[雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--大學(xué)排名在起作用？排名和優(yōu)秀競賽對于大學(xué)選擇高能力學(xué)生的重要性（節(jié)選）

1、3200 英文單詞， 英文單詞，18500 英文字符，中文 英文字符，中文 5500 字文獻(xiàn)出處： 文獻(xiàn)出處：Julia Horstschräer. University Rankings in Action? The Importance of Rankings and an Excellence Competition for University Choice of High-Ability Students[J]. E

2、conomics of Education Review, 2012, 31(6):1162-1176.University rankings in action? The importance of rankings and an excellence competition for university choice of high-ability studentsJulia HorstschräerAbstractThi

3、s paper analyzes how high-ability students respond to different indicators of university quality when applying for a university. Are prospective students influenced by quality indicators of a university ranking or by an

4、excellence status awarded within a nationwide competition? And if so, are some quality dimensions, e.g. research reputation, mentoring, faculty infrastructure, students’ satisfaction or the excellence status, more import

5、ant than others? In order to address these questions, I estimate a random utility model using administrative application data of all German medical schools. As identification relies on the variation in quality indicators

6、 over time, I can disentangle the response to changing quality indicators from the common knowledge regarding university attractiveness. Results show that the ranking provides more relevant information in the quality dim

7、ensions mentoring, faculty infrastructure and the overall students’ satisfaction than with respect to research.Keywords: Higher education; University choice; College admission ;Conditional logit1. IntroductionEvery year,

8、 secondary school graduates that want to pursue higher education have to choose a university. This is a crucial decision for their future trajectories made under imperfect information regarding their own ability, univers

9、ity quality and the corresponding returns to a degree. From an economist’s point of view, it is very important that prospective students apply for the universities that fit them best in order to maximize human capital pr

10、oduction and to minimize drop-outs. Therefore, university rankings and indicators of excellence may provide valuable information for the decision of prospective students.In this paper, I analyze whether high-ability stud

11、ents in fact use different university quality indicators as a source of information and whether some quality dimensions are more important for an applicant’s decision than others. For this purpose, I estimate the effect

12、of different quality indicators from a German university ranking – as well- established as the U.S. News & World Report ranking in the U.S. – on the university application decision of high- ability students. As an ad

13、ditional quality indicator, I use an excellence competition run by the German government, which declared some universities to be “excellence universities” and granted them extra money. Identification relies on the variat

14、ion induced by changes in the ranking indicators over time and the introduction of the excellence status. This allows me to disentangle the response to the new information provided by the quality indicators from the time

15、-constant, common knowledge regarding the overall university attractiveness.In contrast to the U.S. higher education system, the German system is traditionally based on public universities which were recognized as quite

16、homogeneous with respect to their quality. During the last couple of years, however, several changes towards a more competitive market have been implemented. With the publication of university rankings in the media start

17、ing from 1990s onwards, the quality of different institutions has become directly comparable for the first (2010) analyze the influence of German university rankings on the number of matriculated students and the sorting

18、 of students according to ability. They show that rankings also seem to influence the matriculation decision in Germany. However, both German studies cannot control for university fixed effects and, therefore, fail to di

19、sentangle the effect of the additional information provided by the rankings from the common knowledge regarding university attractiveness.This paper contributes to the existing literature on university rankings by distin

20、guishing the importance of different quality dimensions, while controlling for the common knowledge regarding university attractiveness. To my knowledge, this analysis is the first to provide evidence regarding the impor

21、tance of different ranking dimensions. The international literature, so far, has been limited to the influence of the overall rank of an university. The German multidimensional ranking of the Center for Higher Education

22、Development (CHE ranking), however, allows me to study several quality dimensions separately. The main quality dimensions published are research reputation, mentoring, faculty infrastructure as well as a recommendation b

23、y professors and students. An additional quality indicator studied is the excellence status awarded by the German government within an excellence competition. My results thus provide additional knowledge on which quality

24、 dimensions are (most) important for the university choice of prospective students.A random utility model explaining the application decision by university and individual characteristics of the applicants is estimated us

25、ing a conditional logit model. Due to the inclusion of university fixed effects, I can control for the time-constant, common knowledge regarding over- all university attractiveness and, therefore, identification relies s

26、olely on the variation in rankings and excellence status over time. The estimates, thus, reflect the effect of the different ranking indicators on top of the time-constant, overall quality. As I do not control for the qu

27、ality scale underlying the ranking, the effect of interest, however, is not the pure signalling effect of the ranking but indicates the students’ reactions to new information on university quality.I use a very comprehens

28、ive, administrative data set provided by the German central agency (‘ZVS’) administering the application process for medical studies, which is subsequently called central clearinghouse.4 The data set contains individual

29、information on all applicants at German medical schools for the years 2002–2008. Note that students in Germany apply for medical school directly after finishing their secondary education and that medical school programs

30、take about six years to earn a “Master-like” degree without awarding an intermediate “Bachelor-like” degree in between. The data set offers two important advantages for my analysis. First, I can study the application rat

31、her than the matriculation decision. This is important as the application decision is less driven by supply constraints.Second, the individual nature of the data allows me to control for the distance between a student’s

32、hometown and each university in the choice set, which is shown to be a very important determinant of the application decision. An important limitation of the data is, however, that my analyses need to focus on high-abili

33、ty applicants, as the other prospective students are object to strategic application behavior and therefore do not state their true preferences. The results show that achieving excellence status increases the odds to app

34、ly for high-ability students by 19% of the prior odds. Hence, the excellence competition run by the German government significantly affects the university choice of high-ability students. Regarding the ranking indicators