Teacher Preparation, Pre-College Human Capital and Student Learning: Evidence from Enseña Chile

Enseña Chile places university graduates in classrooms after a short preparation programme rather than a traditional teacher-education degree. Comparing their students' learning gains to those of traditionally prepared teachers gives a raw gap of −0.32σ in mathematics: Enseña Chile teachers at −0.19σ, traditional teachers at +0.13σ (s.e. 0.16, p = 0.04). Read on its own, that number looks like a verdict on the route.

It is not, because two other things differ at the same time. Enseña Chile recruits sit at the 97th percentile of the national teacher ability distribution — +1.9 SD above the mean teacher on the PSU/PAA university entrance exam — and ability predicts effectiveness: 0.51σ of value-added per 100 exam points, equivalently 0.41σ per standard deviation of teacher ability, where one teacher SD is about 80 points. And every Enseña Chile teacher in the sample is in their first or second year. Experience matters enormously early on: first-year Enseña Chile teachers are at −0.47σ, second-year at +0.13σ, a difference of +0.60σ. Traditional teachers show a flat profile by comparison, +0.12σ early-career against +0.14σ veteran.

Reweighting the comparison group onto the same ability distribution and separating those two forces leaves a net gap of −0.16σ made of ability +0.25σ [+0.06, +0.42], inexperience −0.30σ [−0.55, −0.09], and a route remainder of −0.10σ [−0.37, +0.17]. The remainder crosses zero: net of who these teachers were before they were hired and how long they have taught, no route penalty is detectable. That is a failure to detect, not a demonstration of equivalence — the interval is wide.