Luis E. VILA*, C. Delia DÁVILA** and José-Ginés MORA***

The development of competences at Latin-American universities: A multi-level production function approach

*University of Valencia**University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

*** Institute of Education, University of London

Ljubiana, Slovenia

24-26, September 2009

Outline

1. Introduction

2. Production of competences in H.E.

3. Proflex data

4. Modeling strategies

5. Some estimation results

6. Concluding remarks

1. Introduction

H.E. & the economy’s potential for innovation

• Individual and aggregate productivity gains, and

therefore growth and development, emerge from

using in production newly available knowledge

– Schultz (1975) ‘allocative ability’

– Lucas (2009) in (t)/t = (t)

• H.E. contributes to build innovation potential in the

economy via the supply of new H.E. graduates

1

Innovative role of graduates

• Fresh HEGs bring into the workplace (among other

forms of human capital) their capacity to innovate:

– Ability to mobilize in their jobs already-available

knowledge/resources not utilized previously

– Ability to continuously create or adapt, and use,

newly-available knowledge or resources while

developing tasks and responsibilities in their jobs

1

Competences to innovate (CTIs)

• Innovative behavior implies a sequence of activities

• Detection, acquisition, evaluation, reallocation

• Specific competences are needed to perform well in

the activities leading to productive innovation

• We will call them “competences to innovate” (CTIs)

1

Detection of opportunity

Innovative behavior and competences

E.S.Resource

reallocation

1

Idea creation or acquisition

Evaluation of new ideas

Alertness to new opportunities

Come up with new ideas, solutions

Mobilization of capacities of others

Willingness to question ideas

Activities Competences

Objective and approach

• To explore production function relationships

between the development of innovation-related

competences and the prevalence of diverse

teaching and learning modes in H.E. studies

• Production of education theoretical framework

• Model-based general approach

• Data Proflex ( 8,700 graduates from 33 Latin-

American universities in 9 countries)

1

Motivation

• Stronger emphasis in ‘the right T&L modes’ would -

ceteris paribus- increase the contribution of Higher

Education to economic growth and general

wellbeing in Latin-American countries by improving

aggregate innovation potential through a more

effective development of CTIs by graduates

1

2. Production of competences in HE

Literature: two main views of learning

• Early Childhood Development: Knowledge

acquisition as a cumulative process starting in

early childhood at the household

• Education Production Function: Cognitive

achievement as the result of applying diverse

combinations of educational inputs to students

2

Competence

development

( C )

Educational resources ( R )

Programme characteristics

Teaching & learning modes

A model for competence production

E.S.Higher

education

studies

Prior investments

Dedication, effort

Ability

Student resources ( R )

2

3. Proflex data

Table 1

Field of study (ISCED 2000). Descriptive statistics

N = 8301 records

3

PercentEducation 7,2Humanities and arts 5,2Social sciences, business and law 41,9Science 6,1Engineering, manufacturing and construction 29,0Agriculture 1,9Health and welfare 8,8Total 100,0

Questions on competences in Proflex

A. “How do you rate your own competence level?”

B. “What is the required level of competence in your current work?”

C. “What was the contribution of the programme completed to your competence development?”

• Answers to A Individual’s human capital

• Answers to B Human capital needed for job

• Answers to C ‘Value added’ by H.E. study

3

Output: Contribution of Higher Education to competence development

3

1

2

3

4

5

6Write and speak in a foreign language

Negotiate effectively

Assert your authority

Use computers and the internet

Alertness to new opportunities

Knowledge of other fields

Mobilise the capacities of others

Question own's and others' ideas

Coordinate activities

Use time efficientlyCome up with new ideas, solutions

Present products, ideas or reports

Perform well under pressure

Write reports, documents

Make your meaning clear

Mastery of own field

Rapidly acquire new knowledge

Work productively with others

Analytical thinking

HE input: Modes of teaching and learning

3

1

2

3

4

5

Internships, work placement

Multiple choice exams

Participation in research projects

Problem-based learning

Facts and practical knowledge

Oral presentations Teacher as the main source of

information

Written assignments

Group assignments

Theories and paradigms

Lectures

Table 2

Other variables in the analysis. Descriptive statistics.

3

Effort and dedicationWeekly hours spent on study 33,54 18,04

Full-Time Student 0,77It was neccesary extra work to pass the exams 3,89 0,91

Educational Family BackgroundFather with Tertiary studies 0,41Mother with Tertiary studies 0,28

Personal characteristictsAge 30,96 3,75

Female 0,55

Mean St. Dev.

4. Modeling strategies

Estimating education production functions

• Ability is unobserved Stochastic frontier models

• Competences correlated Orthogonal factors

• Subjective evaluation Relative measures

• Group effects / endogeneity Multi-level models.

