Present a critical analysis of the article based on the education for growth focusing on the premium on the education and work experience in Singapore
This article undertaken is based on the education for growth focusing on the premium on the education and work experience in Singapore. Audrey Low, Sam Ouliaris, Edward Robison and Wong has divulged that wages given to the students for their work is based on the education attainment. These authors have also shown their ideas and view point regarding with the fact that amount of wages increased with the increase in the experience (Low, Ouliaris, Robinson, & Mei, 2004). After assessing the various articles on the education and wages given to students, I could say that I do not agree with the ideas and econometric tool used by authors. Many authors have suggested that wages given to workers who are studying simultaneously is based on the skills, calibre and intents they are having (Pintea, & Thompson). Nonetheless, work experience and education does matter but Audrey Low, Sam Ouliaris, Edward Robison and Wong has not emphasises upon the other affecting factors which may impact the amount of wages for the particular work. Authors in this article have used standard econometric tool to assess the relevance of the Mincerian human capital earning for the gathered data base. However, use of standard econometric tools focuses on the chart analysis and use of complicated data which may be cumbersome for the readers to understand the gathered data (Low, Ouliaris, Robinson, & Mei, 2004). It would be better if these authors have used ANNOVA method, regression analysis which would have aligned the graphical presentation with the systematic data gathered in this given article.