Recent research Papers
|
Student Evaluations of Teaching (Mostly) Do Not Measure Teaching Effectiveness,
ScienceOpen Research (January, 2016), with Kellie Ottoboni & Philip B. Stark. Gender Biases in Student Evaluations of Teaching, Journal of Public Economics 145 (2017): 27-41. Aspiring Top Civil Servants' Distrust in the Private Sector, Revue d'Economie Politique 128(6)(2018): 1047-1087, with Claudine Desrieux & Romain Espinosa. |
|
Work in Progress
Reducing Discrimination in the Field: Evidence from an Awareness Raising Intervention Targeting Gender Biases in Student Evaluations of Teaching, with Arnaud Philippe (submitted)
This paper presents the results of a field experiment designed to reduce gender discrimination in student evaluations of teaching (SET). In the first intervention, students receive a normative statement reminding them that they should not discriminate in SETs. In the second intervention, the normative statement includes precise information about how other students (especially male students) have discriminated against female teachers in previous years. The purely normative statement has no significant impact on SET overall satisfaction scores, suggesting that a blanket awareness-raising campaign may be inefficient to reduce discrimination. However, the informational statement appears to significantly reduce gender discrimination. The effect we find mainly comes from a change in male students’ evaluation of female teachers.
Gender, Competition and Choices in Higher Education, with Jen Brown (draft available)
Survey data on labor market outcomes of university students in France reveal early career gender gaps within almost every field of study. We provide descriptive evidence of a plausible labor supply-side cause for the persisting gender starting-salary gap: choices within an educational setting continue to differ between male and female students. We examine the choices of undergraduate students at a selective French university, who compete for spots in foreign universities where they will fulfill their mandatory exchange program requirements. Holding fixed the field of study and accounting for individuals’ underlying academic ability, we find that average- and high-ability female students request universities that are worse than their academic standing. Using simulations, we consider the impact of other allocation rules. We find that both male and female students would be better off, on average, if female students asked for better-ranked schools. Whereas average-ability male students compete against higher-ability female students in reality, our simulations make them better off, as they are made to compete against female students of equivalent ability. The results of a survey designed to elicit students’ preferences suggests that female students have broader tastes for higher education. Overall, we find that the competition effects are mainly driven by a small group of very focused men.
Gender Diversity in Firms, with Ghazala Azmat
Student aspirations, with Ghazala Azmat, Sophie Cêtre & Roberto Galbiati
Women in the economics profession: an analysis using RePEc, with Soledad Zignago and Christian Zimmermann
This paper presents the results of a field experiment designed to reduce gender discrimination in student evaluations of teaching (SET). In the first intervention, students receive a normative statement reminding them that they should not discriminate in SETs. In the second intervention, the normative statement includes precise information about how other students (especially male students) have discriminated against female teachers in previous years. The purely normative statement has no significant impact on SET overall satisfaction scores, suggesting that a blanket awareness-raising campaign may be inefficient to reduce discrimination. However, the informational statement appears to significantly reduce gender discrimination. The effect we find mainly comes from a change in male students’ evaluation of female teachers.
Gender, Competition and Choices in Higher Education, with Jen Brown (draft available)
Survey data on labor market outcomes of university students in France reveal early career gender gaps within almost every field of study. We provide descriptive evidence of a plausible labor supply-side cause for the persisting gender starting-salary gap: choices within an educational setting continue to differ between male and female students. We examine the choices of undergraduate students at a selective French university, who compete for spots in foreign universities where they will fulfill their mandatory exchange program requirements. Holding fixed the field of study and accounting for individuals’ underlying academic ability, we find that average- and high-ability female students request universities that are worse than their academic standing. Using simulations, we consider the impact of other allocation rules. We find that both male and female students would be better off, on average, if female students asked for better-ranked schools. Whereas average-ability male students compete against higher-ability female students in reality, our simulations make them better off, as they are made to compete against female students of equivalent ability. The results of a survey designed to elicit students’ preferences suggests that female students have broader tastes for higher education. Overall, we find that the competition effects are mainly driven by a small group of very focused men.
Gender Diversity in Firms, with Ghazala Azmat
Student aspirations, with Ghazala Azmat, Sophie Cêtre & Roberto Galbiati
Women in the economics profession: an analysis using RePEc, with Soledad Zignago and Christian Zimmermann
