Debates in education policy draw on different theories about how to raise children’s achievement. The school competition theory holds that achievement rises when students can choose among competing schools. The school resources theory holds that achievement rises with schools’ resources per student. The family resources theory holds that achievement rises as parents become more educated and earn higher incomes. We test all three theories in Chile between 2002 and 2013, when reading and math scores rose by 0.2 to 0.3 standard deviations, as school competition, school resources, and family resources all increased. We compare Chilean municipalities in a difference-in-differences analysis, asking whether test scores rose fastest in municipalities with greater increases in school competition, school resources, or family resources. We find that municipal test scores did not rise with school competition but did rise with family resources (parental education, not income) and, to a smaller extent, with school resources (as measured by class sizes). Results favor the family resource theory, and to a lesser extent the school resource theory, but not the school competition theory.

教育政策的争论借鉴了关于如何提高儿童成绩的不同理论。学校竞争理论认为，当学生可以在竞争学校中进行选择时，成绩就会提高。学校资源理论认为，学生的成绩随着学校资源的增加而提高。家庭资源理论认为，随着父母受教育程度的提高和收入的增加，成就也会提高。我们在 2002 年至 2013 年间在智利测试了这三种理论，当时随着学校竞争、学校资源和家庭资源的增加，阅读和数学成绩上升了 0.2 至 0.3 个标准差。我们通过双重差分分析比较了智利的各个城市，询问学校竞争、学校资源或家庭资源增加幅度较大的城市中，考试成绩是否上升最快。我们发现，市政考试成绩并没有随着学校竞争的增加而上升，而是随着家庭资源（父母教育，而不是收入）的增加而上升，并且在较小程度上随着学校资源（以班级规模衡量）的增加而上升。结果支持家庭资源理论，在较小​​程度上支持学校资源理论，但不支持学校竞争理论。