---
title: "Virtual Classrooms: How Online College Courses Affect Student Success"
format:
  html:
    theme: cosmo
    toc: true
    embed-resources: true
    include-in-header:
      text: |
        <style>main{overflow-wrap:anywhere;max-width:1100px!important}table{display:block;overflow:auto;font-size:.85rem}td,th{padding:6px}img{max-width:100%}p code,li code{overflow-wrap:anywhere;white-space:normal}</style>
---

[Eric P. Bettinger; Lindsay Fox; Susanna Loeb; Eric S. Taylor (2017)](https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151193). *American Economic Review*.

**Under development — community extension.** This is a provisional source-design assessment, not a new successful replication or a final eligibility ruling.

[Extension index](development.html) · [Provisional eligibility log](development.html#eligibility-log) · [Assessment JSON](aeraej-555.json) · [QMD](aeraej-555.qmd) · [Reproduction code](collection-code.zip)

## Source design and template applicability

Online enrollment is instrumented by offer-by-distance-to-campus. Binary online enrollment does not make the identifying IV design observational DiD; the student analysis inputs are also restricted.

No DiD estimates, uncertainty intervals or homogeneity-test decision were computed in this tranche. No point is added to the calibration plots. This is not a zero effect or a failed statistical test.

## Recorded treatment-column measurement

**Data unavailable.**

The student-level online-course analysis data are restricted and absent from the deposit.

These are the existing data-measured counts, not counts inferred from design labels. A binary instrument, group indicator or interaction component need not be the treatment of interest; the source-design assessment above takes precedence for template applicability.

## Replication status

**This tranche:** unsupported design; source code/documentation inspected, no estimator run.

**Supplied library:** no_did_analysis_data; verification: no scalar DiD target; preparation: needs_restricted_data. These are the library’s labels, not new verification claims. Missing data and unsupported designs are separate issues.

## Evidence and provenance

The following files in the supplied library were inspected. Their SHA-256 digests are recorded in the downloadable assessment JSON. Source archives and microdata are not redistributed.

- `AER/Bettinger_Fox_Loeb_Taylor_AER_2017_113090/R/555_bettinger_fox_loeb_taylor_figure.R` (106 lines)
- `AER/Bettinger_Fox_Loeb_Taylor_AER_2017_113090/R/555_bettinger_fox_loeb_taylor_replicate.R` (238 lines)
- `AER/Bettinger_Fox_Loeb_Taylor_AER_2017_113090/verdict.md` (113 lines)
- `AER/Bettinger_Fox_Loeb_Taylor_AER_2017_113090/aeraej-555.md` (103 lines)