The Faculty Flutie Factor: Does Football Performance Affect a University’s US News and World Report Peer Assessment Score?
Analyzing the peer assessment portion of the US News and World Report’s college rankings, we find that administrators and faculty rate more highly universities whose football team receives a greater number of votes in either the final Associated Press or Coaches Poll. Controlling for unobserved heterogeneity, our estimates suggest that a one standard deviation increase in the number of votes received in either the Associated Press or USA Today Coaches’ Football Poll is viewed as positively as a forty point increase in a school’s SAT score at the 75th percentile.
|Date of creation:||07 Sep 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- TA. Rhoads & S. Gerking, 2000. "Educational contributions, academic quality, and athletic success," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(2), pages 248-258, 04.
- McCormick, Robert E & Tensley, Maurice, 1987. "Athletics versus Academics? Evidence from SAT Scores," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1103-16, October.
- Murphy, Robert G. & Trandel, Gregory A., 1994. "The relation between a university's football record and the size of its applicant pool," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 265-270, September.
- Mixon, Franklin Jr & Trevino, Len J., 2005. "From kickoff to commencement: the positive role of intercollegiate athletics in higher education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 97-102, February.
- Monks, James, 2003. "Patterns of giving to one's alma mater among young graduates from selective institutions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 121-130, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:26443. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.