The long-run impacts of same-race teachers

From Seth Gershenson, Cassandra M.D. Hart, Joshua Hyman, Constance Lindsay and Nicholas W. Papageorge:

We examine the impact of having a same-race teacher on students’ long-run educational attainment. Leveraging random student-teacher pairings in the Tennessee STAR class-size experiment, we find that black students randomly assigned to a black teacher in grades K-3 are 5 percentage points (7%) more likely to graduate from high school and 4 percentage points (13%) more likely to enroll in college than their peers in the same school who are not assigned a black teacher. We document similar patterns using quasi-experimental methods and statewide administrative data from North Carolina. To examine possible mechanisms, we provide a theoretical model that formalizes the notion of “role model effects” as distinct from teacher effectiveness. We envision role model effects as information provision: black teachers provide a crucial signal that leads black students to update their beliefs about the returns to effort and what educational outcomes are possible. Using testable implications generated by the theory, we provide suggestive evidence that role model effects help to explain why black teachers increase the educational attainment of black students.

I would describe the strength of this effect as one of the main and most important things economists have taught us over the last five years.


Shout it from the rooftops, but also very interesting that this is economics, and at the National Bureau of Economics Research. Somebody else falling down on the job.

By the way, one of my inner city teacher dad's stories was that at lunch, during noon supervision, some of the kids started guessing what people with college degrees made. The kids guessed really low, because they didn't have that exposure, and didn't really know the benefits. So my dad (different "race") tried to tell them, no they make lot more, go to college, eh?

Of course that was the 70's, and we might have a different problem now, with Instagram influencers giving kids the idea that home runs are easy.

Good point. I wonder what effect widely publicizing salary data would have on career choices. Most people have only a vague idea what people in the field make before selecting a major.

You are seeing the effects now. Demand equality of outcomes.

You might see that. You might also see more women, and men, and everyone, gravitate towards fields where they get paid more.

Probably, but the choice of careers is not solely one of money, for women OR men. Social workers and software developers tend not to value the same non-monetary rewards, nor value money equally when contrasting with other things. (Comparisons proving a gender basis for salary gaps often gloss over this kind of thing too.)

As I type this, all 5 responses below mine demonstrate how the "kids are kids" teacher bubble does not extend to the whole world. (sad lol)

Diversity is our greatest strength.

Maybe, but the evidence under discussion suggests exactly the opposite. Namely, that when a student has the same color as the teacher, it works better, and as a corollary, when everyone (all students and the teacher) have the same color then it works better. So the logical conclusion is "segregation is our greatest strength".

That's a very sad conclusion, I find, if as Tyler claims it is supported by facts, at least at this time and in this country.

Come on man, having a "teacher like me" is segregation?

And you wonder why I you guys in general disregard.

"Hold" you guys

anonymou, are you logically challenged? If a teacher like me is better then it is also true for other students in the class. So all the student are like the teacher and alike. That means purely black classes and purely Hispanic etc. That's exactly segregation.

That was not the test. It was whether any interaction with a teacher in the course of elementary school changed outcomes.

It certainly was not tested that all teachers k-6 had to be same "race."

In fact I hope we can see the benefit of diverse teachers k-6, some of whom were like me, but all of whom instilled American values.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these ..."

I think there was also a paper showing a positive effect from the Cosby show on college enrollment among African Americans. But by no means are you supposed to suggest that culture (which includes who is held up as a role model) has anything to do with the social outcomes of particular groups of people.

Ok, maybe I am suspicious because this goes against my beliefs but this data seems weak for such conclusion. Why K-3? What kind of experience did these kids had in all subsequent grades? How do you control for the actual message this professor gave these students (this goes beyond effectiveness) around success and education?
I do believe teachers have a significant impact. I would be very cautious to say that the distinguishing factor here is the color of their skin.

As it actually turns out STAR assignments weren't random. Whoops!

The authors actually even identify this in the paper, but choose to pretend it doesn't exist and not even try to control for it because [reasons]:

"This test shows that ever-FRL [free lunch] students and students whose name of DOB [date-of-birth] were missing were less likely to have a same-race teacher"

How many different analyses of STAR have there been now? Have we reached the point where there have been more paper authors than n yet?

