Panel Paper:
When Merit-Based Scholarship Does Not Work: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Malawi
*Names in bold indicate Presenter
We study the impacts of this “relative” merit-based scholarship program alongside a more typical program that provided scholarships to the top students in the sample. The “standard” merit-based scholarship was given to the top 15% students in the final exam. In the relative merit-based scholarship scheme, students were divided into groups of 100 with similar baseline test scores, and within each group, the top 15 students in the final exam receive a scholarship. One hundred seventeen classrooms in 31 schools were randomly assigned to either the standard merit-based scholarship program, relative merit-based scholarship program, or to a control group.
We find no evidence that either scholarship program increased test scores. In fact, the standard merit-based scholarship decreased student test scores by 0.14SD compared to the control group. This corresponds to decreased motivation to study hard, and study time, as measured in follow-up surveys. Moreover, the decreases of motivation, study time, and test scores are larger in those with lower baseline test scores, who are less likely to receive the award. The relative merit-based scholarship program had no significant impacts on student test scores, although there is little evidence of negative effects, as in the standard merit-based scholarship scheme. This study shows that by themselves scholarship programs may not motivate students enough to increase performance in school, and the design of standard merit-based scholarships may in fact result in decreases in motivation and performance.