This paper examines the relationship between education and economic growth, reconciling findings from microeconometric and macroeconomic growth literature. Microeconometric studies suggest that education significantly affects individual income, while macroeconomic studies often find no relationship between education and economic growth. The authors argue that this discrepancy is due to high measurement error in cross-country education data. After accounting for measurement error, the effect of education on income growth is as significant as microeconometric estimates of the return to schooling. The macro growth literature's finding that initial human capital levels affect growth is challenged, as it relies on assumptions that are often rejected by data. Relaxing these assumptions shows that initial education levels have little effect on growth for most countries. The paper also explores the social versus private returns to education. While the private return is well-established, the social return can be higher due to externalities like technological progress or reduced crime. However, in some cases, the social return may be lower, especially if education leads to higher unemployment or if physical capital returns exceed human capital returns. The paper reviews macro growth models, which often focus on the initial level of education rather than changes. It shows that the effect of education on growth is sensitive to econometric assumptions. When these assumptions are relaxed, the positive effect of initial education on growth is less pronounced. The paper also highlights the importance of measurement error in education data, which can significantly attenuate estimates of the effect of education on growth. The paper concludes that while the microeconomic evidence strongly supports the Mincerian wage equation, the evidence for a positive effect of education on a country's growth rate is weak. The positive effect of initial education on growth is mainly observed in countries with very low levels of education. The paper also notes that the return to education varies systematically with individual characteristics, with disadvantaged individuals benefiting more from additional schooling. The paper emphasizes the need for more accurate measurement of education data to better understand its impact on economic growth.This paper examines the relationship between education and economic growth, reconciling findings from microeconometric and macroeconomic growth literature. Microeconometric studies suggest that education significantly affects individual income, while macroeconomic studies often find no relationship between education and economic growth. The authors argue that this discrepancy is due to high measurement error in cross-country education data. After accounting for measurement error, the effect of education on income growth is as significant as microeconometric estimates of the return to schooling. The macro growth literature's finding that initial human capital levels affect growth is challenged, as it relies on assumptions that are often rejected by data. Relaxing these assumptions shows that initial education levels have little effect on growth for most countries. The paper also explores the social versus private returns to education. While the private return is well-established, the social return can be higher due to externalities like technological progress or reduced crime. However, in some cases, the social return may be lower, especially if education leads to higher unemployment or if physical capital returns exceed human capital returns. The paper reviews macro growth models, which often focus on the initial level of education rather than changes. It shows that the effect of education on growth is sensitive to econometric assumptions. When these assumptions are relaxed, the positive effect of initial education on growth is less pronounced. The paper also highlights the importance of measurement error in education data, which can significantly attenuate estimates of the effect of education on growth. The paper concludes that while the microeconomic evidence strongly supports the Mincerian wage equation, the evidence for a positive effect of education on a country's growth rate is weak. The positive effect of initial education on growth is mainly observed in countries with very low levels of education. The paper also notes that the return to education varies systematically with individual characteristics, with disadvantaged individuals benefiting more from additional schooling. The paper emphasizes the need for more accurate measurement of education data to better understand its impact on economic growth.