Question 1: Randomized Control Trials
Answer the following questions based on your reading of the article listed below. You can find the paper from Temple Library

Muralidharan, Karthik, Abhijeet Singh, and Alejandro J. Ganimian. 2019. “Disrupting Education? Experimental Evidence on Technology-Aided Instruction in India." American Economic Review, 109 (4): 1426-60.
-

https://econweb.ucsd.edu/~kamurali/papers/Working%20Papers/Disrupting%20Education%20(Current%20WP).p...

(A) Describe the main question of the paper. Highlight the issue of quantity vs. quality of education that the authors point out in their study. Keep your response between 4-5 sentences. (2.5 points)

(B) Describe the intervention that the authors use in the study. Keep your responses within 4-5 sentences. (2.5 points)

(C) Identify the treatment and control group. Comment on why there are more girls in the sample than boys. (1.5 points)

(D) What is the purpose of Table 1, especially in a randomized control trial? Make sure to include the concept of selection bias in your response. Keep your response to 2-3 sentences. (1.5 points)

(E) The authors note that during the endline survey, there were 87% of the initial number of students who took that test. What specific problem about sample size does this represent? (1 point)

(F) What are the main results that the authors find in the paper? Keep your answers to 3-4 sentences. (2 points)

(G) Describe, in your own words, the four mechanisms behind the results the authors find. Keep your responses to no more than 4 sentences (2 points).

(H) What are the policy implications of the study that the authors suggest? Pay special attention to the costs associated with the technology and the learning guidance that the CAL provides. Keep your response to no more than 4 sentences (2 points).

P.S. this is the only question that requires you to derive information from our RCT discussion and apply it to the questions asked from the paper

Question 2: Cash Transfers
Read the following paper and answer the questions below. This is a paper we discussed in class. You can get the paper from Temple Library.

De Brauw, Alan, and John Hoddinott. “Must conditional cash transfer programs be conditioned to be effective? The impact of conditioning transfers on school enrollment in Mexico.” Journal of Development Economics, 96, no. 2 (2011): 359-370.

(A) Explain both the public and private perspectives behind administering conditional cash transfers (2 points)

(B) Based on the paper, in your own words, explain what the main question of the paper is. Keep your response within 1-2 sentences (1 point)

(C) What conditionality features of PROGRESA and the cash transfer do the authors use to answer their question? Pay special attention to the forms requirements and what happened with these forms. Keep your response within 3-4 sentences (2 points)

(D) Explain in your own words the features of Group 1 and Group 2 in the study. Keep your response within 3-4 sentences (1.5 points)

(E) In your own words, explain why the authors introduced two more groups, Group 3 and Group 4. Explain the difference between Groups 3 and 4 and how they address the main question of the paper. Keep your response within 3-4 sentences. (1.5 points)

(F) In your own words, what are the main results of the paper? What do the authors conclude about conditionality? Keep your response within 3-4 sentences. (2 points)