IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoedu/v88y2022ics0272775722000437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The importance of external assessments: High school math and gender gaps in STEM degrees

Author

Listed:
  • Burgess, Simon
  • Hauberg, Daniel Sloth
  • Rangvid, Beatrice Schindler
  • Sievertsen, Hans Henrik

Abstract

We exploit the random allocation to a semi-external assessment in Math (SEAM) at the end of high school in Denmark to test the effect of SEAM on subsequent enrollment and graduation in post-secondary education. We find that SEAM in high school reduces the gender gap in graduation from post-secondary STEM degrees, and we discuss possible mechanisms. Our results show that cancelling external assessments, as was temporarily implemented in many regions during the COVID-19 pandemic, may impact gender differences in human capital accumulation in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Burgess, Simon & Hauberg, Daniel Sloth & Rangvid, Beatrice Schindler & Sievertsen, Hans Henrik, 2022. "The importance of external assessments: High school math and gender gaps in STEM degrees," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:88:y:2022:i:c:s0272775722000437
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775722000437
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econedurev.2022.102267?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Terrier, Camille, 2020. "Boys lag behind: How teachers’ gender biases affect student achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. Michela Carlana, 2019. "Implicit Stereotypes: Evidence from Teachers’ Gender Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1163-1224.
    3. Rebecca Diamond & Petra Persson, 2016. "The Long-term Consequences of Teacher Discretion in Grading of High-stakes Tests," NBER Working Papers 22207, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Juanna Schrøter Joensen & Helena Skyt Nielsen, 2016. "Mathematics and Gender: Heterogeneity in Causes and Consequences," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(593), pages 1129-1163, June.
    5. Rangvid, Beatrice Schindler, 2015. "Systematic differences across evaluation schemes and educational choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 41-55.
    6. Simon Burgess & Ellen Greaves, 2013. "Test Scores, Subjective Assessment, and Stereotyping of Ethnic Minorities," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(3), pages 535-576.
    7. Holt, Stephen B. & Papageorge, Nicholas W., 2016. "Who believes in me? The effect of student–teacher demographic match on teacher expectationsAuthor-Name: Gershenson, Seth," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 209-224.
    8. Thomas S. Dee & Will Dobbie & Brian A. Jacob & Jonah Rockoff, 2019. "The Causes and Consequences of Test Score Manipulation: Evidence from the New York Regents Examinations," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 382-423, July.
    9. Falch, Torberg & Naper, Linn Renée, 2013. "Educational evaluation schemes and gender gaps in student achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 12-25.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sarah Cattan & Kjell Salvanes & Emma Tominey, 2022. "First Generation Elite: The Role of School Networks," Working Papers 2022-028, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    2. Nicoletti, Cheti & Sevilla, Almudena & Tonei, Valentina, 2022. "Gender stereotypes in the family," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118044, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ferman, Bruno & Fontes, Luiz Felipe, 2020. "Discriminating Behavior: Evidence from teachers’ grading bias," MPRA Paper 100400, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ferman, Bruno & Fontes, Luiz Felipe, 2022. "Assessing knowledge or classroom behavior? Evidence of teachers’ grading bias," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    3. Terrier, Camille, 2020. "Boys lag behind: How teachers’ gender biases affect student achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Stans, Renske A., 2022. "Short-run shock, long-run consequences? The impact of grandparental death on educational outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Devereux, Paul J. & Delaney, Judith, 2021. "Gender and Educational Achievement: Stylized Facts and Causal Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 15753, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Rangvid Beatrice Schindler, 2019. "Gender Discrimination in Exam Grading? Double Evidence from a Natural Experiment and a Field Experiment," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 1-23, April.
    7. Nicole Black & Sonja C. de New, 2020. "Short, Heavy and Underrated? Teacher Assessment Biases by Children's Body Size," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(5), pages 961-987, October.
    8. Erich Battistin & Lorenzo Neri, 2017. "School Performance, Score Inflation and Economic Geography," Working Papers 837, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    9. Calsamiglia, Caterina & Loviglio, Annalisa, 2019. "Grading on a curve: When having good peers is not good," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    10. Machin, Stephen & McNally, Sandra & Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer, 2020. "Entry through the narrow door: The costs of just failing high stakes exams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    11. Puhani, Patrick A. & Yang, Philip, 2020. "Does increased teacher accountability decrease leniency in grading?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 333-341.
    12. Joshua D. Angrist & Erich Battistin & Daniela Vuri, 2017. "In a Small Moment: Class Size and Moral Hazard in the Italian Mezzogiorno," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 216-249, October.
    13. Rakshit, Sonali & Sahoo, Soham, 2023. "Biased teachers and gender gap in learning outcomes: Evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Cornelisz, Ilja & Meeter, Martijn & van Klaveren, Chris, 2019. "Educational equity and teacher discretion effects in high stake exams," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Thomas van Huizen & Madelon Jacobs & Matthijs Oosterveen, 2024. "Teacher bias or measurement error?," Papers 2401.04200, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    16. Thomas van Huizen, 2021. "Teacher bias or measurement error bias? Evidence from track recommendations," Working Papers 2113, Utrecht School of Economics.
    17. Graetz, Georg & Karimi, Arizo, 2019. "Explaining gender gap variation across assessment forms," Working Paper Series 2019:8, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    18. Fumagalli, Laura & Rabe, Birgitta & Burn, Hettie, 2023. "Teacher grade predictions for ethnic minority groups: evidence from England," ISER Working Paper Series 2023-03, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Ellen Sahlström & Mikko Silliman, 2024. "The Extent and Consequences of Teacher Biases against Immigrants," CESifo Working Paper Series 11050, CESifo.
    20. Graetz, Georg & Karimi, Arizo, 2022. "Gender gap variation across assessment types: Explanations and implications," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Assessments; Gender; STEM;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:88:y:2022:i:c:s0272775722000437. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/econedurev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.