"we show that black students who are as good as randomly assigned to a black teacher at least once in the third, fourth,
or fifth grades"

Article is paywalled, but I'm damned if I can see how they can conclude a "role-model" effect is causal. They'd have to control for 1) teacher competence, 2) SOCIAL/CULTURAL effects (especially similarity) 3) teacher educational background (maybe this is corollary of #2?), age, gender,.... We KNOW IQ is culturally sensitive, so doesn't it follow that academic achievement will have a cultural component? Or maybe (or more than just maybe) I'm babbling. This looks to me like sociology, not economics. Smells like it too. Unless someone can provide me with a biological definition of race, that is.

They can make causal conclusions because the assignment of students to teachers has been randomized. The logic is the same as that of a random clinical trial in medicine -- if we randomly assign patients to treatment and control, then in expectation unobserved patient characteristics "wash-out". No need to explicitly control for anything.

It is good practice to check, after the randomization, that the two groups are statistically similar on all measured dimensions. But for unmeasured dimensions the randomization ensures that, in a sufficiently large sample, the probability of the two groups being different is small.

This doesn't control for how much effort a teacher puts out for a particular student.

And if a black teacher puts out more effort for black students, it is hard to deduce whether the teacher decided to give more or the student asked for more. But it is clear that this is zero sum so non-black students lose effort. The marginal benefits though might be similar.

For your idea to work, though, it would seem like nearly all black teachers would have to all provide black students with extra effort. Otherwise you'd see no bump for except for those few black teachers who are doing this. Likewise wouldn't white students who get a black teacher demonstrate a decline relative to their peers who don't? That part might not show up because the effort may not be zero sum. If the teacher gives 'extra effort' then no student gets less from the teacher than they otherwise would have received.

@Boonton On your two points:

1. I don't think ALL the black teachers need to expand more effort to produce the modest result of a few percentage points more success. In fact, if every teacher put out a modicum of additional effort, the students might not gain enough to pass a threshold. My suggestion might be SOME black teachers putting in a LOT more effort.

2. Yes, I did suggest that other students would see a reduction in teaching effort. But the marginal benefits to black students from X additional hours might be greater than the decline in marginal benefits from a decrease of X hours to non-black students. If that is the case, then the extra effort for black students is welfare improving.

But there is a possibility that the non-black students will get hurt WORSE than the gain for black students.

For example, take a homogeneous class of fairly bright students, and then add a profoundly disabled, non-English speaking, or behaviorally disruptive student. That one student might distract substantially from the experience of the remaining students. The jointness of supply works both up and down. A good teaching experience lifts everyone but a bad teaching experience inhibits most.

By this example I'm not assuming that black students are less smart or more disruptive. I'm merely showing that the welfare effects are ambiguous. But since black achievement is below average, it certainly is a possibility.

In my former case though, it might be more efficient to give black students extra resources to close the achievement gap.

#2 has an interesting implication to what we mean by a good versus bad teacher. Say you're saying a teacher has 5 hours per week to devote to students on an individual basis. Ideally she should not simply divide her time equally between all students but figure out the greatest return on investment. If an hour with the black student increases his odds by 5% but the hour with the white one only increases it by 1%, a good teacher would not divide time evenly.

Perhaps instead of asking why black teachers might be focusing more on black students, you should ask why don't white teachers, seeing where the biggest bang for the hour is, do the same? If you have an outcomes based compensation scheme where teachers get bonuses for good results, you would figure they should be doing this if they know what they are doing.

Then again cause and effect might be a bit tangled here. Perhaps black and white teachers can on some level recognize in black students they are open for a role model. The black teachers then act on that because they can pull the part off while the white teachers do not because it would be ineffective for them. (A young actor knows to try for parts like Hamlet while a good older actor knows to go for older parts like King Lear....both might be great actors but they know not to try for the wrong part just like Judy Dench isn't going to try to play Selena but Jennifer Lopez did when she was young).

Was thinking this evening about the possibility that black teachers give more attention to black students. There would be an easy way to spot this in the data.

