MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518870168 · doi:10.3386/w10155

Do Dropouts Drop Out Too Soon? International Evidence From Changes in School-Leaving Laws

2003· report· en· W1518870168 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2003
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrop outDrop (telecommunication)LawPolitical scienceDemographic economicsEconomicsEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies high school dropout behavior by estimating the long-run consequences to leaving school early. I measure these consequences using changes in minimum school leaving ages n often introduced to prevent dropping out n and compare results across the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Students compelled to stay in school experience substantial gains to lifetime wealth, health, and other labor market activities for all three countries, and these results hold up against a wide array of specification checks. I estimate dropping out one year later increases present value income by more than 10 times forgone earnings and more than 2 times the maximum lifetime annual wage. The one-year cost to attending high school would have to be extremely large to offset these gains under a model that views education as an investment. Other, sub-optimal, explanations for why dropouts forgo these benefits are considered.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.661
GPT teacher head0.613
Teacher spread0.048 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it