Education
Reservation‑Category Faculty Match General‑Category Peers in Teaching and Research, Study Finds
A new study on engineering faculty in India found that teachers recruited under caste‑based reservation policies perform as well as, and sometimes slightly better than, their general‑category counterparts in classroom teaching and research output. The research, titled “Affirmative Action, Faculty Productivity and Caste Interactions: Evidence from Engineering Colleges in India,” was authored by Robert W. Fairlie (UCLA and NBER), Saurabh Khanna (University of Amsterdam), Prashant Loyalka (Stanford University) and Gagandeep S. Sachdeva (UC Santa Cruz). It examined data from 50 engineering and technology colleges, including 2,710 faculty members and 20,239 students, covering computer science and electrical engineering departments. Eight elite institutions were randomly selected from IITs, NITs, IIITs and other top‑100 NIRF‑ranked colleges; the remaining 42 were chosen from non‑elite institutions weighted by size.
The study found that reservation‑category faculty have lower observable qualifications: 14 % hold a PhD versus 21 % of general‑category faculty, 64 % have a master’s degree compared with 58 %, and 80 % are assistant professors versus 74 % for general‑category faculty. Their average teaching experience is 8.91 years, slightly below the 10.06 years of general‑category faculty. Despite these differences, students taught by reservation‑category faculty scored an average of 1.44 percentile points higher in immediate course examinations. The advantage remained after adjusting for faculty experience, rank, qualifications and gender.
Longer‑term outcomes—standardised test scores, attendance, dropout rates, graduation rates and plans to pursue postgraduate studies—showed no meaningful differences between the two groups. The study also found no consistent “teacher‑like‑me” advantage for students taught by faculty from their own caste category.
Research productivity and administrative duties were comparable across categories. Only about 13 % of faculty received research funding in the two‑year period studied, with 10 % receiving government funding and 3 % private funding; roughly 28 % held administrative positions. The differences between reservation‑ and general‑category faculty in these areas were small and not statistically significant.
The working paper, released in October by the NBER, is pending peer review and is also listed as forthcoming in the Journal of Political Economy: Microeconomics. The authors note that further research is needed to confirm the findings in other settings.
Frequently asked questions
How do reservation‑category faculty qualifications compare to general‑category faculty?
14 % hold a PhD versus 21 % of general‑category faculty, 64 % have a master’s degree compared with 58 %, and 80 % are assistant professors versus 74 % for general‑category faculty.
Do students taught by reservation‑category faculty perform better on exams?
Yes, students taught by reservation‑category faculty scored an average of 1.44 percentile points higher in immediate course examinations, even after adjusting for experience, rank, qualifications and gender.
Are there differences in research funding or administrative roles between the two groups?
Only about 13 % of faculty received research funding in the two‑year period, with 10 % receiving government funding and 3 % private funding; roughly 28 % held administrative positions. The differences between reservation‑ and general‑category faculty in these areas were small and not statistically significant.