Search

This study investigates how exposure to a field of study influences students’ major choices. If students have incomplete information, exposure potentially helps them to learn about the scope of a field as well as how well the field matches their interest and abilities. We exploit a natural experiment where university students have to write a research paper in business, economics, or law during their first year before they choose a major. Due to oversubscription of business papers, the field of the paper is assigned quasi-randomly. We find that writing in economics raises the probability of majoring in economics by 2.7 percentage points. We show further that this effect varies across subfields: the effect is driven by assignment to topics less typical of the public's perception of the field of economics, suggesting students learn through exposure that the field is broader than they thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their recent paper “(Un)informed College and Major Choice: Evidence from Linked Survey and Administrative Data,” Hastings, Neilson, Ramirez, & Zimmerman (2016) provide an informal costly-information model, linking family background to students’ beliefs about educational costs and benefits. They verify predictions of their model using a data set of beliefs about college institutions and majors among Chilean college applicants and students. I test some of those same predictions using a data set of beliefs about college institutions and different levels of college education among high school students in the United States. I verify their predictions, with some exceptions, supporting the use of their costly-search model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using student evaluations of their instructor as an outcome measure, we estimate and compare class size and teacher effects for higher education, with an emphasis on determining whether a comprehensive class size reduction policy that draws on the hiring of new teachers is likely to improve educational outcomes. We find that first time teachers perform significantly worse than their peers, and we find substantial class size effects. Hence higher education institutions face a tradeoff if they wish to increase admission. This tradeoff implies that as class size increases, at first the negative class size effect is smaller than that of introducing a first time teacher. However, beyond a certain level, the class size effect dominates and it is better to create a new class with a first time teacher. 1 1 We would like to thank Matías Covarrubias and Fernanda Rojas for excellent research assistance. We would also like to thank comments received in the internal workshop of Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile’s Economics Department and in the 2011 Yearly Congress of the Economics Society of Chile. We also thank two anonymous referees whose advice greatly improved the paper. The usual disclaimer applies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]