As you pointed out, this would be zero sum. So the positive impact of a black teacher for a black student would dilute if the black student had to share the black teacher with many black classmates. If you don't see that effect in the data, I think you can rule out the 'motivated black teacher' theory.

It takes longer to type "article is paywalled" than do a web search:

"We KNOW IQ is culturally sensitive"


Should high school degree-holders b allowed to take a year of teachers' college and thereafter apprentice into the profession without ba/bs degrees? Maybe prospective teachers could pass subject tests and then go thru teacher training without uni subject study

It is weird, for instance, that a kid born and raised in Puerto Rico should have to pay/wait for a uni degree to teach Spanish. There r many Spanish teaching jobs. There r many low-income bilinguals in the US

Black people seem large and gregarious, to me. They have deeper voices, on average, and they don't blush as visibly. They deal with confrontation more frequently. Many of the best US entertainers are black. Teaching is a public-speaking position, among other things. I think this is a field where less occupational licensing would b good

very convincing research.
researchers isolated the same-race-teachers variable among all other variables for a very small sample of students... and measured its effect to a one percentage point accuracy.

I attended segregated (public) schools, so all of my teachers were white, with two exceptions. In anticipation of integration (by court order), in my senior year two black teachers were assigned to my all-white high school. They were two of the best teachers I ever had, one who taught math (geometry) and the other English. Sure, the school board would send the best, but just the same, the best were better than the all-white teachers I had. What younger people today can't understand is how black families back then were just like white families, only poorer (most whites were poor). Why has so much changed? Thomas Sowell has his answer, but I don't believe it tells the entire story; he is correct that the civil rights act, which mandated that blacks could shop in formerly segregated stores, devastated black-owned businesses. This study linked by Cowen, on the significance of same-race teachers, may tangentially support Sowell's thesis. My view, though, is that the overriding problem is the resistance to integration in this country, not the good faith efforts to bring about integration.

Brown v. Board of Education cost a lot of black teachers their jobs. How's that for unintended consequences?

It also ruined most public schools, outside of magnets and a few affluent districts.

I suppose we could discuss how it is completely absurd that the appearance of your kindergarten teacher was the reason you graduated from high school.

But hey, that would ruin the party, right?

I look forward to your protests on the street corners, demanding that we stop training teachers, and just start hiring them based on looks.

'I suppose we could discuss how it is completely absurd that the appearance of your kindergarten teacher was the reason you graduated from high school. '

Well, most kindergarten teachers are female, right? And more females graduate from high school, right?

Seems like just the start of the party, not its ruin.

Though what that has to do with whatever important things economists are teaching us these days is open to question (or scorn, of course).

This study will be grabbed upon by the Academy and will result in more failed policies such as lowering the bar for black teachers. Then in a few years after failing to replicate will be quietly trashed.

I’m black and didn't have a black teacher during my attendance at Catholic school. I had two black teachers at public school, one a PE teacher and the other a black studies teacher.

They had no impact on my life or outcomes. The people that had an impact were my parents, my white Southern preschool owner that implored my immigrant parents to enroll me in Catholic school, my community that unlike the African-American community, pushed me to excel.

There’s no secret recipe for school success but hey I suppose academics need something to study, consultants need to be paid etc.

article here:

This part answers at my exposure question, 1 year seems to be enough: "we show that black students who are as good as randomly assigned to a black teacher at least once in the third, fourth, or fifth grades are more likely to aspire to college and less likely to drop out of high school."

If you're wondering, it's a male thing: "On average, having had at least one black teacher in grades 3-5 reduces males’ dropout probability by about eight percentage points, effectively halving the black male dropout rate . There is no such effect on black female students. "

And this is a 110% politically correct way to tell family role models are very important too: "There could also be heterogeneity by SES in students’ long-run responses to exposure to same-race elementary school teachers, as students from low-income and less-educated households might disproportionately benefit from same-race role models in school due to their lower levels of exposure to, and confidence interacting with, college-educated individuals outside of the traditional school day".

The curious thing here is that children can have a role model in front of them and not learn from him. The role model has to fit a specific conditions: same race. So, is being inspired by teachers of all colors, sex-orientations or body sizes an advantage?

Now playing full troll...........I'd like to know the results for male teachers. If a same-race teacher has that effect, what about having a teacher of the same sex?

