TESTING FOR STATIONARITY IN HETEROGENEOUS PANEL DATA IN THE CASE OF MODEL MISSPECIFICATION

This paper investigates the performance of the tests proposed by Hadri and by Hadri and Larsson for testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data under model misspecification. The panel tests are based on the well known KPSS test (cf. Kwiatkowski et al.) which considers two models: stationarity around a deterministic level and stationarity around a deterministic trend. There is no study, as far as we know, on the statistical properties of the test when the wrong model is used. We also consider the case of the simultaneous presence of the two types of models in a panel. We employ two asymptotics: joint asymptotic, T, N -> infinity simultaneously, and T fixed and N allowed to grow indefinitely. We use Monte Carlo experiments to investigate the effects of misspecification in sample sizes usually used in practice. The results indicate that the assumption that T is fixed rather than asymptotic leads to tests that have less size distortions, particularly for relatively small T with large N panels (micro-panels) than the tests derived under the joint asymptotics. We also find that choosing a deterministic trend when a deterministic level is true does not significantly affect the properties of the test. But, choosing a deterministic level when a deterministic trend is true leads to extreme over-rejections. Therefore, when unsure about which model has generated the data, it is suggested to use the model with a trend. We also propose a new statistic for testing for stationarity in mixed panel data where the mixture is known. The performance of this new test is very good for both cases of T asymptotic and T fixed. The statistic for T asymptotic is slightly undersized when T is very small (

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluation of Time to Read, a Volunteer Tutoring Program for 8-9 Year Olds

Tutoring is commonly employed to prevent early reading failure, and evidence suggests that it can have a positive effect. This article presents findings from a large-scale (n = 734) randomized controlled trial evaluation of the effect of Time to Read—a volunteer tutoring program aimed at children aged 8 to 9 years—on reading comprehension, self-esteem, locus of control, enjoyment of learning, and future aspirations. The study found that the program had only a relatively small effect on children’s aspirations (effect size +0.17, 95% confidence interval [0.015, 0.328]) and no other outcomes. It is suggested that this lack of evidence found may be due to misspecification of the program logic model and outcomes identified and program-related factors, particularly the low dosage of the program.