TY  - RPRT
A1  - Petersen, Hans-Georg
A1  - Kirchner, Markus
T1  - Education return and financing
BT  - donated affluence as consequence of tuition free study programs in Germany
N2  - The paper sheds some light on the education returns in Germany in the post war period. After describing higher education in Germany the current stand of higher education financing within the single states is presented. In six states tuition fees will be introduced in 2007/08 and discussions are going on in even some more. In the second part of the paper an empirical analysis is done using longitudinal data from the German social pension system. The analysis over the whole lifecycle renders results which proof that the higher education advantages are quite remarkable and might be a justification for more intensified financing by tuition fees. But all this has to be embedded into an encompassing strategy of tax and social policy, especially to prevent a strengthened process of social selection, which would be counterproductive for an increased and highly qualified human capital in Germany.
T3  - Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge - 55 
KW  - education return
KW  - tuition fees
KW  - tertiary education
KW  - vocational education
KW  - human capital
KW  - lifetime income
KW  - income contingent loans
Y1  - 2008
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-26969
SN  - 1864-1431
SN  - 0948-7549
ER  - 
TY  - RPRT
A1  - Amann, Erwin
A1  - Rzepka, Sylvi
T1  - The Effect of Goal-Setting Prompts in a Blended Learning Environment
BT  - Evidence from a Field Experiment
T2  - CEPA Discussion Papers
N2  - We investigate how inviting students to set task-based goals affects usage of an online learning platform and course performance. We design and implement a randomized field experiment in a large mandatory economics course with blended learning elements. The low-cost treatment induces students to use the online learning system more often, more intensively, and to begin earlier with exam preparation. Treated students perform better in the course than the control group: they are 18.8% (0.20 SD) more likely to pass the exam and earn 6.7% (0.19 SD) more points on the exam. There is no evidence that treated students spend significantly more time, rather they tend to shift to more productive learning methods. The heterogeneity analysis suggests that higher treatment effects are associated with higher levels of behavioral bias but also with poor early course behavior.
T3  - CEPA Discussion Papers - 25 
KW  - natural field experiment
KW  - blended learning
KW  - behavioral economics
KW  - goal-setting
Y1  - 2021
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-493476
SN  - 2628-653X
N1  - The trial is registered in the AEA RCT registry, RCT ID AEARCTR-28790 (https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2928-1.0).
IS  - 25
ER  -