A Meta-Analysis of Government-Sponsored Training Programs

Abstract

This study uses meta-analysis to synthesize findings from 31 evaluations of 15 voluntary government-funded training programs for the disadvantaged that operated between 1964 and 1998. On average, the earnings effects of the evaluated programs seem to have been largest for women, quite modest for men, and negligible for youths. For men and women, the earnings effects of training appear to have persisted for at least several years after the training was complete. Classroom skills training was apparently effective in increasing earnings, but basic education was not. There is no evidence that more expensive training programs performed better than less expensive ones. Although the United States has more than three decades of experience in running training programs, the programs do not appear to have become more effective over time.ince the 1960s, federal and state governments have funded training programs designed to increase the earnings of low-income individuals who have ended their formal education. These programs have been envisioned as tools for combating unemployment and poverty and, more recently, as a tool for decreasing transfer payments by increasing the earnings of recipients of government transfers.Although many evaluations of these programs have been published, there have been few attempts to formally synthesize the results. Studies of an individual program typically focus on whether the program "works" by, for example, increasing the earnings of those who participate. There have also been several recent summaries of these programs, but they have focused more on the overall effectiveness of the programs than on factors that make one program more effective than another (for example, see LaLonde 1995; Friedlander, Greenberg, and Robins 1997; Heckman, LaLonde, and Smith 1999). In addition, the summary studies have rarely used formal statistical tools to take the analysis beyond simple pattern recognition-essentially, visual in-

Wage Effects of On‐the‐Job Training: A Meta‐Analysis

“…Two studies have investigated the effectiveness of training, using a meta-analysis (Greenberg et al 2003, Greenberg et al 2006. Greenberg et al (2003) use a mixed-effects meta-regression model to estimate the overall effect of government funded training programmes, and find that the earnings effect is largest for women and that the effect persists some years after the training is completed.…”

“…Greenberg et al (2003) use a mixed-effects meta-regression model to estimate the overall effect of government funded training programmes, and find that the earnings effect is largest for women and that the effect persists some years after the training is completed. Greenberg et al (2006), applying the same data set, compare studies that have used observational methods with those using experimental methods.…”

Protection and Training Institutions for Improving Workforce Integration in Latin America and Asia

“…Finally, women tend to derive more benefit from training than do men in terms of better employability and a higher rate of transition to work. This effect can be seen in all types of training (Greenberg, Michalopoulos and Robins, 2003), although it is stronger in countries where women have a relatively low workforce participation rate (Bergemann and Van den Berg, 2008).…”

“…Training targeted at the second group, young people, is not very successful in terms of improving labour market outcomes, at least in developed countries (Betcherman, Dar and Olivas, 2004): 20 According to studies in European countries (Kluve, 2010) and the United States (Greenberg, Michalopoulos and Robins, 2003), youth training programmes are less effective than general programmes or those geared to adults. Apparently it makes more sense to improve initial education so that there will be fewer dropouts and other academic problems, than to try to remedy the problems later through training (Betcherman, Dar and Olivas, 2004).…”

“…training, on-the-job training, 16 and work experience (Kluve, 2010;Greenberg, Michalopoulos and Robins, 2003). In addition, there are courses organized and conducted by employers themselves, in what is called on-the-job training, and courses organized and conducted by an accredited provider, known as off-the-job training (Picchio and Van Ours, 2013;Kristensen, 2012;Goerlitz and Tamm, 2012).…”