L6 Slides

Andreas Flache

Manu Muñoz-Herrera

Applying theories to practical problems

Lecture Week 6 - Application of TheoriesBlock A 2012/2013

http://manumunozh.wix.com/apptheories



An example of a policy problemSchool segregation

Think for a moment: Are schools in the Netherlands ethnically segregated?

How was your school?

What is your perception about segregation. Is it a problem?

Is it a political problem? Should there be policies about it?

Should the government be involved in addressing this issue?

How do you think this could be done?

An example:

http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2011/02/school_segregation_no_longer_a.php





Aims of the lecture

In this lecture we will:

Learn how to use the application of theories to inform policy advice. This means

Learn what are criteria for a good theoretical basis for developing policy advice

Learn what are the steps in coming from theory to advice

Learn what are problems of applying theories to real life problems (transversal in the lecture)

Part 1: Application of theories & policy advice

Let’s answer this questions

How can theory help in developing good advice?

Which questions can you not answer with theory alone?

Let’s answer this questions

How can theory help in developing good advice? Explanation of social phenomena Predictions of the expected effects of policy

Which questions can you not answer with theory alone? Is there enough political support for a policy? Is the policy implemented appropriately? Is the goal of the policy clearly defined? Is the goal of the policy socially desirable?

Example 1:School segregation in the US

Example: School segregation in the US

James S. Coleman1926-1995

In the 1960’s, James Coleman and other scholars were commissioned by the US Department of Education to write a report on educational equality in the US

Main findings: School funding has little impact on school achievement of students Instead, background and socioeconomic status of students have

strong effects Racial mixing increases school achievement of black students of

lower status


The big question is then:

How can we increase racial equality?

The context of the report:

The theory: The study suggests that racial mixing increases school achievements of black students and, thus, increases racial equality

The problem: There was a high degree of school segregation. Schools were either black or white and few mixed schools.

The advice: To desegregate schools, busing was introduced. In this way, more black students went to schools in their school district which used to be predominantly white.


Now the question is:

Is busing a solution?

Steps in the theoretical analysis of policy advice

Why do we think a given policy has certain expected effect?


Why do we think a given policy has certain expected effect? Because we have a theory (law-like statement) that predicts that if given the

policy is applied (condition), the expected effect will be obtained (prediction, or, explanandum).

Why do we have this theory and think it is a good theory?


Why do we think a given policy has certain expected effect? Because we have a theory (law-like statement) that predicts that given the policy

is applied (condition), the expected effect will be obtained (prediction, or, explanandum).

Why do we have this theory and think it is a good theory? Because the theory can explain phenomena related to the policy problem we

want to address (adequacy conditions) Here: why is there school segregation (in the US in the 1960’s)? Implicit theory:


Why do we think a policy has an expected effect? Because we have a theory (law-like statement) that predicts that given the policy



want to address (adequacy conditions) Here: why is there school segregation (in the US in the 1960’s)? Implicit theory: Because pupils attend school in their neighborhood and

neighborhoods are segregated.

If this is the explanation, what would it imply for the policy?


Why do we think a policy has an expected effect? Because we have a theory (law-like statement) that predicts that given the policy



want to address (adequacy conditions) Here: why is there school segregation (in the US in the 1960’s)? Implicit theory: Because pupils attend school in their neighborhood and

neighborhoods are segregated.

If this is the explanation, what would it imply for the policy? If we make pupils attend schools outside of their neighborhood with larger

proportion of out-group, we increase interethnic contact at schools Busing

This is the argument somewhat simplified

------------------------------------------Busing increases racial equality

Try to build the syllogism that concludes with the advice above

This is the argument somewhat simplified

Minority-majority contact increases racial equality Busing increases minority-majority contact

----------------------------------------------------------------------------Busing increases racial equality

Result of empirical research:since advice was only for the US, empirical results concerning the US were treated as a law

Assumptionfollowing from our segregation theoryAdvice

Is the argument valid? An even more simplified version

In schools with minority-majority contact (C) there is racial equality (E)Schools in districts with busing (B) have minority-majority contact (C)----------------------------------------------------------------------------In schools with busing (B), there is racial equality (E)

Is the argument valid?

Is the argument valid? An even more simplified version

In schools with minority-majority contact (C) there is racial equality (E)Schools in districts with busing (B) have minority-majority contact (C)----------------------------------------------------------------------------In schools with busing (B), there is racial equality (E)

All C* is EAll B* is C--------------All B is E*

C

B E

Did segregation policies worked out?

