<!-- Start of picture text --> Learning Scores vs Education Expenditure Learning Scores vs Education Expenditure<br>GRC GBRDE UESPDOMITANLDCHLAUSBGRCZETTOSVKRUSID NARGTURROMPERUSABRAHUNMEXMKDCOLLTUIR NPRYHNDTHABOLPOLCA NJORMDACH EL VAMYSCY PPRTTUNVUTFRAAUTKWT ISL FINNZL IS R SW E NOR DNK GRC GBRDE UESPITADOMNLDCHLAUSBGRCZETTOSVKRUSIDNARGTURROMPERUSABRAHUNMEXMKDCOLLTUIRNPRYHNDTHABOLPOLJORCA NMDACHEL VAMYSCY PPRTTUNVUTAUTFRAKWT ISL FINNZL IS R SW E NOR DNK<br>MUS PHLCMRBFAUGAMOZMD GMARTZACI VBLZKENSWZ ZAF ZWEBWA MUS PHLCMRBFAUGAMOZMDGMARTZACI VBLZKENSWZZAF ZWEBWA<br>ZMBMLISEN LSO NAM ZMBMLISENMWI LSO NAM<br>MWI<br>NER<br>NER<br>600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600<br>600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Orthogonalized Public Expditure on Education<br>Orthogonalized Public Expditure on Education<br>Data Source: World Bank WDI & Crouch and Fasih (2004)<br>Data Source: World Bank WDI & Crouch and Fasih (2004)<br>(d.1) (d.2)<br>600 600<br>500 500<br>400 400<br>Learning Scores Learning Scores<br>300 300<br>200<br>200<br><!-- End of picture text -->

**Figure 7 Education Efficiency Frontier: Single Input and Single Output**

Several results may be highlighted:

- a. In general, the rankings are robust to the output indicator selected. This can be can be verified by the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient (see Tables C.1 and C.2 in Appendix C), that are all positive, significant and high. The range oscillates from a minimum of .53 to a maximum of .94, with the mean of .70. This result implies that countries appearing as efficient (or inefficient) according to one indicator, are ranked similarly when other output indicator is used.

- b. Despite the orthogonalization by GDP, the relatively rich countries tend to be in the less efficient group, i.e. countries with higher per-capita GDP spend more than other countries in attaining similar education outcomes. Higher spending may reflect the higher cost of tertiary education. This is one factor that may help explain the stand-out of Estonia, Latvia, and Poland. Oil-rich countries, such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, tend to be in the group of relatively more inefficient producers.

- c. Another group of relatively inefficient producers are those with “average” expenditure levels but extremely low education attainment. Among those are mostly African counties (Angola, Niger, Burkina Faso, Sudan, and Ethiopia), some Middle Eastern countries (Djibouti, and Yemen) and South Asia (Bangladesh and Pakistan). Table B.1-3 in Appendix B list the output-efficiency scores for three of the indicators.

- d. Output-efficiency rankings also vary with the selected output indicators. The spearman correlation coefficient of the output-efficiency scores (see Tables C.3 and C.4 in Appendix) show that these are robust to the selected indicator, though the mean of the correlation coefficients is lower (.52) and the range is somewhat higher (.30 to .95) than those registered in the input-efficiency rankings.

- e. In an attempt to identify clusters of more efficient countries and more inefficient countries, the top (and bottom) 10 percent of the efficiency ranking were selected for each of the indicators. If a country appeared in the efficient (inefficient) tail in three or more of the indicators, it was included in Table 1.

14