Skip to main content

Table 4 Probability of being dropout

From: Dropout trends and educational reforms: the role of the LOGSE in Spain

  Males Females
  (1) (2) (1) (2)
Demographics     
Father present -0.1937*** -0.1938*** -0.1666*** -0.1665***
  (-22.87) (-22.88) (-19.03) (-18.99)
Mother present -0.1580*** -0.1579*** -0.2159*** -0.2161***
  (-16.52) (-16.58) (-17.41) (-17.42)
Father dropout 0.1926*** 0.1928*** 0.1162*** 0.1161***
  (21.60) (21.58) (14.63) (14.65)
Mother dropout 0.0982*** 0.0983*** 0.0797*** 0.0797***
  (17.38) (17.42) (16.29) (16.26)
Cohort effect 0.0724 0.0913 0.1296 0.0893
  (0.98) (1.22) (1.47) (1.04)
Labour Market and Business Cycle (regional)
Expected real wage 0.0064 0.0122 -0.0437** -0.0422**
ratio, workers age 30 (0.16) (0.32) (-2.56) (-2.34)
Share of employment 0.1884 0.0553 -0.4503 -0.2404
in construction (0.48) (0.13) (-1.12) (-0.59)
Unemployment rate 0.3074 0.3439 0.3349*** 0.3285**
  (1.24) (1.39) (2.87) (2.40)
Growth rate 0.3868 0.3449 0.0907 0.1278
  (1.40) (1.22) (0.34) (0.47)
Educational model     
Competences in -0.0346 -0.0330 -0.0054 -0.0111
education (-1.42) (-1.50) (-0.17) (-0.36)
Adequacy rate 15 (%) -0.0015 -0.0011 0.0005 0.0005
  (-1.44) (-1.04) (0.32) (0.29)
Incidence of the LOGSE     
% studying LOGSE 0.1402   -0.1911***  
  (1.01)   (-3.28)  
% studying FP-I -0.0164 -0.0600 -0.1756 -0.0823
  (-0.13) (-0.53) (-1.61) (-0.77)
% studying ESO-I   0.1364***   -0.0553
   (2.91)   (-1.33)
R-squared 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08
Observations 52531 52531 50393 50393
  1. Individuals aged 18-24 interviewed between 1995 and 2010. Robustness checks. No immigrants. Marginal effects.
  2. NOTES: The difference between (1) and (2) relies in the set of educational indicators included in the specification. ***significant at 1%; **significant at 5%; *significant at 10%. Omitted variables: regional & cohort dummies. Marginal effects after probit estimation. Reported t-stats constructed from standard errors clustered by region.