Table 9: Marginal effects (xlOO) of adult education on the probability of enrollment of 6-14 year olds, urban and rural areas (Probit results for selected variables)-using MEAN years of adult schooling

||A dlt|f hli|Interaction: Male'Av<br>f h|erage adult<br>l|P-value (test of eq<br>di|uality of adult<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||verage au yea<br>Female adults|s o scoong<br>Male adults|years o sc<br>Female adults<br>M|oo<br>ale adults|eucaton pa<br>Girls|ameters)<br>Boys|
|Benin 1996|0.2|2.1 s|2.6 s|1.3 s|0.004 s|0.584|
|Burkina Faso 1992-93|0.6|2.2 s|2.3 s|0.8|0.005 s|0.814|
|C.A.R. 1994-95|4.3 s|3.2 s|-1.2|-0.2|0.128|0.876|
|Cameroon 1991<br>|6.0 s<br>|3.5 s<br>|-1.5 s<br>|0.4<br>|0.021 s<br>|0.539<br>|
|Chad 1998|6.1 s|4.5 s|-1.3|0.1|0.034 s|0.753|
|Cote d'Ivoire 1994|2.3 s|2.7 s|1.4 s|1.2 s|0.548|0.855|
|Ghana 1993|1.6 s|2.3 s|0.0|-0.5|0.063|0.491|
|Mali 1995-96|2.0 s|3.2 s|1.3 s|0.2|0.097|0.936|
|Niger 1992|22 s|15 s|-07|04|0305|0530|
|<br>Niger 1997|.<br>3.0 s|.<br>2.0 s|.<br>-0.5|.<br>0.4|.<br>0.048 s|.<br>0.804|
|<br>Senegal 1992-93|3.9 s|3.6 s|-1.1|0.0|0.732|0.276|
|Togo 1998|2.2 s|2.3 s|0.4|0.6|0.877|0.612|
|Egypt 1992|1.6 s|1.5 s|-0.9 s|0.0|0.666|0.006 s|
|Egypt 1995-96|1.4 s|1.1 s|-0.4|-0.1|0.284|0.829|
|Morocco 1992|0.1|2.2 s|1.9 s|0.7|0.007 s|0.331|
|Bangladesh 1993-94|0.9 s|2.1 s|1.5 s|0.2|0.015 s|0.875|
|Bangladesh 1996-97<br>|0.4<br>|2.1 s<br>|1.1 s<br>|-0.3<br>|0.001 s<br>|0.477|
|India 1992-93|3.4 s|2.8 s|-1.5 s|0.0|0.010 s|0.000 s|
|Nepal 1996<br>|4.1 s<br>|4.0 s<br>|-3.2 s<br>|-0.4<br>|0.908<br>|0.009 s<br>|
|Pakistan 1990-91|4.9 s|3.3 s|-2'.6 s|0.4|0.020 s|0.044 s|
|Comoros 1996|2.2 s|2.6 s|-0.6|-0.4|0.651|0.468|
|Kenya 1993|1.8 s|1.0 s|0.0|-0.3|0.031 s|0.004 s|
|Kenya 1998|1.0 s|0.6 s|0.5 s|0.2|0.090|0.003 s|
|Madagascar 1997|3.8 s|3.3 s|0.9|1.2 s|0.465|0.778|
|Malawi 1992|2.2 s|3.3 s|0.5|0.0|0.113|0.394|
|<br>Malawi 1996|<br>1.0 s|<br>0.6|<br>0.4|<br>-0.4|<br>0.478|0.094|
|Mozambique 1997<br>|5.1 s<br>|1.9 s<br>|-1.2<br>|0.7<br>|0.017 s<br>|0.417<br>|
|Namibia 1992|1.8 s|0.7 s|0.2|-0.2|0.001 s|0.000 s|
|Rwanda 1992|2.Q s|1.6 s|-0.9|0.0|0.509|0.373|
|Tanzania 1991-92|0.6|1.7 s|0.6|0.1|0.081|0.454|
|Tanzania 1996|1.9 s|1.8 s|0.2|-0.3|0.919|0.338|
|Uganda 1995|2.8 s|1.4 s|-0.8 s|0.4|0.003 s|0.829|
|Zambia 1992|2.0 s|1.7 s|0.9 s|-0.2|0.634|0.016 s|
|Zambia 1996-97|3.2 s|2.8 s|-0.4|-0.2|0.389|0.609|
|Zimbabwe 1994|1.5 s|0.5 s|-0.1|0.1|0.004 s|0.026 s|
|Dominican Republic 1991|<br>2.4 s|0.1|-0.2|1.3 s|0.000 s|0.284|
|Dominican Republic 1996|<br>0.5 s|0.1|0.4|0.1|0.063|0.000 s|
|Guatemala 1995|2.9 s|2.7 s|-0.1|-0.1|0.761|0.699|
|Haiti 1994-95|1.5 s|1.4 s|**0.9**|0.5|0.864|0.521|
|Nicaragua 1998|2.4 s|1.0 s|-0.5 s|0.0|0.000 s|0.021 s|
|Indonesia 1991|1.1 s|0.9 s|0.1|0.0|0.582|0.427|
|Indonesia 1994|1.0 s|0.9 s|0.2|0.2|0.597|0.724|
|Indonesia 1997|0.9 s|0.6 s|(.1|0.1|0.171|0.167|
|Philippines 1993|1.4 s|0.7 s|<br>(1.2|0.3|0.030 s|0.036 s|
|Philippines 1998|0.9 s|0.6 s|0.2|0.3|0.288|0.755|
|Bolivia 1993-94|0.6 s|0.3 s|-0.4|-0.1|0.422|0.784|
|Bolivia 1997|0.3 s|0.1|-0.1|0.2|0.107|0.972|
|Brazil 1996|0.6 s|0.2 s|-0(.1|0.1|0.037 s|0.245|
|<br>Brazil, Northeast 1991|<br>1.9 s|<br>1.0|<br>0.8|<br>1.1 s|<br>0.277|0.478|
|Brazil Northeast 1996|07 s|03|07 s|03|0360|0041 s|
|,<br>Colombia 1990|.<br>1.6 s|.<br>0.5|.<br>-0.3|.<br>0.5|.<br>0.052|.<br>0.700|
|Colombia 1995<br>|0.7 s<br>|0.7 s<br>|0.6 s<br>|0.2<br>|0.911<br>|0.113<br>|
|Peru 1991-92|0.5 s|0.4 s|-0.3|0.1|0.435|0.374|
|Peru 1996|0.5 s|0.5 s|-0.2 s|-0.1|0.720|0.076|
|Kazakstan 1995|0.3|0.0|().1|0.2|0.387|0.711|
|Turkey 1993<br>|2.6 s<br>|2.3 s<br>|-1.1 s<br>|-0.1<br>|0.564<br>|0.158<br>|
|Uzbekistan 1996|0.6|0.3|(0.2|0.1|0.512|0.355|

Notes: Each marginal effect (or change in the dummy from zero to one) is evaluated at the means of all other regressors. Significant difference from zero at the 5 percent level is indicated by an "s". Other variables in the regression are age and age squared, a dummy variable for gender, dummy variables for wealth group, and a dummy variable for urban area. P-value reported is the p-value of the two-sided test for equality between the underlying probit coefficients on male and female education.