What are the policy implications? Suppose whites do better with white teachers. Is a mostly white school district allowed to prefer white teachers?

Do you think there is a danger that majority white districts would not have majority white teachers? Nationally, about 81.9% of teachers are "white non-Hispanic" some states not reporting. More here:

You might want to check some of this out with sub-race ethnicity. It's not likely that whites wouldn't have white teachers, but some may not have teachers of the same exact ethnic background and there could be some changes in effect higher up the ability distribution (over-represented white sub-ethnicities, etc.)

Apples and oranges. A white society like ours still is has lots of white role models literally everywhere.

The whole point of role models for blacks is so they know *they too* can succeed in this society that's so unlike them.

(That said, for poor and/or rural white youths, some poor or rural role models may help too.)

Assuming you're white (I try to imagine an Oriental or black person asking that kind of question, I really try), picture yourself growing up in a sub-Saharan African country, or in someplace like China, Japan or Korea. Just ask yourself, in the privacy of your own heart, whether it *really* would have made no difference as a white child in those societies to have had just one or two white teachers.

All but one of my primary school teachers were women. I suppose I must blame them for my lack of a Nobel Prize in Physics.

So they are 93% as likely to do the same thing. I guess when nothing else works then 7% is quite impressive.

Well, that's far and away better results than a statin drug -- and people are eating those like M&Ms.

As usual, treating this as a general effect, not a black effect is unjustified. How about for Asians? Is this true as well for NE Asians?

I'm sure it would be true for "Asians" in similar circumstance, and by that I mean any place inter-generational poverty disconnects kids from models of success.

In a lot of poor countries, where state education is decentralized and scarce, poor people are often taught by members of their community. "I'm sure it would be true" under your theory that they should be doing very well.

Here's some context-free Wikipedia links, since you seem to think that makes your argument more persuasive:

So ... the National Bureau of Economics Research publishes a paper, and you seek to minimize it by saying it is "my" theory about role models?


And your reason for believing that the study (assuming it's valid) can be generalized to other groups is..."I'm certain" and telling us that Cambodian-Americans have a higher poverty rate than other Asian groups.

Classic indeed.

Speaking of classics. Way to drop "in similar circumstance, and by that I mean any place inter-generational poverty disconnects kids from models of success."

Again, being the son of parents who worked in minority-majority schools, I feel like I do have more exposure to the problems at those schools than the average suburban white kibitzer.

And this study is consistent with what my parents told me, yes.

This is about a very specific model of success based on race and your certainty in being able to generalize to other groups comes from anecdotes from your parents.

This is about role models, and isolated communities without internal models of success.

Note that there are white Protestant communities that fit that description.

+1. It is rare among Asian-Americans to have race hustlers (who are given prominent platforms by white liberals) telling them that the system prevents their success. And if the purported effect is concentrated on males (see above), then there is good reason to doubt that black and Asian families are comparable.

I have known non-black women who have taught in Atlanta Public Schools, most of which have nearly all black students. The young black boys are completely out of control.

White teachers can't really do anything about it. A white teacher so much as breathes in a kid's direction and the mother is at the school raising hell about a white woman touching her kid.

HOWEVER, black teachers can pretty much do what they want to the black boys: pinch them, berate them harshly and embarrass them, twist their ears, swat them on the behind, whack them with a ruler, etc. Even when first grade boys get in to a fight, the white teachers will go get a black teacher to break it up because to physically separate the kids would raise a parent's ire.

Given that there's probably no disciplinarian at home, perhaps if a teacher is allowed to jerk a knot in young black boys' behinds so that they will just sit they asses down a bit in K-3, they might have a better chance.

The young black boys are completely out of control.

That's a policy choice. Time to choose different policies.

Feel free to come to Atlanta and tell our diverse bureaucracy that. Let me know what they say.

Note also that it is only a second-hand report. Essentially he is saying "my friend told me black kids are bad, and I believe that more than this study."

This page really is awful.

Nothing there contradicts the study. I was going to chime in and say, during high school, there were things only a guy teacher can say to a boy. It's not surprising that only a black teacher might be able to tell a black boy to shape up in terms that he'll listen too.