(1) Districts without segregation policies (2) Districts where fewer than 50% of students were affected (3) Districts where more than 50% of students were affected (4) Overall

Data from Logan et al. 2008

1

2

3

4

Did segregation policies worked out?

1

2

3

4

There is school desegregation also when there is no intervention Trend appears to be equally strong for regions with many students

who were affected by the intervention Hence, it is questionable whether desegregation policies had an effect

What might have gone wrong?

Busing was used in mixed school districts where the school composition did not match the racial composition of the district

Coleman (1975) himself argued that in large cities desegregation may motivate whites to move to white school districts where there are no desegregation programs (because school composition matches composition of district)

This tendency is called white flight

Results from Coleman’s study:


Results from Coleman’s study:


Note that the white-flight argument is debated. However, a recent overview concluded that the preponderance of evidence now suggests that school desegregation is a push factor for whites (Logan et al. 2008).

White flight suggests a decrease in school segregation within school districts but simultaneously an increase in segregation between districts

This may have consequences for the effect of busing

This was the argument

Minority-majority contact increases racial equality Busing increases minority-majority contact

----------------------------------------------------------------------------Busing increases racial equality

This may be problematic:It may be true that busing leads to more contact. However, the argument has a hidden ceteris paribus assumption.

The problem with ceteris paribus assumptions

The busing advice implicitly presumes that all other things remain equal It is assumed that busing does not have any other consequences that might

lead to less contact between the groups It also presumes that contact may not be influenced by other processes

Thus, it is possible that An advice is valid in the sense that all premises are true, And, that they imply the expected effects of the policy

Nevertheless, the policy may not have the expected effects

This happens when the implicit ceteris paribus assumption is wrong

Thus, when we develop an advice: Consider whether the policy has unintended effects which might intervene

The problem with ceteris paribus assumptions

Note that many explanations are based on ceteris paribus assumptions as well

However, when we test explanations We can (at least) statistically control for effects of other variables Thus, this is not a serious problem for explanations.

Empirical support for white flight

This measures to which degree school composition maps composition of districts

This measures the degree to which districts of a metropolitan area have similar racial composition

+ Segregation decreased even without interventions

+ No changes without intervention+ but slightly stronger increase in segregation between districts with interventions

Example school segregation in the US: Summary

The aim was to increase educational equality in the US by decreasing school segregation

Busing was an adequate policy in the sense that there was a valid argument that predicted it would have the desired effects

However, the underlying theory made implicit ceteris paribus assumptions. An additional process (white flights) led to increased segregation between school districts. This hampered the effects of busing.

What is more, some scholars argue that busing might have even triggered/increased white flights

Example school segregation in the US: Summary

Thus, when you develop policy advices, be aware of the fact that theories make implicit ceteris paribus assumptions

Try to predict what might go wrong and how likely this might happen and consider this when you give an advice

If there is a trade-off, then try to find an optimal strategy (i.e., busing only in smaller towns, where people hardly move)

Coleman’s conclusion

If a policy does not actively employ the interest of those on whom it has an impact, it will find those interests actively employed in directions that defeat its goals

In designing policy it is useful to take an individualistic perspective: start from the goals of the individuals and assume that they try to achieve

their goals under the given policy (not the goals of the policy makers).

Part 2: Steps to come from theories to policy advice

Steps

Step 1: Find related phenomena to explain

Step 2: Develop a valid explanation

Step 3: Policy implications

Example 2:School segregation in the Netherlands

Segregation between primary schools in NL

Half of all primary schools in the 4 biggest cities are black schools

>50% students with non-western cultural background

Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of school choice

Strong residential segregation in big cities

Policy in NL until recently: encourage mixing

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91

.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00

% minority surrounding neighborhood

proportion minority at

school

Residential segregation and school segregation in 2001

Data from Statistics Netherlands and Ministry of Education (1391 primary schools in 31 biggest cities)

How to find a suitable individualistic theory?

Explanandum:

The larger the proportion of non-western immigrants in neighborhood, the larger the proportion of non-western immigrant pupils at school in this neighborhood


Main elements of an individualistic explanation (i.e., Coleman, Lindenberg)

IndependentMacro-variable

DependentMacro-variable

Input individual choice: Choice options Information Costs and benefits...

