Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Development and History

Development and Economic History

Members of the Development and Economic History Research Group combine archival data, lab-in-the-field experiments, randomized controlled trials, text analysis, survey and secondary data along with theoretical tools to study issues in development and economic history. Faculty and students work in the field in South Asia, China and Africa as well as doing archival work in libraries across Europe and Asia.

Almost all faculty are members of CAGE in the economics department and some are also members of Warwick Interdisciplinary Centre for International Development (WICID). There is a regular weekly external seminar, two weekly internal workshops, and high quality research students. We also organise international conferences on campus, or in Venice.

Our activities

Development and Economic History Research Group Workshop/Seminar

Monday: 1.00-2.00pm
For faculty and PhD students at Warwick and other top-level academic institutions across the world. For a detailed scheduled of speakers please follow the link below.
Organisers: Bishnupriya Gupta and Claudia Rei

People

Academics

Academics associated with the Development and Economic History Research Group are:


Bishnupriya Gupta

Co-ordinator

Anant Sudarshan

Deputy Co-ordinator


Events

Show all calendar items

CAGE-AMES Workshop - Keitaro Ninomiya

- Export as iCalendar
Location: S2.77 Cowling Room

Title: Comparing standardized tests and teachers-based-assessments; Evidence from the A-levels fiasco in the UK.

 

Abstract: The distributional consequence of integrating teachers' assessments with standardized exam scores for college admissions remains challenging to assess. I focus on a unique event in the UK, when the pandemic completely replaced standardized exams with teacher-based assessments of their students, to investigate the changes in the pattern of grade assignment across students and schools. I find the method change led to substantial inflation; students' expected grade increased uniformly across groups with similar performances in a past standardized exam. Non-facilitating subjects experienced higher grade inflation than facilitating subjects. Institutional differences across school types and share of well-performing students also account for differences in the extent of inflation. My findings indicate an inclusion of teachers' predictions to college admissions reward students unevenly.

Show all calendar items