 1,9Health and welfare 8,8Total 100,0
Questions on competences in Proflex
A. “How do you rate your own competence level?”
B. “What is the required level of competence in your current work?”
C. “What was the contribution of the programme completed to your competence development?”
• Answers to A Individual’s human capital
• Answers to B Human capital needed for job
• Answers to C ‘Value added’ by H.E. study
3
Output: Contribution of Higher Education to competence development
3
1
2
3
4
5
6Write and speak in a foreign language
Negotiate effectively
Assert your authority
Use computers and the internet
Alertness to new opportunities
Knowledge of other fields
Mobilise the capacities of others
Question own's and others' ideas
Coordinate activities
Use time efficientlyCome up with new ideas, solutions
Present products, ideas or reports
Perform well under pressure
Write reports, documents
Make your meaning clear
Mastery of own field
Rapidly acquire new knowledge
Work productively with others
Analytical thinking
HE input: Modes of teaching and learning
3
1
2
3
4
5
Internships, work placement
Multiple choice exams
Participation in research projects
Problem-based learning
Facts and practical knowledge
Oral presentations Teacher as the main source of
information
Written assignments
Group assignments
Theories and paradigms
Lectures
Table 2
Other variables in the analysis. Descriptive statistics.
3
Effort and dedicationWeekly hours spent on study 33,54 18,04
Full-Time Student 0,77It was neccesary extra work to pass the exams 3,89 0,91
Educational Family BackgroundFather with Tertiary studies 0,41Mother with Tertiary studies 0,28
Personal characteristictsAge 30,96 3,75
Female 0,55
Mean St. Dev.
4. Modeling strategies
Estimating education production functions
• Ability is unobserved Stochastic frontier models
• Competences correlated Orthogonal factors
• Subjective evaluation Relative measures
• Group effects / endogeneity Multi-level models.
– T&L modes = (Programme, X)
– Student effort = (Modes, Programme, Z, )
– Programme = (Prior achievement, Y, )
4
Variance components model (two-level)
Cij = f ( Rij , Sij ) + uj + ij
Composite error terms:
• uj : group noise N( 0, 2u ) : field, institution, country
ij : individual noise N( 0, 2 )
• Intragroup correlation = 2u / ( 2
u + 2 )
4
5. Some estimation results
Table 3 :
2-level model (individual/field) for development of CTIs
5
Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z|
Modes of teaching and learning
Lectures 0.053 0.005 0.034 0.093 0.025 0.086 0.039 0.003
Group assignments 0.019 0.334 0.058 0.014 0.037 0.403 0.210 0.000
Participation in research projects 0.126 0.000 0.080 0.000 0.055 0.007 0.097 0.000
Internships, work placements 0.010 0.523 -0.006 0.741 -0.020 0.449 0.023 0.326
Facts and practical knowledge 0.148 0.000 0.130 0.000 0.101 0.002 0.160 0.000
Theories and paradigms -0.001 0.960 0.114 0.000 0.188 0.000 0.025 0.340
Teacher as main source of information 0.014 0.418 0.001 0.980 0.000 0.992 0.009 0.288
Project and/or problem-based learning 0.179 0.000 0.169 0.000 0.143 0.000 0.148 0.000
Written assignments -0.020 0.489 -0.036 0.116 -0.017 0.402 -0.006 0.731
Oral presentations 0.122 0.002 0.139 0.000 0.165 0.000 0.144 0.000
Multiple choice exams 0.080 0.000 0.016 0.336 -0.022 0.394 0.050 0.000
Effort and dedication
Weekly hours spent on study -0.0005 0.527 0.004 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.035
Full-Time Student -0.076 0.149 -0.010 0.841 0.051 0.440 -0.108 0.019
Did extra work 0.187 0.000 0.215 0.000 0.122 0.000 0.079 0.000
Educational Family Background