Output: Individual choice

Explanandum: Macro relationship

Theory of action

Bridge assumptions

Transformation assumptions


First theory: distance minimization (1)

Independent macro-variable: % immigrants in the local area (neighborhood or city)

Dependent macro-variable % immigrants in the schools of the local area

Mechanism Individual parents select (boundedly) rationally from available schools Parents want to minimize distance to school Parents are indifferent with regard to ethnic composition of school (This is an

assumption which might be wrong)

Step 2: Develop a valid explanation


but actually, “... about 70% of the parents had not considered any schools outside their local

area (postcode district)” p. 461, Karsten et al. 2003. School Choice and Ethnic Segregation. Educational Policy 17.

Based on representative survey of parents in NL (N=931)

Step 2: Develop a valid explanation (continuation)

Elaboration of an individualistic explanation (graphically)

School location

% minority school% minority in proximity school

Costs of choosing this school for parents

Likelihood parents choose this school

++

-

Macro

Micro

Likelihood these parents are minority

transformation

Reconstruction as valid individualistic explanation

The smaller the distance to a school, the larger the expected utility from selecting this school for parents (law)

The higher the perceived utility of a course of action, the more likely an individual will choose this action (theory of action)

Parents choose between school-in-own-neighborhoods and school-in-another-neighborhood

Reconstruction as valid individualistic explanation

The smaller the distance to a school, the larger the expected utility from selecting this school for parents (law)


Parents choose between school-in-own-neighborhoods and school-in-another-neighborhood

The smaller the distance to a school, the more likely parents choose this school

Reconstruction as valid individualistic explanation (2)

The smaller the distance to a school, the more likely parents choose this school (ceteris paribus)

In big cities in the Netherlands, around year 2000, the distance to a school in the own neighborhood is shorter than to schools in another neighborhood (Condition)



In big cities in the Netherlands, around year 2000, the distance to a school in the own neighborhood is shorter than to schools in another neighborhood (Condition)

In big cities in the Netherlands, around year 2000, parents choose more likely schools within their own neighborhood than outside their own neighborhood.



The larger the proportion of minority members in school, the more likely individual parents are minority members (bridge)



The larger the proportion of minority members in school, the more likely individual parents are minority members (bridge)

In big cities in the Netherlands, around year 2000, the larger the proportion of minority members in a neighborhood, the more likely parents who choose for a school in that neighborhood are minority members.



The more likely the parents who choose for a school are minority members, the larger the proportion of minority members at that school (Transformation)



The more likely the parents who choose for a school are minority members, the larger the proportion of minority members at that school (Transformation)

In big cities in the Netherlands, around year 2000, the larger the proportion of minority members in a neighborhood, the larger the proportion of minority members at that school

This is the explanandum


The theory can explain the association between neighborhood composition and school composition.

What if the theory were correct? Which policies would then reduce school segregation?

Step 3: Policy implications (Theory of distance minimization)


The theory can explain the association between neighborhood composition and school composition.

What if the theory were correct? Which policies would then reduce school segregation?

Residential desegregation policy (i.e., create mixed neighborhoods)

Choose locations of schools in between black and white neighborhoods.

Step 3: Policy implications (Theory of distance minimization)

A valid simplified argument for residential desegregation policy

Neighborhoods with residential desegregation policies are on average more heterogeneous than other neighborhoods (all D are H)

If a neighborhood is more heterogeneous, then schools in this neighborhood are also more heterogeneous (all H is Sh)

Notice that this latter statement follows from our theory of distance minimization for NL around 2000

Thus: In neighborhoods to which residential desegregation policies are applied, schools are on average more heterogeneous than in other neighborhoods.

Would this work? Zoned access rule - the case of Tiel

To realize the goal of desegregation, the school boards in Tiel formed and implemented their natural recruitment zones scheme. In each zone there is a Catholic, Protestant and a public school. So, according to the boards and the BCP, parents would have sufficient opportunities to choose a school in relation to their freedom of education. Children should go to a school in the zone they live in. This means that schools would not be allowed to admit children from other zones.

Dorothee Peters, George Muskens, 2011. Ethnic School Segregation Exists: Possibilities for Counteracting Measures. The Open Education Journal. 4, 158-163.

An extended theory: but why?

Differences between school composition and neighborhood composition in NL (in 2002).

Too black = % minority > 1.5* neighborhoodToo white = % minority < 0.5* neighborhood

Number schools Percentagetoo black 694 50%representative 514 37%too white 183 13%Total 1391 100%

How can we explain this with distance minimization? Not with our version of the theory. So, let’s try something else.