You don't think "the young black boys are completely out of control" is a tad all-encompassing?

Every school has nerds, jocks and stoners. There is the class clown, the teacher's pet, and the angry kid.

You certainly cannot name type by color.

The GAO report shows black students and black boys in particular have more discipline problems than other groups. Notably, both Hispanics and Asians are "underrepresented" in most categories of discipline and are more underrepresented than whites in several categories, so it's reasonable to say that there's an unusually big discipline problem among black boys.

Page 14-15:

Of course there are tough schools and bad environments, but you can't see that is not the same as "black students?"

Or even that at a tough school with a bad environment there might be a nerd who just wants to learn?

The basic problem here is applying general expectations to every individual, which of course is the definition of bias.

You can't see that a disproportionately large portion of black students have internalized "black redneck" culture (so it's not only a matter of external environment) and that this is the group that the social engineers are trying to target with black teacher role models to try to counteract that culture. And they have to do that because (as the OP noted) non-black teachers are hemmed in by the multiculturalist BS propagated by those social engineers (aggravated of course by the directives of Obama Administration).

Black nerds can do just fine without black teachers as role models, and they'd do better if more troublemakers were disciplined and separated from students who want to learn.

And of course the fear that all black boys are a danger .. starts to sound like a certain kind of famous bias.

No one said all. Stop with your strawmanning. You're pissing into the wind here. Everyone knows black males have more disciplinary problems than other kids.

Does the study compare outcomes for non-black students based on the same teachers? Is it possible that the black teachers at the school just happen to be better teachers (whether due to racial bias in hiring or random variation) and all students benefit from having them?

I would describe the strength of this effect as one of the main and most important things economists have taught us over the last five years.

Why does it not surprise me that someone from Mercatus would suggest that economists should devote themselves to social psychology?

Any thoughts on this critique of the study which seems to me to be relatively devastating? (Found via a Jesse Singal tweet):

First, the effect was limited almost entirely to enrollment in community college. Second, although black children with black teachers were, overall, 4 percent more likely to enroll in college, they were only 2.7 percent more likely to stay past their first year—and this result was only marginally significant. Third, they were only 0.5 percent more likely to earn a degree. The authors confirm this in the text—”We find a near-zero, statistically insignificant effect on degree receipt”—but also offer up some gobbledegook to suggest this is no big deal: “However, given the very low rates of degree completion among non-matched students (8.5%), we cannot rule out degree receipt effects on the order of 1 or 2 percentage points. Effects in that range would suggest the marginal matched student induced into college persisting to degree receipt at around the same rate as the inframarginal, non-matched student.”

If I’m reading that correctly, it means the effect on earning a degree is about zero no matter what.

If the students are more likely to attend college but no more likely to earn a degree, this effect is actually a social net negative. Going to college and not finishing is a worse outcome that not going at all.

So once again the main effect, if any, appears to be more about keeping them occupied in day care than scholastic improvement.

Nice use of "them," buddy.

Heaven help us if we started thinking of all American school children as "us," am I right?

You're wrong as usual. It would be a travesty if "us" became an acceptable pronoun to use in the objective case, but then those of your ilk suffer from the soft bigotry of low expectations.

You don't think "our students and our schools" is both more accurate and less prejudiced?

I mean you have to be pretty far down the path to bigotry to believe that there is any absolute binding between race and dysfunction in education.

You have to be pretty far down the path of stupidity to believe that “absolute binding”means anything.

There is certainly a strong association between race and dysfunction in education, at least if abysmal test scores imply dysfunction in education.
For example, if you compare schools that are > 80% black with schools that are > 80% non-NAM, how much overlap is there is the mean test score distributions? Probably no overlap, aside maybe from a few very atypical black magnet schools.

And leftist demonization of whites will certainly discourage whites from thinking of blacks as part of “us”.

Strange then(*) that your energy would be spent denying that this report could be correct and that outcomes could be improved(**).

* - lol, no. Your bias depends on the idea that outcomes cannot be improved.

** - and to get from there to "demonization of whites" has to be the biggest tell in the history of the world.

Where do I deny that this report could be correct?

