The choice between fixed and random effects models: some considerations for educational research
Paul Clarke (paul.clarke@bristol.ac.uk),
Claire Crawford (claire_c@ifs.org.uk),
Fiona Steele (fiona.steele@bristol.ac.uk) and
Anna Vignoles
Additional contact information
Paul Clarke: Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, 2 Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TX.
Claire Crawford: Institute for Fiscal Studies, 7 Ridgmount Street, London, WC1E 7AE; Institute of Education, University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AL, UK.
Fiona Steele: Centre for Multilevel Modelling, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol, 2 Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TX
No 10-10, DoQSS Working Papers from Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London
Abstract:
We discuss the use of fixed and random effects models in the context of educational research and set out the assumptions behind the two modelling approaches. To illustrate the issues that should be considered when choosing between these approaches, we analyse the determinants of pupil achievement in primary school, using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We conclude that a fixed effects approach will be preferable in scenarios where the primary interest is in policy-relevant inference of the effects of individual characteristics, but the process through which pupils are selected into schools is poorly understood or the data are too limited to adjust for the effects of selection. In this context, the robustness of the fixed effects approach to the random effects assumption is attractive, and educational researchers should consider using it, even if only to assess the robustness of estimates obtained from random effects models. On the other hand, when the selection mechanism is fairly well understood and the researcher has access to rich data, the random effects model should naturally be preferred because it can produce policy-relevant estimates while allowing a wider range of research questions to be addressed. Moreover, random effects estimators of regression coefficients and shrinkage estimators of school effects are more statistically efficient than those for fixed effects.
Keywords: fixed effects; random effects; multilevel modelling; education; pupil achievement (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C52 I21 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 35 pages
Date: 2010-06-18
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ecm, nep-edu and nep-ure
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (36)
Downloads: (external link)
https://repec.ucl.ac.uk/REPEc/pdf/qsswp1010.pdf (application/pdf)
Related works:
Working Paper: The Choice between fixed and random effects models: some considerations for educational research (2010)
Working Paper: The Choice Between Fixed and Random Effects Models: Some Considerations for Educational Research (2010)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:qss:dqsswp:1010
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in DoQSS Working Papers from Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London Quantitative Social Science, Social Research Institute, 55-59 Gordon Square, London WC1H 0NU. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dr Neus Bover Fonts (n.bover-fonts@ucl.ac.uk).