This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by L, R. Articles by Maynard, R. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by L, R. Articles by Maynard, R. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

How Precise Are Evaluations of Employment and Training Programs

Evidence from a Field Experiment

University of Chicago

Rebecca Maynard

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

This article summarizes the results from two studies that used experimental data to evaluate nonexperimental methods of program evaluation. These studies compared the experimental estimates—of an employment and training program that used random assignment to allocate its participants into training positions—to estimates from nonexperimental procedures. Both studies indicate that the nonexperimental methods may not accurately replicate the experimental estimates, and that recently developed methods for constructing comparison groups are no more likely to yield accurate estimates of the impact of training than the more conventional econometric procedures.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. H. Greenberg and S. Morris Large-Scale Social Experimentation in Britain: What Can and Cannot be Learnt from the Employment Retention and Advancement Demonstration? Evaluation, April 1, 2005; 11(2): 223 - 242. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Grossman and J. P. Tierney The Fallibility of Comparison Groups Eval Rev, October 1, 1993; 17(5): 556 - 571. [Abstract] [PDF]