Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Whether faculty research affects college student learning has long been the subject of debate. Previous studies use subjective measures of student learning; focus on correlation rather than causation; and typically focus on one college, thus lacking generalizability. Using unique, large-scale survey and assessment data that we collected from nationally representative samples of STEM undergraduates in China, India, and Russia, as well as a causal identification strategy that accounts for differential sorting of students to faculty, we present generalizable estimates of the effect of faculty research on objective, standardized measures of student learning. Results show that faculty research has a negative effect on student learning, suggesting direct trade-offs between the university’s dual mission of producing research and learning.

Keywords

China faculty India research Russia STEM student learning universities

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Angrist

J. D.

Pischke

J. S.

(2008). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton University Press.

Bettinger

E.P.

Long

B. T.

(2005). Do faculty serve as role models? The impact of instructor gender on female students. American Economic Review, 95(2), 152–157. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/4132808

Bettinger

E. P.

Long

B. T.

(2010). Does cheaper mean better? The impact of using adjunct instructors on student outcomes. Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(3), 598–613. doi:10.1162/REST_a_00014

Carnoy

Loyalka

Dobryakova

Dossani

Kuhns

Wang

(2013). University expansion in a changing global economy: Triumph of the BRICs? Stanford University.

Carrell

S. E.

West

J. E.

(2010). Does professor quality matter? Evidence from random assignment of students to professors. Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 409–432. doi:10.1086/653808

Cech

T. R.

(2003). Rebalancing teaching and research. Science, 299, 165.

Clotfelter

C. T.

Ladd

H. F.

Vigdor

J. L.

(2010). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school: A cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects. Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 655–681. doi:10.3368/jhr.45.3.655

Dee

T. S.

(2005). A teacher like me: Does race, ethnicity, or gender matter? American Economic Review, 95(2), 158–165. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132809

Dee

T. S.

(2007). Teachers and the gender gaps in student achievement. Journal of Human Resources, 42(3), 528–554.

10.

Feldman

K. A.

(1987). Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Research in Higher Education, 26(3), 227–298.

11.

Felton

Mitchell

Stinson

(2004). Web-based student evaluations of professors: The relations between perceived quality, easiness and sexiness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(1), 91–108. doi:10.1080/0260293032000158180

12.

Figlio

D. N.

Schapiro

(2017). Are great teachers poor scholars. Evidence Speaks Reports, 2(6).

13.

Fox

M. F.

(1992). Research, teaching, and publication productivity: Mutuality versus competition in Academia. Sociology of Education, 65(4), 293–305.

14.

Galbraith

C. S.

Merrill

G. B.

(2012). Faculty research productivity and standardized student learning outcomes in a university teaching environment: A Bayesian analysis of relationships. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 469–480.

15.

Griffiths

(2004). Knowledge production and the research–teaching nexus: The case of the built environment disciplines. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 709–726.

16.

Hanushek

E. A.

Rivkin

S. G.

(2010). Generalizations about using value-added measures of teacher quality. American Economic Review, 100(2), 267–71. doi:10.1257/aer.100.2.267

17.

Hattie

Marsh

H. W.

(1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507–542.

18.

Hoffmann

Oreopoulos

(2009). Professor qualities and student achievement. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(1), 83–92.

19.

Humboldt

W. V.

(1970). On the spirit and organisational framework of intellectual institutions in Berlin. Minerva, 8(2), 242–250.

20.

Kardanova

Loyalka

Chirikov

Liu

Wang

Enchikova

Shi

Johnson

(2016). Developing instruments to assess and compare the quality of engineering education: The case of China and Russia. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(5), 770–786. doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1162278

21.

Kingdon

Teal

(2010). Teacher unions, teacher pay and student performance in India: A pupil fixed effects approach. Journal of Development Economics, 91(2), 278–288. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2009.09.001

22.

Lavy

(2015). Do differences in schools’ instruction time explain international achievement gaps? Evidence from developed and developing countries. Economic Journal, 125(588), F397–424. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291468-0297/issues

23.

Shcheglova

Bhuradia

Loyalka

Zhou

S. F.

N. N.

L. P.

Guo

Chirikov

(2020). Large-scale international assessments of learning outcomes: balancing the interests of multiple stakeholders. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 43(2), 198–213.

24.

Linsky

A. S.

Straus

M. A.

(1975). Student evaluations, research productivity, and eminence of college faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 46(1), 89–102.

25.

Loyalka

Carnoy

Froumin

Dossani

Tilak

J. B.

Yang

(2014). Factors affecting the quality of engineering education in the four largest emerging economies. Higher Education, 68(6), 977–1004. doi:10.1007/s10734-014-9755-8

26.

Loyalka

Liu

O. L.

Chirikov

Kardanova

Ling

Guo

Johnson

A. S.

Bhuradia

Khanna

Froumin

Shi

Choudhury

P. K.

Beteille

Marmolejo

Tognatta

(2019). Computer science skills across China, India, Russia, and the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(14), 6732–6736.

27.

Loyalka

Liu

Kardanova

Chirikov

Guo

Beteille

Tognatta

Ling

Federiakin

Wang

Khanna

Bhuradia

Shi

(2021). Skill levels and gains in college STEM education in China, India, Russia, and the United States. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 892–904.

28.

Lucena

Downey

Jesiek

Elber

(2008). Competencies beyond countries: The re-organization of engineering education in the United States, Europe, and Latin America. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 433–447. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00991.x

29.

National Academy of Science. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future.

30.

National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2015). China statistical yearbook. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2015/indexeh.htm.

31.

National Science Board. (2016). Science & engineering indicators. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED571833.pdf

32.

Nature Editorial. (2010, June 3). Education ambivalence. Nature. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/465525b

33.

Neumann

(1992). Perceptions of the teaching-research nexus: A framework for analysis. Higher Education, 23(2), 159–171.

34.

Newman

J. H.

(1853). The idea of a university. Doubleday.

35.

Prince

M. J.

Felder

R. M.

Brent

(2007). Does faculty research improve undergraduate teaching? An analysis of existing and potential synergies. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 283–294.

36.

Rivkin

S. G.

Schiman

J. C.

(2015). Instruction time, classroom quality, and academic achievement. Economic Journal, 125(588), F425–448. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291468-0297/issues

37.

Robertson

Bond

C. H.

(2001). Experiences of the relation between teaching and research: What do academics value? Higher Education Research and Development, 20(1), 5–19.

38.

Shevlin

Banyard

Davies

Griffiths

(2000). The validity of student evaluation of teaching in higher education: Love me, love my lectures? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 397–405. doi:10.1080/713611436

39.

Smeby

J. C.

(1998). Knowledge production and knowledge transmission: The interaction between research and teaching at universities. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(1), 5–20.

40.

Teichler

Arimoto

Cummings

W. K.

(2013). The changing academic profession. Springer.

41.

Tuckman

H. P.

Hagemann

R. P.

(1976). An analysis of the reward structure in two disciplines. Journal of Higher Education, 47(4), 447–464. doi:10.1080/00221546.1976.11774066

42.

Wood

F. S.

1973. The use of individual effects and residuals in fitting equations to data. Technometrics, 15(4), 677–695. doi:10.2307/1267381

43.

Zakharov

Tsheko

Carnoy

(2016). Do “better” teachers and classroom resources improve student achievement? A causal comparative approach in Kenya, South Africa, and Swaziland. International Journal of Educational Development, 50, 108–124.

44.

Zimmerman

(1992). Regression toward mediocrity in economic stature. American Economic Review, 82(3), 409–429.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.32 MB

The Effect of Faculty Research on Student Learning in College

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material