Using DEA for measuring teachers’ performance and the impact on students’ outcomes: evidence for Spain
- 167 Downloads
This research contributes to the ongoing debate about differences in teachers’ performance. We introduce a new methodology that combines production frontier and impact evaluation insights that allows using DEA as an identification strategy of a treatment with high and low quality teachers within schools to assess their performance. We use a unique database of primary schools in Spain that, for every school, supplies information on two classrooms at 4th grade where students and teachers were randomly assigned into the two classrooms. We find considerable differences in teachers’ efficiency across schools with significant effects on students’ achievement. In line with previous findings, we find that neither teacher experience nor academic training explains teachers’ efficiency. Conversely, being a female teacher, having worked five or more years in the same school or having smaller class sizes positively affects the performance of teachers.
KeywordsTeachers’ performance Efficiency DEA Causal inference Primary education
JEL classificationI21 C14
We thank two anonymous referees for helpful discussions and suggestions. Research support from the Fundación Ramón Areces is acknowledged by the authors. Gabriela Sicilia thanks financial support received from the Agencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- Angrist JD, Lavy V, Leder-Luis J, and Shany A (2017). Maimonides Rule Redux (No. w23486). National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Barro RJ, Lee JW (1996) International measures of schooling years and schooling quality. Am Econ Rev 86:218–223Google Scholar
- Chetty R, Friedman JN, and Rockoff JE (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. NBER: wp17699, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Coleman JS, Campbell EQ, Hobson CJ, McPartland J, Mood AM, Weinfeld FD, York R (1966) Equality of educational opportunity. Washington DC, 1066-5684.Google Scholar
- Cordero JM, Cristobal V, & Santín D (2017). Causal inference on education policies: a survey of empirical studies using PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS. J Econ Surv doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12217.
- De la Fuente A (2011) Human capital and productivity. Nordic Econ Policy Rev 2:103–132Google Scholar
- Gordon RJ, Kane TJ, Staiger D (2006) Identifying effective teachers using performance on the job. Brookings Institution, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
- Hanushek, E. A. (2003) The Failure of Input-based Schooling Policies. The Economic Journal 113:64–98Google Scholar
- Hanushek EA, Rivkin SG (2006) Teacher quality. In: Hanusheck EA, Welch F (eds) Handbook of the Economics of Education. 2. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- Heckman JJ, Kautz T (2013). Fostering and measuring skills: Interventions that improve character and cognition. NBER wp19656. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- INEE. (2010). Evaluación general de diagnóstico 2009. Educación primaria. Cuarto curso. Informe de resultados. Ministerio de Educación. Madrid.Google Scholar
- Kane TJ, Staiger DO (2008). Estimating teacher impacts on student achievement: an experimental evaluation. NBER wp14607. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Krieg JM (2005) Student gender and teacher gender: what is the impact on high stakes test scores. Curr Issues Educ 8:1–16Google Scholar