– T&L modes = (Programme, X)

– Student effort = (Modes, Programme, Z, )

– Programme = (Prior achievement, Y, )

4

Variance components model (two-level)

Cij = f ( Rij , Sij ) + uj + ij

Composite error terms:

• uj : group noise N( 0, 2u ) : field, institution, country

ij : individual noise N( 0, 2 )

• Intragroup correlation = 2u / ( 2

u + 2 )

4

5. Some estimation results

Table 3 :

2-level model (individual/field) for development of CTIs

5

Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z|

Modes of teaching and learning

Lectures 0.053 0.005 0.034 0.093 0.025 0.086 0.039 0.003

Group assignments 0.019 0.334 0.058 0.014 0.037 0.403 0.210 0.000

Participation in research projects 0.126 0.000 0.080 0.000 0.055 0.007 0.097 0.000

Internships, work placements 0.010 0.523 -0.006 0.741 -0.020 0.449 0.023 0.326

Facts and practical knowledge 0.148 0.000 0.130 0.000 0.101 0.002 0.160 0.000

Theories and paradigms -0.001 0.960 0.114 0.000 0.188 0.000 0.025 0.340

Teacher as main source of information 0.014 0.418 0.001 0.980 0.000 0.992 0.009 0.288

Project and/or problem-based learning 0.179 0.000 0.169 0.000 0.143 0.000 0.148 0.000

Written assignments -0.020 0.489 -0.036 0.116 -0.017 0.402 -0.006 0.731

Oral presentations 0.122 0.002 0.139 0.000 0.165 0.000 0.144 0.000

Multiple choice exams 0.080 0.000 0.016 0.336 -0.022 0.394 0.050 0.000

Effort and dedication

Weekly hours spent on study -0.0005 0.527 0.004 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.035

Full-Time Student -0.076 0.149 -0.010 0.841 0.051 0.440 -0.108 0.019

Did extra work 0.187 0.000 0.215 0.000 0.122 0.000 0.079 0.000

Educational Family Background

Father with Tertiary studies -0.028 0.757 -0.030 0.495 -0.049 0.483 -0.106 0.061

Mother with Tertiary studies -0.043 0.610 0.100 0.034 0.103 0.009 0.068 0.415

Personal characteristics

Age -0.015 0.014 -0.005 0.379 0.007 0.328 -0.013 0.081

Female 0.012 0.772 -0.066 0.106 -0.053 0.355 0.014 0.698Constant 1.879 0.000 1.951 0.000 1.671 0.000 1.869 0.000

N level 1 (individuals)

N level 2 (field of study)

Intragroup correlation Rho

Ability to mobilize the capacities of others

7

5248

2.6%

7 7 7

3.2% 1.8% 0.5%

Alertness to new opportunities

Ability to come up with new ideas and

solutions

Willingness to question your own and

other's ideas

5259 5243 5249

Table 4:

3-level model (individual/institution/country) for development of CTIs5

Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z| Coeff. P>|z|

Modes of teaching and learning

Lectures 0.023 0.465 0.022 0.267 0.037 0.090 0.015 0.501

Group assignments 0.044 0.036 0.064 0.006 0.040 0.111 0.228 0.000

Participation in research projects 0.120 0.001 0.086 0.000 0.079 0.000 0.099 0.000

Internships, work placements 0.047 0.121 0.010 0.555 -0.010 0.609 0.057 0.002

Facts and practical knowledge 0.139 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.091 0.000 0.143 0.000

Theories and paradigms 0.013 0.614 0.107 0.000 0.173 0.000 0.039 0.106

Teacher as main source of information -0.012 0.767 -0.014 0.520 -0.016 0.478 -0.021 0.368

Project and/or problem-based learning 0.160 0.000 0.168 0.000 0.136 0.000 0.136 0.000

Written assignments 0.005 0.929 -0.032 0.152 0.008 0.751 0.028 0.247

Oral presentations 0.063 0.026 0.082 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.093 0.000

Multiple choice exams 0.048 0.017 0.018 0.280 -0.031 0.081 0.020 0.249

Effort and dedication

Weekly hours spent on study -0.001 0.655 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.799 0.000 0.751

Full-Time Student -0.060 0.191 0.004 0.940 0.018 0.721 -0.117 0.021

Did extra work 0.181 0.000 0.238 0.000 0.121 0.000 0.073 0.003

Educational Family Background

Father with Tertiary studies -0.048 0.087 -0.044 0.305 -0.042 0.387 -0.124 0.008

Mother with Tertiary studies -0.079 0.178 0.061 0.182 0.053 0.279 0.045 0.366

Personal characteristics

Age -0.002 0.769 0.008 0.142 0.014 0.034 -0.002 0.740

Female 0.046 0.407 -0.049 0.209 -0.023 0.570 0.054 0.193Constant 1.823 0.000 1.181 0.000 1.798 0.000 1.514 0.000

N level 1 (individuals)

N level 2 (institutions)

N level 3 (countries)

Intragroup correlation Rho (institution, country)Intragroup correlation Rho (country)

335288

9

9.3% 18.5% 11.6% 5.8%

7.3% 16.8% 10.1% 3.3%

5284 5268 5274

Alertness to new opportunities

Ability to come up with new ideas and

solutions

Willingness to question your own and

other's ideas

33 33 33

9 9 9

Ability to mobilize the capacities of others

6. Concluding remarks

Summary of main results

• Acquisition of CTIs in H.E. appears to depend on the prevalence of some pro-active T&L modes

• Each CTI is more efficiently developed through a specific combination of T&L modes

• Most prevalent modes in Latin-American H.E. contribute little, if any, to develop CTIs specifically

• Field of study, institution attended and country are crucial to development of CTI’s

6

Problems remaining / Further research

• No longitudinal information on decision rules of

– Students: programme choice, behavior

– Institutions: study design, admission

– Policy makers: regulation and funding

• Costs of teaching & learning modes unknown

• Other sources of CTIs beside higher education

• Actual CTIs utilization not yet addressed

6

The development of competences at

Latin-American universities: A multi-level

production function approach

Thank you very much for your attention

luis.vila@uv.es