Publications
- Boring, A., & Philippe, A. (2021). Reducing Discrimination in the Field Evidence from an Awareness Raising Intervention Targeting Gender Biases in Student Evaluations of Teaching. Journal of Public Economics, 193.
- Azmat, G., & Boring, A. (2020). Gender Diversity in Firms. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 36(4), 760-782.
- Boring, A., Desrieux, C., & Espinosa, R. (2018). Aspiring Top Civil Servants' Distrust in the Private Sector. Revue d’Economie Politique, 128(6), 1047-1087.
- Boring, A. (2017). Gender Biases in Student Evaluations of Teaching, Journal of Public Economics, 145, 27-41.
- Boring, A., Ottoboni, K., & Stark, P. (2016). Student Evaluations of Teaching (Mostly) Do Not Measure Teaching Effectiveness. ScienceOpen Research.
Working papers
Gender and Choices in Higher Education, with Jen Brown
Data on the labor market outcomes of university graduates show that gender pay gaps appear soon after graduation in nearly every field of study. We provide descriptive evidence of a plausible cause of the gender starting-salary gap: choices within an educational setting that differ between male and female students, even after accounting for academic specialization. We examine the choices of undergraduate students at a selective French university who are competing for seats at foreign universities to fulfill a mandatory exchange program requirement. Holding fixed students' field of study, we find that average- and high-ability female students request exchange universities that are worse-ranked than their male peers. A survey eliciting students’ preferences suggests that male students prioritize the academic characteristics of potential exchange universities more often, whereas similar female students consider both the academic and non-academic characteristics of exchange destinations. We explore the short-term consequences of these differing preferences using a simulation that assigns students to exchange seats solely on university ranking and students' academic performance. Female students' assignment improves almost uniformly; while top-performing male students face increased competition for seats, and male students with average grades face less competition as high-achieving female students shift towards better-ranked assignments.
Turning Back the Clock: Beliefs in Gender Norms During Lockdown, with Gloria Moroni
We study the impact of lockdown measures on beliefs regarding gender norms. We collect data from a representative sample of 1,000 individuals in France during the first COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. To measure beliefs in gender norms, we use questions from the European Values Study, and match respondents from the two surveys to compare beliefs before and during lockdown. We find evidence that the first lockdown was associated with a shift towards more traditional beliefs in gender norms. The effect is mainly driven by men and individuals who were the most time constrained during lockdown: individuals with young children living in the household. We also find evidence that is consistent with a "conservative shift" hypothesis: beliefs in traditional gender roles increase more for individuals from economically vulnerable groups. Overall, our results suggest that there is no ratchet effect regarding beliefs in gender norms: when there is a reversal in the conditions that enable individuals to believe in equal gender norms (such as the ability to outsource household production or economic stability), individuals shift their beliefs towards less equal gender norms.
Data on the labor market outcomes of university graduates show that gender pay gaps appear soon after graduation in nearly every field of study. We provide descriptive evidence of a plausible cause of the gender starting-salary gap: choices within an educational setting that differ between male and female students, even after accounting for academic specialization. We examine the choices of undergraduate students at a selective French university who are competing for seats at foreign universities to fulfill a mandatory exchange program requirement. Holding fixed students' field of study, we find that average- and high-ability female students request exchange universities that are worse-ranked than their male peers. A survey eliciting students’ preferences suggests that male students prioritize the academic characteristics of potential exchange universities more often, whereas similar female students consider both the academic and non-academic characteristics of exchange destinations. We explore the short-term consequences of these differing preferences using a simulation that assigns students to exchange seats solely on university ranking and students' academic performance. Female students' assignment improves almost uniformly; while top-performing male students face increased competition for seats, and male students with average grades face less competition as high-achieving female students shift towards better-ranked assignments.
Turning Back the Clock: Beliefs in Gender Norms During Lockdown, with Gloria Moroni
We study the impact of lockdown measures on beliefs regarding gender norms. We collect data from a representative sample of 1,000 individuals in France during the first COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. To measure beliefs in gender norms, we use questions from the European Values Study, and match respondents from the two surveys to compare beliefs before and during lockdown. We find evidence that the first lockdown was associated with a shift towards more traditional beliefs in gender norms. The effect is mainly driven by men and individuals who were the most time constrained during lockdown: individuals with young children living in the household. We also find evidence that is consistent with a "conservative shift" hypothesis: beliefs in traditional gender roles increase more for individuals from economically vulnerable groups. Overall, our results suggest that there is no ratchet effect regarding beliefs in gender norms: when there is a reversal in the conditions that enable individuals to believe in equal gender norms (such as the ability to outsource household production or economic stability), individuals shift their beliefs towards less equal gender norms.
Work in progress
Using Motivation Letters to Understand Students' Higher Educational Choices, with Ghazala Azmat, Sophie Cêtre & Roberto Galbiati
We analyze information from motivation letters that students provide in their admissions packages to a selective French university specialized in social sciences. We use the information these letters contain to understand how students’ motivations evolve over the course of their studies, up to their choices of master’s degree specialization. We analyze how students’ motivations for different study paths evolve throughout their undergraduate studies, when they are exposed to new courses and when they receive ability signals through grades in different fields.
Improving Student Evaluations of Teaching
Ideally, student evaluations of teaching (SET) provide instructors with useful information to help them improve the quality of their teaching. The original purpose of SETs was formative: to help instructors improve their teaching practices through student feedback. Over time, universities have started relying on SETs to assess instructors’ teaching effectiveness (summative purpose). A vast number of universities worldwide now use SETs as their main assessment tool to make personnel decisions for faculty, especially tenure track and adjunct faculty. Despite their widespread use, SETs remain highly controversial. Using survey data, the research describes some of the main issues that instructors worldwide currently have with SETs. The research then discusses measures that universities can implement to improve their use of SETs. The analysis covers five main issues that impact instructors' satisfaction and well-being: student biases, response rates and selection effects of students who complete their evaluations, multitasking issues and distorted incentives for instructors who are trying to fulfill both formative and summative purposes of SETs, the perceived power that students have over instructors' careers through SETs, and university administrations' interpretation of SET scores.
We analyze information from motivation letters that students provide in their admissions packages to a selective French university specialized in social sciences. We use the information these letters contain to understand how students’ motivations evolve over the course of their studies, up to their choices of master’s degree specialization. We analyze how students’ motivations for different study paths evolve throughout their undergraduate studies, when they are exposed to new courses and when they receive ability signals through grades in different fields.
Improving Student Evaluations of Teaching
Ideally, student evaluations of teaching (SET) provide instructors with useful information to help them improve the quality of their teaching. The original purpose of SETs was formative: to help instructors improve their teaching practices through student feedback. Over time, universities have started relying on SETs to assess instructors’ teaching effectiveness (summative purpose). A vast number of universities worldwide now use SETs as their main assessment tool to make personnel decisions for faculty, especially tenure track and adjunct faculty. Despite their widespread use, SETs remain highly controversial. Using survey data, the research describes some of the main issues that instructors worldwide currently have with SETs. The research then discusses measures that universities can implement to improve their use of SETs. The analysis covers five main issues that impact instructors' satisfaction and well-being: student biases, response rates and selection effects of students who complete their evaluations, multitasking issues and distorted incentives for instructors who are trying to fulfill both formative and summative purposes of SETs, the perceived power that students have over instructors' careers through SETs, and university administrations' interpretation of SET scores.
