IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v47y2015i45p4868-4883.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

(How) Do research and administrative duties affect university professors' teaching?

Author

Listed:
  • Aurora García-Gallego
  • Nikolaos Georgantzís
  • Joan Martín-Montaner
  • Teodosio Pérez-Amaral

Abstract

We analyse the interaction between university professors' teaching quality and their research and administrative activities. Our sample is a high-quality individual panel data set from a medium-size public Spanish university that allows us to avoid several types of biases frequently encountered in the literature. Although researchers teach roughly 20% more than nonresearchers, their teaching quality is also 20% higher. Instructors with no research are 5 times more likely than the rest to be among the worst teachers. Over much of the relevant range, we find a nonlinear and positive relationship between research output and teaching quantity on teaching quality. Our conclusions may be useful for decision-makers in universities and governments.

Suggested Citation

  • Aurora García-Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Joan Martín-Montaner & Teodosio Pérez-Amaral, 2015. "(How) Do research and administrative duties affect university professors' teaching?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(45), pages 4868-4883, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:47:y:2015:i:45:p:4868-4883
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2015.1037438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2015.1037438
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lindbeck, Assar & Snower, Dennis J., 2003. "The Firm as a Pool of Factor Complementarities," Working Paper Series 598, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. Michael A. McPherson, 2006. "Determinants of How Students Evaluate Teachers," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 3-20, January.
    3. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    4. Spiller, Pablo T & Zelner, Bennet A, 1997. "Product Complementarities, Capabilities and Governance: A Dynamic Transaction Cost Perspective," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 561-594, September.
    5. Assar Lindbeck & Dennis Snower, 2003. "The Firm as a Pool of Factor Complementarities," CESifo Working Paper Series 1046, CESifo Group Munich.
    6. Beleche, Trinidad & Fairris, David & Marks, Mindy, 2012. "Do course evaluations truly reflect student learning? Evidence from an objectively graded post-test," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 709-719.
    7. Scott E. Carrell & James E. West, 2010. "Does Professor Quality Matter? Evidence from Random Assignment of Students to Professors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(3), pages 409-432, June.
    8. Bedard, Kelly & Kuhn, Peter, 2008. "Where class size really matters: Class size and student ratings of instructor effectiveness," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 253-265, June.
    9. Ben R. Martin, 2012. "Are universities and university research under threat? Towards an evolutionary model of university speciation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 543-565.
    10. Paul Isely & Harinder Singh, 2005. "Do Higher Grades Lead to Favorable Student Evaluations?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 29-42, January.
    11. Ewing, Andrew M., 2012. "Estimating the impact of relative expected grade on student evaluations of teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 141-154.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:47:y:2015:i:45:p:4868-4883. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.