Faculty hired under reservation do not lower teaching quality, finds new study
Faculty members hired under caste-based reservation policies in India's engineering colleges may have fewer PhDs, lower academic ranks and less teaching experience than their general-category counterparts. But when it comes to teaching students, these differences do not appear to translate into poorer academic outcomes.
A new study by four researchers, published as a working paper by the US-based National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) in October 2026, has found no meaningful difference in teaching quality between reservation-category and general-category faculty across several measures of student performance.
In fact, students taught by reservation-category faculty performed slightly better in course examinations, recording an improvement of around 1.3 to 1.5 percentile points compared with students taught by general-category faculty.
Titled Affirmative Action, Faculty Productivity and Caste Interactions: Evidence from Engineering Colleges in India, the paper examines whether faculty recruited through affirmative action policies are as effective in teaching, research and administrative responsibilities as those hired outside the reservation system.
The research was conducted by Robert W. Fairlie of the University of California, Los Angeles, and NBER; Saurabh Khanna of the University of Amsterdam; Prashant Loyalka of Stanford University; and Gagandeep S. Sachdeva of the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL).
The findings offer evidence against the argument that recruiting faculty through reservation policies necessarily compromises teaching standards. FEWER PHDs, LOWER RANKS, BUT NOT POORER TEACHINGThe researchers analysed faculty and student data from a nationally representative sample of 50 engineering and technology colleges across India.
The study covered 2,710 faculty members and 20,239 students, primarily from computer science and electrical engineering departments.
The findings show that reservation-category faculty were less likely to hold completed PhDs and more likely to have a master's degree as their highest qualification. They were also more likely to be assistant professors and less likely to hold the rank of full professor.
The difference in academic experience was also noticeable. Reservation-category faculty had an average of 8.91 years of experience in higher education, compared with 10.06 years among general-category faculty.
Here is how the qualifications compared:Faculty qualificationReservation categoryGeneral categoryAssistant professors80%74%Associate professors13%14%Full professors3%8%Completed PhD14%21%Master's degree as highest qualification64%58%Average academic experience8.91 years10.06 years
The differences were not limited to individual qualifications. The researchers also found that reservation-category faculty were less likely to have earned degrees from elite engineering colleges.
However, the researchers cautioned against treating these differences in academic credentials as evidence of weaker teaching abilities.STUDENTS SCORED BETTER IN CLASSES TAUGHT BY RESERVED FACULTY
To understand whether differences in faculty qualifications affected classroom performance, the researchers examined student outcomes across several measures.
An important part of this analysis involved 12 colleges where students were randomly assigned to different classroom sections within courses. This helped reduce the possibility that students were choosing teachers based on their caste category or academic reputation.
The researchers had access to course-level grades for 2,268 students, taught by 501 faculty members across 1,277 classrooms and 415 courses.
The results were striking. Students taught by reservation-category faculty recorded course rankings that were 1.44 percentile points higher, on average, than those taught by general-category faculty. The difference was statistically significant.
Even after accounting for differences in faculty qualifications, the advantage remained between 1.33 and 1.52 percentile points.
The researchers also examined whether this advantage continued beyond immediate examinations.
They found no meaningful differences between the two faculty groups in follow-on course grades, academic skills tests covering subjects such as mathematics and physics, computer science and electrical engineering assessments, attendance, dropout rates or expected graduation.
Students' plans to pursue higher studies and their research engagement with faculty also showed no meaningful differences.
In other words, the study found no evidence that students taught by reservation-category faculty were academically disadvantaged in the short or longer term. advertisementDOES A TEACHER FROM THE SAME COMMUNITY MAKE A DIFFERENCE?The researchers also explored another important question: Do students from reserved categories perform better when taught by faculty belonging to similar social backgrounds?
This is often referred to as the 'teacher-like-me' effect, where students may benefit from having teachers who share their social or cultural backgrounds.
However, the study did not find statistically significant evidence of such an advantage.
Reservation-category students taught by reservation-category faculty did not perform meaningfully better than those taught by general-category faculty. This pattern held across course grades and several longer-term educational outcomes.
The researchers also examined whether general-category students performed worse when taught by reservation-category faculty, given the possibility of resentment or discrimination linked to reservation-based recruitment.
The findings did not support this concern either. General-category students actually recorded slightly better grades in classrooms taught by reservation-category faculty.RESEARCH OUTPUT AND ADMINISTRATIVE WORK SHOW NO SIGNIFICANT GAP
Teaching was not the only measure of faculty productivity examined in the research. The authors also assessed publications, research funding and administrative responsibilities.
The engineering and technology faculty produced an average of 2.4 publications annually. When the researchers considered only international journal publications, the average stood at 0.98 papers a year.
Even across these measures, they did not find statistically significant differences between reservation-category and general-category faculty.
The same pattern emerged in research funding and administrative responsibilities, including positions held within departments and colleges.
The authors concluded that the differences between the two groups in research productivity and administrative service were small and not statistically different from zero. WHAT THE FINDINGS MEAN FOR THE RESERVATION DEBATE
The study comes amid continuing debates over caste representation and reservation policies in higher education, particularly concerns about vacant reserved faculty positions and the availability of qualified candidates.
The researchers point out that approximately half of faculty positions in Indian colleges are reserved for disadvantaged caste and social groups, including Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
They also discuss how discrimination in the private-sector labour market could influence the career choices of highly qualified candidates from disadvantaged communities. Such candidates may be more likely to consider academic or public-sector positions where reservation policies apply.
However, the researchers present this as a possible explanation rather than establishing a direct causal link between private-sector discrimination and the decision to enter academia.
There are also limitations to consider. The data were collected in 2017 and 2019, and the classroom randomisation analysis covered only 12 of the 50 colleges. The paper is an NBER working paper circulated for discussion and has not undergone peer review.
The researchers also caution against assuming that the findings automatically apply to other sectors or professions. They call for more research using similarly rigorous methods to examine the relationship between affirmative action and worker productivity.
For now, their findings offer an important distinction in the debate: differences in educational qualifications and academic seniority do not necessarily mean differences in teaching effectiveness.- EndsRead | 60% of faculty in India's top institutions now hold a PhDRead | What does National Education Policy 2020 mean for teachers in universities today?
