IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v51y2019i58p6280-6285.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are contingent instructors better teachers: evidence from a Chinese university

Author

Listed:
  • Qiang Feng
  • Jing Feng
  • Ming Li
  • Yang Li

Abstract

This paper evaluates the effects of contingent instructors on education outcomes in the context of higher education in developing countries. Exploiting the features of Chinese higher education system, we are able to exclude the confounding effects of student selection and heterogeneous marking standards. Although students of contingent instructors appear to perform as well as their fellow students taught by full-time instructors, we find the evidence that contingent instructors utilize lower marking standards, resulting an inflation of the scores of their students, which masks the negative impacts of their teaching. Our results suggest that contingent instructors have a significantly negative impact on education outcomes. While exposure to contingent instructors may affect the probability of students taking more challenging courses in the following term, the longer-term impacts on education outcomes are negligible.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiang Feng & Jing Feng & Ming Li & Yang Li, 2019. "Are contingent instructors better teachers: evidence from a Chinese university," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(58), pages 6280-6285, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:51:y:2019:i:58:p:6280-6285
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2019.1667476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2019.1667476
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2019.1667476?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    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:51:y:2019:i:58:p:6280-6285. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.