Father with Tertiary studies -0.028 0.757 -0.030 0.495 -0.049 0.483 -0.106 0.061
Mother with Tertiary studies -0.043 0.610 0.100 0.034 0.103 0.009 0.068 0.415
Personal characteristics
Age -0.015 0.014 -0.005 0.379 0.007 0.328 -0.013 0.081
Female 0.012 0.772 -0.066 0.106 -0.053 0.355 0.014 0.698Constant 1.879 0.000 1.951 0.000 1.671 0.000 1.869 0.000
N level 1 (individuals)
N level 2 (field of study)
Intragroup correlation Rho
Ability to mobilize the capacities of others
7
5248
2.6%
7 7 7
3.2% 1.8% 0.5%
Alertness to new opportunities
Ability to come up with new ideas and
solutions
Willingness to question your own and
other's ideas
5259 5243 5249
Table 4:
3-level model (individual/institution/country) for development of CTIs5
Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z|
Modes of teaching and learning
Lectures 0.023 0.465 0.022 0.267 0.037 0.090 0.015 0.501
Group assignments 0.044 0.036 0.064 0.006 0.040 0.111 0.228 0.000
Participation in research projects 0.120 0.001 0.086 0.000 0.079 0.000 0.099 0.000
Internships, work placements 0.047 0.121 0.010 0.555 -0.010 0.609 0.057 0.002
Facts and practical knowledge 0.139 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.091 0.000 0.143 0.000
Theories and paradigms 0.013 0.614 0.107 0.000 0.173 0.000 0.039 0.106
Teacher as main source of information -0.012 0.767 -0.014 0.520 -0.016 0.478 -0.021 0.368
Project and/or problem-based learning 0.160 0.000 0.168 0.000 0.136 0.000 0.136 0.000
Written assignments 0.005 0.929 -0.032 0.152 0.008 0.751 0.028 0.247
Oral presentations 0.063 0.026 0.082 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.093 0.000
Multiple choice exams 0.048 0.017 0.018 0.280 -0.031 0.081 0.020 0.249
Effort and dedication
Weekly hours spent on study -0.001 0.655 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.799 0.000 0.751
Full-Time Student -0.060 0.191 0.004 0.940 0.018 0.721 -0.117 0.021
Did extra work 0.181 0.000 0.238 0.000 0.121 0.000 0.073 0.003
Educational Family Background
Father with Tertiary studies -0.048 0.087 -0.044 0.305 -0.042 0.387 -0.124 0.008
Mother with Tertiary studies -0.079 0.178 0.061 0.182 0.053 0.279 0.045 0.366
Personal characteristics
Age -0.002 0.769 0.008 0.142 0.014 0.034 -0.002 0.740
Female 0.046 0.407 -0.049 0.209 -0.023 0.570 0.054 0.193Constant 1.823 0.000 1.181 0.000 1.798 0.000 1.514 0.000
N level 1 (individuals)
N level 2 (institutions)
N level 3 (countries)
Intragroup correlation Rho (institution, country)Intragroup correlation Rho (country)
335288
9
9.3% 18.5% 11.6% 5.8%
7.3% 16.8% 10.1% 3.3%
5284 5268 5274
Alertness to new opportunities
Ability to come up with new ideas and
solutions
Willingness to question your own and
other's ideas
33 33 33
9 9 9
Ability to mobilize the capacities of others
6. Concluding remarks
Summary of main results
• Acquisition of CTIs in H.E. appears to depend on the prevalence of some pro-active T&L modes
• Each CTI is more efficiently developed through a specific combination of T&L modes
• Most prevalent modes in Latin-American H.E. contribute little, if any, to develop CTIs specifically
• Field of study, institution attended and country are crucial to development of CTI’s
6
Problems remaining / Further research
• No longitudinal information on decision rules of
– Students: programme choice, behavior
– Institutions: study design, admission
– Policy makers: regulation and funding
• Costs of teaching & learning modes unknown
• Other sources of CTIs beside higher education
• Actual CTIs utilization not yet addressed
6
The development of competences at
Latin-American universities: A multi-level
production function approach
Thank you very much for your attention