Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human capital report cards for American states

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A theoretical and empirical basis for comparing stocks of human capital in the American states is developed. Human capital report cards are measurement tools allowing states to benchmark their production and retention of the knowledges, skills and abilities required by economic development and public education policy making. A prototype report card is created from 12 indicators — seven of which theoretically capture a ‘basic’ dimension of human capital and five of which measure ‘complex’ human capital. Principal component factor analysis reveals that for the 50 states in the 1980s the concept of human capital is a multi-dimensional construct rather than a unidimensional one and that ‘basic’ and ‘complex’ factors do in fact distinguish the major cleavages among human capital measures. A further finding is that the relative positions of the 50 states can be plotted on the two dimensions with practical payoffs accruing to state and local planners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Productivity and Quality Center (1993).The Benchmarking Workbook: Adapting Best Practices for Performance Improvement. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, Frank M. and Stephen B. Withey (1974). ‘Developing measures of perceived life quality: Results from several national surveys,’Social Indicators Research 1(1): 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, Raymond A. (1966).Social Indicators. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce (1990).America's Choice: High Skills or Low Wages. Rochester: National Center on Education and the Economy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corporation for Enterprise Development (CfED) (1993).1993 Development Report Card for the States: Economic Benchmarks for State and Corporate Decision Makers. Washington.

  • Council of Chief State School Officers (1990a).State Education Indicators 1990. Washington: CCSSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Chief State School Officers (1990b).State Indicators of Science and Mathematics Education 1990. Washington: CCSSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, Peter F. (1968).The Age of Discontinuity. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Paul D. (1992). ‘Get ready: The time for performance measurement is finally coming!’Public Administration Review 52(5): 513–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, Howard (1983).Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grayson, Jr. C. Jackson (1993). ‘Outcomes, benchmarking and TQM,’Health Systems Review 26(6): 14–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, Bertram M. (1967).Social Goals and Indicators for a Great Society. Philadelphia: The American Academy of Political and Social Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, Bertram M. (1969).Social Intelligence for America's Future: Explorations in Societal Problems. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammack, David C., Michael Hartoonian, John Howe, Lynn B. Jenkins, and Eugene Owen (1990).The US History Report Card. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Charles (1988).Public Schools USA: A Comparative Guide to School Districts. Charlotte: Williamson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatry, H. P., M. Alexander, and J. R. Fountain, Jr. (1989).Elementary and Secondary Education. Stanford: Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatry, H. P., J. R. Fountain, Jr., J. M. Sullivan, and L. Kramer (1990).An Overview. Stanford: Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiesling, Herbert J. (1994). ‘Reading the report cards: What do “state of achievement” reports tell us about American education? Review Essay,’Economics of Education Review 13(2).

  • Lapointe, Archie E., Janice M. Askew, and Nancy A. Mead (1992).Learning Science. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapointe, Archie E., Nancy A. Mead, and Janice M. Askew (1992).Learning Mathematics. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehnen, Robert G. (1992). ‘Constructing state education performance indicators from ACT and SAT Scores,”Policy Studies Journal 20(1): 22–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehnen, Robert G. and Eugene B. McGregor, Jr. (1991). ‘Economic Development and Formal Intellectual Attainment,’ a paper presented at the 13th Annual APPAM Research Conference, Bethesda.

  • MacRae, Jr. Duncan (1985).Policy Indicators. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, Fritz (1980).Knowledge and Knowledge Production. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, Fritz (1982).The Branches of Learning. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, Fritz (1984).The Economics of Information and Human Capital. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Ray and Marc Tucker (1992).Thinking for a Living: Education and the Wealth of Nations. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, Jr. Eugene B. (1991).Strategic Management of Human Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities: Workforce Decision Making in the Post-Industrial Era. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, Jr. Eugene B. (1994). ‘Economic Development and Public Education: Strategies and standards.’Educational Policy 8(3): 252–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, Ina V. S. and Lynn B. Jenkins (1990).The Reading Report Card, 1971–88. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, Ina V.S., John A. Dossey, Eugene H. Owen, and Gary W. Phillips (1991).The State of Mathematics Achievement. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics (1991a).Report of the Special Study Panel on Education Indicators to the Acting Commissioner of Education Statistics. Education Counts: An Indicator System to Monitor the Nation's Education Health. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics (1991b).The State of Mathematics Achievement: NAEP's 1990 Assessment of the Nation and the Trial Assessment of the States. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983).Beyond Rhetoric: A New American Agenda for Children and Families. A Report to the Nation and the Secretary of Education. Washington.

  • National Education Goals Panel (1991).The National Education Goals Report 1991: Building A Nation of Learners. Washington.

  • National Education Goals Panel (1992).The National Education Goals Report 1991: Building A Nation of Learners. Washington.

  • National Governors Association (1993). ‘Strategic investment: Tough choices for America's future,’Backgrounder. Washington.

  • Oregon Progress Board (1991).Oregon Benchmarks: Setting Measurable Standards for Progress. Report to the 1991 Legislature. Salem.

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (1992).Education at a Glance. Paris.

  • Rivlin, Alice M. (1971).Systematic Thinking for Social Action. Washington: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, Lester M. (1991). ‘Overview: Why human capital? Why now?’ in David W. Hornbeck and Lester M. Salamon, eds.,Human Capital and America's Future. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) (1991).What Work Requires of Schools. Washington: US Department of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) (1992).Learning A Living: A Blueprint for High Performance. Washington: US Department of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shultz, Theodore W. (1971).Investment in Human Capital: The Role of Education. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Bureau of Census (1976).Social Indicators. Washington.

  • US Department of Education (1991).America 2000: An Education Strategy. Washington.

  • US News and World Report (1993).America's Best Hospitals. Washington: 2400 N Street, NW.

  • US Office of Management and Budget (1973).Social Indicators. Washington.

  • in't Veld, Roeland J. (1993). ‘The dynamics of educational performance indicators,’ in John L. Mikesell, ed.,International Perspectives on Regional Development and Regional Organization. Bloomington: Indiana University, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, 311–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wholey, Joseph S. and Harry P. Hatry (1992). ‘The case for performance monitoring,’Public Administration Review 52(6): 604–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, S. N. (1986). ‘Performance indicators and management performance in nationalized industries,’Public Administration 64: 303–317.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, 801 West Michigan St., 46202, Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Robert G. Lehnen & Eugene M. McGregor Jr.

Authors
  1. Robert G. Lehnen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eugene M. McGregor Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lehnen, R.G., McGregor, E.M. Human capital report cards for American states. Policy Sci 27, 19–35 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999597

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999597

Keywords

Search

Navigation