Table 2: Children’s Achievement and Attainment—Second Experiment

|||Surve|y-Based Test Scores||Enroll 7th|Grade (1 = yes)|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||Reading|Math|Socio-emotional|Overall Index||age _≥_13|
|API Original|0.126|0.056|0.071|0.124|0.073|0.081|
||[0.104]|[0.455]|[0.418]|[0.187]|[0.255]|[0.519]|
||_{_0.138_}_|_{_0.483_}_|_{_0.440_}_|_{_0.218_}_|_{_0.283_}_|_{_0.573_}_|
||(0.147)|(0.554)|(0.554)|(0.234)|(0.312)|(0.469)|
|API Plus|0.315|0.237|0.199|0.366|0.124|0.298|
||[0.001]|[0.008]|[0.022]|[0.001]|[0.074]|[0.030]|
||_{_0.001_}_|_{_0.012_}_|_{_0.030_}_|_{_0.001_}_|_{_0.084_}_|_{_0.053_}_|
||(0.001)|(0.005)|(0.011)|(0.001)|(0.032)|(0.032)|
|API Original = API Plus|[0.043]|[0.043]|[0.178]|[0.020]|[0.469]|[0.134]|
||_{_0.086_}_|_{_0.115_}_|_{_0.225_}_|_{_0.024_}_|_{_0.570_}_|_{_0.229_}_|
||(0.045)|(0.045)|(0.098)|(0.023)|(0.376)|(0.157)|
|Number of clusters|224|224|224|224|182|76|
|Observations|1044|1044|1045|1045|468|106|

_Notes_ : This table shows OLS estimates and the associated _p_ -values on student outcomes measured after two academic years of exposure to the API program under the second experiment designed and implemented by the authors in collaboration with the government. For detailed descriptions of the test scores used in this table, see Appendix A.2. The dependent variables in the first four columns are standardized with respect to their means and the standard deviations in the control group. The dependent variable in the last two columns is computed from administrative school records (see Appendix A.1). _p_ -values reported in brackets refer to the conventional asymptotic inference. _p_ -values reported in braces are computed using randomization inference (randomization- _t_ ). _p_ -values reported in parentheses are adjusted for testing each null hypothesis (null impact of API Original, API Plus, and the comparison) for the two different families of outcomes (survey-based and administrative data) through the stepwise procedure described in Romano and Wolf (2005a,b, 2016). All _p_ -values account for clustering at the school level.

While the difference with respect to the _Original_ modality is not statistically significant, the larger effect of the _Plus_ modality is consistent with qualitative evidence documenting that mentors with enhanced training shared more effective strategies to best deal with children’s emotions during the bimonthly peer-to-peer sessions (see Appendix A.3). The effect size of the _Plus_ modality on the GLS-weighted index of achievement is very large, 0.37 standard deviations—precisely estimated, and statistically different at the 95 percent level from the effect of the _Original_ modality.<sup>9</sup> The last two columns in Table 2 report the estimated effects on the average transition rate to secondary school. Less than two-thirds of the sixth graders in the control group enroll in seventh grade, while the corresponding national average is 95 percent. The _Plus_ modality

> 9In Table B-7 we report the results by sub-domains of the reading scores (panel A), math scores (panel B). While the estimates are erratic and not statistically significant for the _Original_ modality, the _Plus_ modality is shown to increase students’ proficiency in reading across various domains (familiar-word reading, reading comprehension, and dictation). There are no improvements in sound-related questions (initial sound and initial name), which is probably due to the fact that children whose first mother tongue is an indigenous language might struggle to capture Spanish alphabet pronunciation. For math scores, the _Plus_ modality seems particularly effective on numbers’ identification and discrimination as well as additions. There are no improvements in more involved tasks such as problem solving and shape recognition. Similarly, in Table B-8 we report the effects of the two program modalities for each individual component of the socio-emotional score.

13