Are tenure track professors better teachers?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study makes use of detailed student-level data from eight cohorts of first-year students at Northwestern University to investigate the relative effects of tenure track/tenured versus contingent faculty on student learning. We focus on classes taken during a student's first term at Northwestern and employ an identification strategy in which we control for both student-level fixed effects and next-class-taken fixed effects to measure the degree to which contingent faculty contribute more or less to lasting student learning than do other faculty. We find consistent evidence that students learn relatively more from contingent faculty in their firstterm courses. This result is driven by the fact that the bottom quarter of tenure track/tenured faculty (as indicted by our measure of teaching effectiveness) has lower "value added" than their contingent counterparts. Differences between contingent and tenure track/tenured faculty are present across a wide variety of subject areas and are particularly pronounced for Northwestern's averages and less-qualified students.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)715-724
Number of pages10
JournalReview of Economics and Statistics
Volume97
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

Fingerprint

university teacher
teacher
student
effectiveness of teaching
first-year student
Tenure
value added
learning
evidence
Fixed effects
Student learning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Economics and Econometrics

Cite this

@article{984e4f37f1574eb49cee4fce596b54c6,
title = "Are tenure track professors better teachers?",
abstract = "This study makes use of detailed student-level data from eight cohorts of first-year students at Northwestern University to investigate the relative effects of tenure track/tenured versus contingent faculty on student learning. We focus on classes taken during a student's first term at Northwestern and employ an identification strategy in which we control for both student-level fixed effects and next-class-taken fixed effects to measure the degree to which contingent faculty contribute more or less to lasting student learning than do other faculty. We find consistent evidence that students learn relatively more from contingent faculty in their firstterm courses. This result is driven by the fact that the bottom quarter of tenure track/tenured faculty (as indicted by our measure of teaching effectiveness) has lower {"}value added{"} than their contingent counterparts. Differences between contingent and tenure track/tenured faculty are present across a wide variety of subject areas and are particularly pronounced for Northwestern's averages and less-qualified students.",
author = "Figlio, {David N} and Morton Schapiro and Soter, {Kevin B.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1162/REST_a_00529",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "97",
pages = "715--724",
journal = "Review of Economics and Statistics",
issn = "0034-6535",
publisher = "MIT Press Journals",
number = "4",

}

Are tenure track professors better teachers? / Figlio, David N; Schapiro, Morton; Soter, Kevin B.

In: Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 97, No. 4, 01.10.2015, p. 715-724.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are tenure track professors better teachers?

AU - Figlio, David N

AU - Schapiro, Morton

AU - Soter, Kevin B.

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - This study makes use of detailed student-level data from eight cohorts of first-year students at Northwestern University to investigate the relative effects of tenure track/tenured versus contingent faculty on student learning. We focus on classes taken during a student's first term at Northwestern and employ an identification strategy in which we control for both student-level fixed effects and next-class-taken fixed effects to measure the degree to which contingent faculty contribute more or less to lasting student learning than do other faculty. We find consistent evidence that students learn relatively more from contingent faculty in their firstterm courses. This result is driven by the fact that the bottom quarter of tenure track/tenured faculty (as indicted by our measure of teaching effectiveness) has lower "value added" than their contingent counterparts. Differences between contingent and tenure track/tenured faculty are present across a wide variety of subject areas and are particularly pronounced for Northwestern's averages and less-qualified students.

AB - This study makes use of detailed student-level data from eight cohorts of first-year students at Northwestern University to investigate the relative effects of tenure track/tenured versus contingent faculty on student learning. We focus on classes taken during a student's first term at Northwestern and employ an identification strategy in which we control for both student-level fixed effects and next-class-taken fixed effects to measure the degree to which contingent faculty contribute more or less to lasting student learning than do other faculty. We find consistent evidence that students learn relatively more from contingent faculty in their firstterm courses. This result is driven by the fact that the bottom quarter of tenure track/tenured faculty (as indicted by our measure of teaching effectiveness) has lower "value added" than their contingent counterparts. Differences between contingent and tenure track/tenured faculty are present across a wide variety of subject areas and are particularly pronounced for Northwestern's averages and less-qualified students.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942608160&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84942608160&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1162/REST_a_00529

DO - 10.1162/REST_a_00529

M3 - Article

VL - 97

SP - 715

EP - 724

JO - Review of Economics and Statistics

JF - Review of Economics and Statistics

SN - 0034-6535

IS - 4

ER -