Maybe having a black teacher really does raise the college completion rate by 0.5% . Wow!

But in spite of that huge 0.5% improvement, most black Americans (and a lot of non-black Americans) are not capable of doing any job that can’t be done just as well by a Mexican who snuck across the border last week.

As several commenters have already suggested, maybe the benefit for blacks of having a black teacher is that black teachers are better at keeping the black students (boys especially) under control.

And I do think there’s a lot of room for improvement in the education of blacks, by not letting disruptive students sabotage the education of the ones who are willing to work and behave themselves. More tracking would also help, so that more students are taught at a level appropriate for them. Pushing students who can’t add fractions into AP Calculus doesn’t seem to work so well.

That "impacts" (plural) in the title -- [wince].

An black attorney how used to occupy the office I now work in and was Liberal on everything else and an NAACP guy but looked back at school desegregation as a mistake for such reasons.

Maybe the black teachers graded the black students more easily, thus more passed.

Absent that, if a black teacher expends more effort to improve learning for black students, the role model effect doesn't exist and it is actually just a greater quantity of teaching at the expense of every other student.

How would black teachers grading black students more easily in K-3 years result in a higher high school graduation rate and college rate many years and teachers later?

Great point. I forgot about the K-3 aspect.

That makes me wonder, though, how a positive K-3 experience has such remote and long lasting effects. The obvious answer to me is foundational learning. But could positive role models provide such a boost? Could that effect derive from psychological effects of being a minority? Are there equivalent effects for other minority groups?

I suspect it is a roll model effect causing a slight deviation in life paths when young that snowballs into larger movements later on.

This study begs for a "clinically significant end point". I do not care if people complete degrees or enroll in college. I care if they make more money. If they live longer. End points that measure things without intrinsic value are highly dubious. Being unemployed with "some college" and some college debt is by far worse than just being unemployed.

So you would wait 70 years to collect data?

You have a valid question about whether real lifetime values like income and lifespan go up. Well we do know this is the case on average that those who finish high school do better than those that don't, that those who enroll in college do better than those that don't.

In order to discount this result then you have to believe the effect boosts high school graduation and college enrollment but then somehow stops before anything positive comes from that. Also this 'stopping' cannot be so dramatic that it distorts the overall averages.

"we do know this is the case on average that those who enroll in college do better than those that don't. "

What about on the margin though?

Cuts both ways. We know the average high school drop out does worse than the non-drop out. If your son wants to drop out of high school, though, he would be the marginal one. Would he follow the average or would he deviate from the average? i guess neither of us know but I do feel like I know what your inclinations would be.

It's almost as if we should have schools that are, say, 'Separated but Equivalent', yes?

Doesn't this make an interesting argument for affirmative action?

Consider this: Suppose a school district establishes a merit pay scheme. The student's progress from previous years is averaged. If the student performs above the previous trend, the teacher gets a bonus, if not no bonus.

So you have a school with two teachers, one white and one black. Both appear the same in terms of style, skill, experience, everything. Via the 'role model' effect, black students respond to the black teacher and do 7% better. A few years go by and libertarian interest group sues alleging this is a backdoor affirmative action system reverse discriminating against whites. Defense?

There wouldn't be a legitimate discrimination complaint unless the black students were non-randomly placed into the black teacher's classroom.

In that case, the compensation scheme does not satisfy disparate treatment because they are treated equally by race. A disparate impact claim would have to show that the employment practice has no legitimate non-discriminatory purpose.

Suppose an AI uncovers this role model effect and notes that when a black teacher has a black student there is on average a 7% boost coming just from that impact alone. Hence the formula is modified. If a white teacher achieves a 7% improvement in a black student, that gets a bonus since that is far above the baseline expectation. However the black teacher must achieve a greater than 7% impact (say 14%). .

Even with the optimal percentage of black teachers (100% ? 50% ?...), many and probably the overwhelming majority of black students are going to end up with very crummy academic skills.

If you want to improve the job prospects of those people, stop admiting low-skill immigrants and have mandatory E-Verify. We should regard the jobs that our dimmer fellow citizens are capable of doing as a precious (and probably dwindling) resource to be reserved for such fellow citizens.

