Response paper to Hoekstra (2009) and Kirkeboen et al. (2016).

You will see that these two papers use regression discontinuity to estimate the returns to going to higher quality college along with in Kirkeboen et al. (2016) the returns to specific degrees. Your aim (along with suggested lengths) should be to: Discuss the importance of the question of discovering the return to college quality and college major (This should not take more than one paragraph). Summarize the methodologies and results of each paper as you understand them. (One paragraph each) Discuss why the results in the two papers on the returns to college quality differ. Both papers have good internal validity, so focus your discussion on the different context of the papers, especially as it relates to the counterfactual majors and schools that students go to if they just miss the threshold. This is the key innovation of the Kirkeboen et al. (2016) paper: you know a student's exact counterfactual degree and school. What is this counterfactual in the Hoekstra (2009) paper? How does major choice affect the different returns to college quality identified in both papers? Please read my brief description on next page about the college that Hoekstra (2009) looks at (which is unamed in his paper, but I have named it!) (2-3 paragraphs for this and prior point) Conclude by talking about external validity and discussing what we still need to learn about returns to college quality and college degree that these papers could not identity (especially in context of US education system). (one paragraph at most)