## Notes from 28 December 2025 [[2025-12-27|← Previous note]] ┃ [[2025-12-29|Next note →]] **Read:** ["Are Tenure Track Professors Better Teachers?" (_Review of Economics and Statistics_, 2015)](https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/97/4/715/58274/Are-Tenure-Track-Professors-Better-Teachers?redirectedFrom=fulltext&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email) - Study tracked 15,000 students at Northwestern over 8 years - Students taught by non-tenure track instructors in intro courses performed _better_ in subsequent advanced courses than those taught by tenured/tenure-track faculty - Effect concentrated in bottom quartile: worst 25% of tenured professors significantly underperform worst 25% of non-tenured - Top 75% of both groups perform nearly identically - Gains especially pronounced for students entering with weaker academic preparation **Explanation (authors):** Selection and retention mechanism. Non-tenured instructors who teach poorly don't get contract renewals. Tenured professors retained/rewarded primarily for research, can persist despite weak teaching. - "Non-tenured" here = mostly full-time lecturers on open-ended contracts, not temporary adjuncts - Not pure hire/fire flexibility, but more accountability than traditional tenure Parallels the [[Education Reform in Sobral (Brazil)|Sobral]] model where teachers lack job stability and face strong accountability for results. Not identical systems, but similar underlying logic: performance consequences shape the distribution of quality, especially at the bottom.