Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
Rothstein (2017) successfully replicates Chetty, Friedman, and Rockoff's (2014a, b)—henceforth, CFR's—results using data from North Carolina, but raises concerns about CFR's methods. We show that Rothstein's methodological critiques are invalid by presenting simulations and supplementary empirical evidence which show that (i) his preferred imputation of missing data generates bias; (ii) his "placebo test" rejects valid research designs; and (iii) his method of controlling for covariates yields inconsistent estimates of teachers' long-term effects. Consistent with the conclusions of Bacher-Hicks, Kane, and Staiger (2016) using data from Los Angeles, we conclude that Rothstein's replication study ultimately reinforces CFR's methods and results.