@article{belfield_bowden_rodriguez_2019, title={Evaluating Regulatory Impact Assessments in Education Policy}, volume={40}, ISSN={["1557-0878"]}, DOI={10.1177/1098214018785463}, abstractNote={Benefit–cost analysis is an important part of regulatory decision-making, yet there are questions as to how often and how well it is performed. Here we examine 28 Regulatory Impact Assessments performed by the federal government on education regulations since 2006. We find many Regulatory Impact Assessments estimated costs, albeit using informal methods, but most failed to adequately report benefits. Also, most studies did not estimate net present value or clearly report methodological assumptions. In reviewing the relatively high quality studies we identified a number of discrepancies from best practice. Most importantly, few Regulatory Impact Assessments attempted a social benefit–cost analysis: Most examined “administrative burdens” from compliance with legislation. This alternative focus on administrative burdens has significant implications for economic evaluation in practice.}, number={3}, journal={AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION}, author={Belfield, Clive R. and Bowden, A. Brooks and Rodriguez, Viviana}, year={2019}, month={Sep}, pages={335–353} }
 @misc{belfield_bowden_2019, title={Using Resource and Cost Considerations to Support Educational Evaluation: Six Domains}, volume={48}, ISSN={["1935-102X"]}, DOI={10.3102/0013189X18814447}, abstractNote={ Cost, cost-effectiveness, and benefit-cost analysis are methods used by economists to evaluate public policies. Essentially, these methods rely on impact evaluations, that is, research studies of efficacy and effectiveness. However, in most research in education, these cost and impact evaluations are performed separately. This separation creates methodological deficiencies and undermines the contribution of educational research to decision making. In this article, we identify key domains of educational research evaluations that, we believe, would be enhanced if resource and cost analyses were integrated more directly. These domains relate to outcome specification, treatment contrast, implementation fidelity, the role of mediators, power of the test, and meta-analysis. For each domain, we provide a case study example of how these cost analyses can complement and augment current research practices in educational evaluation. More interaction between economists and education researchers would be beneficial for both groups. }, number={2}, journal={EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER}, author={Belfield, Clive R. and Bowden, A. Brooks}, year={2019}, month={Mar}, pages={120–127} }
 @book{teaching benefit-cost analysis: tools of the trade_2018, ISBN={["978-1-78643-531-6"]}, DOI={10.4337/9781786435323}, journal={TEACHING BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS: TOOLS OF THE TRADE}, year={2018}, pages={1–244} }
 @article{jacob_armstrong_bowden_pan_2016, title={Leveraging Volunteers: An Experimental Evaluation of a Tutoring Program for Struggling Readers}, volume={9}, ISSN={1934-5747 1934-5739}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2016.1138560}, DOI={10.1080/19345747.2016.1138560}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT This study evaluates the impacts and costs of the Reading Partners program, which uses community volunteers to provide one-on-one tutoring to struggling readers in under-resourced elementary schools. The evaluation uses an experimental design. Students were randomly assigned within 19 different Reading Partners sites to a program or control condition to answer questions about the impact of the program on student reading proficiency. A cost study, using a subsample of six of the 19 study sites, explores the resources needed to implement the Reading Partners program as described in the evaluation. Findings indicate that the Reading Partners program has a positive and statistically significant impact on all three measures of reading proficiency assessed with an effect size equal to around 0.10. The cost study findings illustrate the potential value of the Reading Partners program from the schools' perspective because the financial and other resources required by the schools to implement the program are low. Additionally, the study serves as an example of how evaluations can rigorously examine both the impacts and costs of a program to provide evidence regarding effectiveness.}, number={sup1}, journal={Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Jacob, Robin and Armstrong, Catherine and Bowden, A. Brooks and Pan, Yilin}, year={2016}, month={Feb}, pages={67–92} }
 @article{bowden_belfield_2015, title={Evaluating the Talent Search TRIO program: A Benefit-Cost Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis}, volume={6}, ISSN={2194-5888 2152-2812}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/BCA.2015.48}, DOI={10.1017/BCA.2015.48}, abstractNote={Talent Search was created to improve high school completion and college enrollment for disadvantaged students. Since the program’s inception in 1967, there has not been a valid study on its economic value. In this paper, we perform a full economic evaluation, yielding direct information on the value of Talent Search and highlighting key methodological issues relating to economic evaluations of education programs. We provide rigorous estimates of social costs using the ingredients method. Using prior estimates of impacts from Constantine et al. [(2006). Study Of The Effect of The Talent Search Program On Secondary And Postsecondary Outcomes In Florida, Indiana And Texas: Final Report From Phase II of The National Evaluation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service], we perform a cost-benefit analysis based on new estimates of shadow prices. Finally, to examine site-specific differences in impacts and costs, we undertake cost-effectiveness analysis and derive confidence intervals that illustrate key sensitivity issues. Regarding costs, we find significant resource use beyond federal funding amounts; but we also find that the present value benefits of Talent Search almost certainly exceed the present value of costs by a substantial margin. With regard to cost-effectiveness, we find significant differences across sites and extremely wide confidence intervals. We conclude with an outline of key research issues that need to be addressed to enhance future economic evaluations in educational settings with wide site-specific variation.}, number={3}, journal={Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Bowden, A. Brooks and Belfield, Clive}, year={2015}, pages={572–602} }
 @article{belfield_bowden_klapp_levin_shand_zander_2015, title={The Economic Value of Social and Emotional Learning}, volume={6}, ISSN={2194-5888 2152-2812}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/BCA.2015.55}, DOI={10.1017/BCA.2015.55}, abstractNote={There is a growing body of research emphasizing the advantages of teaching students social and emotional (SE) skills in school. Here we examine the economic value of these skills within a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) framework. Our examination has three parts. First, we describe how the current method of BCA must be expanded to adequately evaluate SE skills, and we identify important decisions analysts must make. Second, we review the evidence on the benefits of SE skills, again noting key methodological issues with respect to shadow pricing. Finally, we perform BCA of four selected social and emotional learning (SEL) interventions: 4Rs; Second Step, Life Skills Training; and Responsive Classroom. These analyses illustrate both methodological and empirical challenges in estimating net present values for these interventions. Even with these challenges, we find that the benefits of these interventions substantially outweigh the costs. We highlight promising areas of research for improving the application of BCA to SEL.}, number={3}, journal={Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Belfield, Clive and Bowden, A. Brooks and Klapp, Alli and Levin, Henry and Shand, Robert and Zander, Sabine}, year={2015}, pages={508–544} }