I am doing a research on the effect of the faculty rank on the students' performance (GPA) in higher education, Do you have any views on the topic or references?

You can make Situational test and get a qualitative data. You can make MCQ test and get quantitative data.

I think that you could explore teacher attitudes toward the knowledge or specifis topics, because the attitudes can modify the students' performance.

ya sure i would like to share in regard to this and i will surely look after that in next reply i will give you available resources also ,u hv taken a good research problem and ,i would like to add that educationist are concerned with the inculcation of right self0image of the teacher.To have integrated and well adjusted citizens teachers will have to be carefully educated professionally ao as to enable them to develop a wholesome personality and right values ,u plz refer "PROSPECTIVE TEACHER AN EXPOSITION ON SELF-CONCEPT,INTELLIGENCE AND ADJUSTMENT BY DR.GEETA RAI,PUBLISHER IS BHARTIYA VIDYA SANSTHAN VARANASI.All the very best for ur reserach work ,will let u knw about other references also

I'd like to reiterate that you would need to be relating scores on *standardized* tests to professorial rank (or preferably, years teaching, as there won't be a lot of variability in rank as a variable). At least at my university, classroom grades are completely under the purview of the professor, and as such, are going to have contain a significant amount of bias. For example, some professors are intent on maintaining a normal distribution of grades and will adjust scores to reflect such a distribution. Other professors are primarily interested in student mastery of the material, so an excellent professor teaching highly capable students may give out only well-earned top scores. Other professors, who "feel bad" about giving poor grades may also only give out top scores, yet these scores would not be related to mastery of the material.

Speaking of relation between teachers and students...I guess, teachers, right from the primary level starts filling the little brain of a child with "A" for Apple, "B" for Ball and this seems to continue even at higher education level as well. Teachers basically should excavates the brain of a student of rich inquisitiveness and translate it into tangible knowledge.

Thank you very much, I will look up these sources. Thanks to all of you who have contributed.
The situation here represents students in the foundation year at the university(preparatory year). All the students are competing because their GPA will be the only factor to determine which college they will join. I am studing the conditions that might lead to inequality among the students during this crucial year.

I wish to mention, if I may, Carl Ransom Rogers (1994). His book Freedom to Learn, co-authored with H. Jerome Freiberg (ISBN ) 0-02-403121-6) is still very important, I think. Οne can also look up the contemporary work of Dylan Wiliam on Formative Assessment, (his personal site and a site called Keeping Learning on Track are good), John McLeod's book, Counselling Skill, in which he introduces the notion of embedded counselling and how this can affect teacher-student relationships and, finally, the on-going research activity of the Counselling Unit at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.

It's all the fault of Martin Heidegger. In his 1952 lecture What is called Thinking? (Was heißt Denken?) he talks about teaching in unambiguous terms:

"Teaching is even more difficult than learning. We know that; but we rarely think about it. And why is teaching more difficult than learning? Not because the teacher must have a larger store of information, and have it always ready. Teaching is more difficult than learning because what teaching calls for is this: to let learn. The real teacher, in fact, lets nothing else be learned than — learning… The teacher is far ahead of his apprentices in this alone, that he has still far more to learn than they— he has to learn to let them learn. The teacher must be capable of being more teachable than the apprentices."

Now, beat that!

While teachers have varied means of asessing students, the students grades will vary according to the measures imposed. The rookie and pro among faculty may not be so distinguished in terms of rank. That is to speak about "teaching for learning" compared to "teaching for earning". Only with standard measures could you gauge the relationship between GPAs and faculty ranks. Nevertheless, if you are just going to do a study surveying grades and testing it against faculty ranks, the results will be very questionable to point only to correlations. It can't lead you to an acceptable generalization because of lmitiations in methodology.

I know of full professors, older and higher in rank, giving very high grades; when their students' learning is compared to those younger and lower in ranks, the latter did better. Yet, there are still professors who are older and higher rank, that they can keep up with the trends in education, the emerging learning styles of students and still maintain reputable grading system.

Knowledge and expertise comes in many ages and requires steadfast desire to increase one's knowledge. Professors not only learn from their own sources of knowledge but it the students that have formed teaching styles and presentation. Experience, knowledge and enthusiasm in my opinion is the key to successful teaching. We must keep in mind that some professors are asked to teach a course that may have little relation to their actual expertise. For example a Psychology professor whose field is animal behaviour and is teaching abnormal psychology. Although the two can be inferred they are two separate fields and require different knowledge. A young professor gain more knowledge and expertise as his experiences grow in that field (that includes teaching). I'll bet a young professor feels as intimidated by their possible older students as the older student are with a younger professor.

According to me, the teacher's attitude and the students interest in learning helps the students to score good marks in their exams. The teacher may be experienced or inexperienced. The thing more important is how you teach and motivate the students. I hope this would help you.

To my understanding I think you wanted to take only two variable rank of teacher(independent) and achievement in the form of GPA (dependent) and you wanted to find the relationship (not effect) of .....What is the degree level for which the research is a requirement.....A vary narrow topic (limited variables)

Regardless of the age nor tenure of teaching in an academic institution, a professor's effectivity in training students and affecting the later's GPA is not based on age nor being a full time or a part time professor. The effectivity of a professor in significantly increasing the GPA of his/her respective students lie on the approaches, educational conditionings , training & evaluation tools, as well as how proactive and creative is the professor is as an operational person to train the target skills to the students. Additionally any successful undertaking is a two way street thus both the trainor/professor and the students should also do their best in learning and communicating with each other on the academic & acquisitional level & targets throughout the lessons.

Based from experience I have met highly qualified academic graduates of phds but some are irresponsibly ineffective in unsupervised lessons (when the dean & other administrators are not around). Likewise there were young masteral professors who meticulously and proactively trained their respective students who has effectively garnered a lot of skills, in less than half a semester.

GPA of students does not depends only on the faculty experience rather it depends more on the specific subjects and the complexity of assessment question during the exams. Even a incompetent faculty can produce better results if he/she handles an easy/theory oriented paper and if the exam questions are simple. Experienced faculty are generally strong in fundamental subjects whereas young faculty are more comfortable in teaching latest tools/techniques and application part(as far as my experience and understanding).

Because I chose to obtain a degree in education before becoming an educator, I am continually dismayed be what I witness my colleagues doing within their classes in the name of "instruction" (i.e. a narrow subset of "teaching"). There are several excellent pieces of literature examining academics who still hold to the "knowledge transmission" hypothesis of education in comparison to those actively working to create differentiated classrooms, built upon Brunerian spiraled scaffolding, acting as guides on the side as opposed to the sage on the stage. These are not merely philosophical perspectives but entirely different methods to teaching, assessing, and building powerful student-teacher relationships. The challenge is that most tend to do what has been done - replicate the model, even if the model was little more than walking into class and reading from the text book at the podium, or reciting the words built into a Powerpoint, or failing to differentiate to ensure that products (i.e. papers and other assignments) are respectful and take into account readiness, (dis)ability, personal history/culture/ethnicity/gender, interest, prefered learning style ...

If rank is significantly (and strongly) determined by demonstrable student growth (as opposed to merely a letter grade), based upon formative assessments as well as summative (i.e. the professor is a responsive educator actively seeking to enhance teaching skills), then we find a very real effect on student performance. If rank is determined by papers published and time in education ... research from K-12 and university studies demonstrate no significant effect.