Would this work? Zoned access rule - the case of Tiel

Of those native Dutch parents, 60.3% considered the non white schools on their locality to be completely unsuitable; fewer ethnic minority parents were of this opinion; but still 45.3% of them did think this. Considerably more than the number of ethnic minority parents who considered the representative and White schools to be completely unsuitable: about 25%.

pg. 464, Karsten et al. 2003. School Choice and Ethnic Segregation. Educational Policy 17Based on representative survey of parents in NL (N=931)

The theory of white flight

We keep this from the theory of distance minimization

The smaller the distance to a school, the larger the expected utility from selecting this school for parents (ceteris paribus)


Parents choose between school-in-own-neighborhoods and school-in-another-neighborhood (Definition)


Our extension

The smaller the distance to a school, the larger the expected utility from selecting this school for parents (ceteris paribus)

The larger the expected proportion of minority students, the lower is for native parents the expected utility of selecting the school (ceteris paribus)

This implies that native parents select more likely schools with larger distance from their own neighborhood if they live in a black neighborhood (what is the implicit assumption here?)

This implies that in neighborhoods with a large proportion of minority, schools are too black because native parents flee to other schools (outside the neighborhood)

Policy implications Zoned access rule

Without zoned access rule, native parents in black neighborhoods choose schools outside their neighborhood, such that school becomes too black (all N that are without zoned access=za and that are black are also neighborhoods with too black schools=Bs)

With zoned access rule, all parents choose schools in their neighborhoods=Sn (All N that are za are Sn)

No neighborhood where parents choose schools within their neighborhood has too black schools (No Sn is Bs)

Thus: if no za and black neighborhood, then Bs if za then no Bs

How developing deeper explanations may help to develop better policies

An explanation A is deeper than an explanation B, if A implies conditions under which the phenomenon explained by B is also predicted to occur by A and other conditions under A predict that the phenomenon should not occur

Deeper explanations can give more insight into the underlying process

Example:

The larger the expected proportion of minority students, the lower is for native parents the expected utility of selecting this school (ceteris paribus)

Why should this be the case?

Many studies show:

Most parents are mainly concerned about the quality of the school

Many native parents think that black schools have poorer quality

This explains why many native parents do not want their children to attend a black school

In Amsterdam, two [native Dutch] parents started [an] initiative in 2002 by registering their children at a primary school in their neighborhood (at that moment a so called black school, situated in a mixed neighborhood) and proposed actions towards mixing the school population. The parents distributed leaflets on the initiative and together with the school they organized an informative meeting for parents in the neighborhood. The school arranged attractive changes of the school curriculum and invested in the physical appearance and the maintenance of the school building. At strategically chosen occasions, the school arranged publicity and presented itself as a school of interest. This is a process continuing until today. Three years after the start of the activities, the lowest grades showed a mixed population of pupils (50-50 percent). Nowadays, all grades show comparative percentages.

Dorothee Peters, George Muskens, 2011. Ethnic School Segregation Exists: Possibilities for Counteracting Measures. The Open Education Journal. 4, 158-163.

Why does the parents’ initiative work?

If parents believe that a school is a good school, they send their child to that school

This is a good school This is a school in a black neighborhood Without further information, most native parents thing that schools in black

neighborhoods are bad schools Thus: most native parents believe this school is a bad school Thus: most native parents do not send their child to this school The parent initiative makes the native parents aware that the school is actually a

good school

Thus: if there is a parent initiative AND a school in a black neighborhood is good THEN native parents send their child to this school. If there is not parent initiative they don’t.

Summary (1)

What are criteria for a good theoretical basis for developing policy advice?

The most important criterion is that you have a valid reasoning. That is: you have an adequate explanation (according to the conditions of adequacy) of how the expected effects of the proposed policy logically follow from an explicitly formulated theory (law + condition).

Summary (2)

Learn what are the steps in coming from theory to advice


Step 2: Develop valid explanations for these phenomena

Step 3: Derive from the theory that you use to explain the phenomena, why the proposed policy advice should have the proposed effects (valid reasoning)

Summary (3)

Learn what are the problems of applying theories to real life problems

The most important problem is that you overlook implicit ceteris paribus assumptions in your reasoning that turn out to not be true

One way to address this problem is that you try to develop deeper explanations that specify under what conditions certain premises apply and when they do not apply.

Tutorial - Assignment in Nestor

✤ You were asked in the previous assignment to come up with an example of a social phenomena to be analyzed.

✤ Most of you came up with one. In the tutorial we will practice upon your individual examples, how to:

✤ Explain, predict and give policy advice

Technology

L6 Slides