Perhaps the late Beverly Hall discovered how to get black teachers to improve the test scores of black students?

Damned "economists" only want to report "outputs".

There may be something going on or this may all be artifact.

The link refers to some data relating to Pre-K programs and "good" teachers. Pre-K experience shows no long-term academic benefit but both Pre-K experience and "good" grammar school teachers deliver social benefits"eventually". A retired "school marm" friend ans I have joked about "the magic" that some teachers have.

My friend got to see some prior students raising Hell in he "Front Office" to get their child into my friend's class. These parents were apparently not being to "polite" aboutwhat they wanted. [Obviously, stable population in that school district.]

The economists don't provide diddly for details but the "same race" teacher phenomenon may like the "good teacher" effect may only be evident a decade or more beyond the "treatment" period and then only in a statistical population. How are you going to assign bonuses for events that might occur a decade or more in the future?

On a more hopefull note, the data set used for the linked studies may have teacher characteristicsthat could be used to evaluate the economists' pilot study hypothesis. Some poor grad student might have to dig down to see what race"Ms. Snarkyblather" was but that would move things along quicker that starting a new 20 year follow-up.

I personally believe in "the magic", which I suspect would over-ride any of a teacher's physical characteristics, but that is what all them data sheets are for. Grades and test scores seem to be in another realm.

Then again, data is much less fun than snarking about gub'mint schools and HBD.

It's the "magic". Get off your pulpits and find it.

Happy Turkey Day to you all. I hope your pardon comes through in time.

In addition,........

The linked study about the long-term social benefits of Pre-K experience or "good" teachers, must have used data from several decades ago when all teachers were formally educated, credentialled, and aided by experienced peers. Much of that is in the past. Currently, there is quite a bit of speechifying about "same-race" teachers with less emphasis on training. A replication of the "race effect" in the modern age may be necessary to determine how much of "the magic" is based on training and how much is physical.

I personally don't have a clue about what we should be looking for in teacher candidates.

"The Magic".........

Sorry. None of my teachers had a bit of success implanting anything about spelling or typing. We all have our burdens.......

You could also look into the sex of the pupil/student. How about all the boys who have had female teachers - especially ones who grew up fatherless.

You could also look into the sex of the pupil/student. How about all the boys who have had female teachers - especially ones who grew up fatherless.

I don't know why Tyler's acting like this is big news. I was writing about the research showing that black kids did better with black teachers six years ago. and

I think it's likely behavioral, particularly in elementary school, but no other insight other than that.

Consider, however, that we've spent 20 years raising the test scores required for teachers when there's vanishingly little support for the idea that smart teachers get better results, and lots of support for black teachers getting better results.

Goldhaber's findings (from way more than five years ago) found that black teachers who had failed the proficiency tests had better results than white teachers who had, as I recall, although it's been a while.

I work in a majority-minority high school and this effect is real. What generally happens is that the black teachers know that the kids who are clowning around can do better, and tell them so, and the kids are much more inclined to listen and believe. You can win that level of trust as a white teacher but it's harder and takes longer.

It would be quite a challenge to generate enough black teachers to propagate this effect over the K-12 timeframe. It almost requires residential segregation.

I strongly suspect this is true, and emphasizes the need for more black teachers, especially in the K-6 (K-3??) range, so that black kids have a black teacher role model.

I'm pretty sure that college and business Affirmative Action has been fairly harmful to the Black community thru taking solid, middle class style Blacks who would make excellent teachers, and instead bribing them with more money to be token Blacks at non-teaching roles. These individuals most often do make more, often much more money than teachers make -- but in depriving their birth community of themselves as active role models, the community loses some benefit.

This is a brain drain out of the ghettos; not good for Black community.

I’ll bet that a lot of the blacks who went to law school and flunked out or couldn’t pass the bar would have made decent teachers, at least for black kids. Maybe a lot of those people would not have been able to pass the teacher certification exam either, but the black advantage in keeping black kids under control would probably outweigh their IQ deficit when it comes to teaching black kids.

Education Realist above says there’s little evidence that smarter teachers get better results. My guess is that dumb teachers do OK teaching dumb kids, but that the really smart kids do better with smart teachers.

Comments for this post are closed