IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jhucap/doi10.1086-726629.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Differences in Persistence in a Field of Study: This Isn’t All about Grades

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Kaganovich
  • Morgan Taylor
  • Ruli Xiao

Abstract

Weaker retention of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is well documented, particularly in response to low grades. We explore mechanisms underlying gender gaps in persistence across the spectrum of fields using an Indiana University dataset. We decompose these gaps into components attributable to student taste for field and the importance attached to grades there. We find that women’s weaker preference for field is predominantly responsible for their weaker persistence. STEM-starting women are less averse to low grades than are men but have weaker taste for STEM, resulting in lower retention. Relaxation of grading standards in STEM will have little effect on women’s inferior retention.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Kaganovich & Morgan Taylor & Ruli Xiao, 2023. "Gender Differences in Persistence in a Field of Study: This Isn’t All about Grades," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(4), pages 503-556.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jhucap:doi:10.1086/726629
    DOI: 10.1086/726629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/726629
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/726629
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/726629?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claudia Goldin & Lawrence F. Katz & Ilyana Kuziemko, 2006. "The Homecoming of American College Women: The Reversal of the College Gender Gap," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 133-156, Fall.
    2. Thomas Ahn & Peter Arcidiacono & Amy Hopson & James R. Thomas, 2019. "Equilibrium Grade Inflation with Implications for Female Interest in STEM Majors," NBER Working Papers 26556, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2010. "Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of Competition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 129-144, Spring.
    4. Francine D. Blau & Lawrence M. Kahn, 2017. "The Gender Wage Gap: Extent, Trends, and Explanations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(3), pages 789-865, September.
    5. Valerie K. Bostwick & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2022. "Nevertheless She Persisted? Gender Peer Effects in Doctoral STEM Programs," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(2), pages 397-436.
    6. Ashworth, Jared & Ransom, Tyler, 2019. "Has the college wage premium continued to rise? Evidence from multiple U.S. surveys," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 149-154.
    7. Arcidiacono, Peter, 2004. "Ability sorting and the returns to college major," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 121(1-2), pages 343-375.
    8. Montmarquette, Claude & Cannings, Kathy & Mahseredjian, Sophie, 2002. "How do young people choose college majors?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 543-556, December.
    9. Gary S. Becker & William H. J. Hubbard & Kevin M. Murphy, 2010. "Explaining the Worldwide Boom in Higher Education of Women," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(3), pages 203-241.
    10. Basit Zafar, 2013. "College Major Choice and the Gender Gap," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 48(3), pages 545-595.
    11. Rask, Kevin, 2010. "Attrition in STEM fields at a liberal arts college: The importance of grades and pre-collegiate preferences," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 892-900, December.
    12. Ann L. Owen, 2010. "Grades, Gender, and Encouragement: A Regression Discontinuity Analysis," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 217-234, June.
    13. Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd R. Stinebrickner, 2014. "A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 426-472.
    14. Joseph G. Altonji & Peter Arcidiacono & Arnaud Maurel, 2015. "The Analysis of Field Choice in College and Graduate School: Determinants and Wage Effects," NBER Working Papers 21655, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Ost, Ben, 2010. "The role of peers and grades in determining major persistence in the sciences," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 923-934, December.
    16. Rask, Kevin & Tiefenthaler, Jill, 2008. "The role of grade sensitivity in explaining the gender imbalance in undergraduate economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 676-687, December.
    17. Kugler, Adriana & Tinsley, Catherine H. & Ukhaneva, Olga, 2017. "Choice of Majors: Are Women Really Different from Men?," IZA Discussion Papers 10947, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Gary S. Becker & William H. J. Hubbard & Kevin M. Murphy, 2010. "Explaining the Worldwide Boom in Higher Education of Women," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(3), pages 203-241.
    19. Manski, Charles F., 1989. "Schooling as experimentation: a reappraisal of the postsecondary dropout phenomenon," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 305-312, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michael Kaganovich & Morgan Taylor & Ruli Xiao, 2021. "Gender Differences in Persistence in a Field of Study," CESifo Working Paper Series 9087, CESifo.
    2. Michael Kaganovich, 2023. "Trade-Offs in Choosing a College Major," CESifo Working Paper Series 10650, CESifo.
    3. Jiang, Xuan, 2021. "Women in STEM: Ability, preference, and value," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Carmen Aina & Chiara Mussida & Gabriele Lombardi, 2023. "Are Business and Economics Alike?," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 9(2), pages 557-585, July.
    5. Fernando Saltiel, 2019. "What's Math Got to Do With It? Multidimensional Ability and the Gender Gap in STEM," 2019 Meeting Papers 1201, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Li, Hsueh-Hsiang, 2018. "Do mentoring, information, and nudge reduce the gender gap in economics majors?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 165-183.
    7. Arpita Patnaik & Matthew J. Wiswall & Basit Zafar, 2020. "College Majors," NBER Working Papers 27645, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Kugler, Adriana D. & Tinsley, Catherine H. & Ukhaneva, Olga, 2021. "Choice of majors: are women really different from men?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    9. 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.
    10. Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd R. Stinebrickner, 2014. "A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 426-472.
    11. Shulamit Kahn & Donna Ginther, 2017. "Women and STEM," NBER Working Papers 23525, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Marta De Philippis, 2023. "STEM Graduates and Secondary School Curriculum: Does Early Exposure to Science Matter?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(6), pages 1914-1947.
    13. McNally, Sandra, 2020. "Gender Differences in Tertiary Education: What Explains STEM Participation?," IZA Policy Papers 165, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. David L. Sjoquist & John V. Winters, 2015. "State Merit Aid Programs and College Major: A Focus on STEM," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(4), pages 973-1006.
    15. Yanqing Ding & Wei Li & Xin Li & Yinduo Wu & Jin Yang & Xiaoyang Ye, 2021. "Heterogeneous Major Preferences for Extrinsic Incentives: The Effects of Wage Information on the Gender Gap in STEM Major Choice," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 62(8), pages 1113-1145, December.
    16. Kugler, Adriana & Tinsley, Catherine H. & Ukhaneva, Olga, 2017. "Choice of Majors: Are Women Really Different from Men?," IZA Discussion Papers 10947, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Fricke, Hans & Grogger, Jeffrey & Steinmayr, Andreas, 2018. "Exposure to academic fields and college major choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 199-213.
    18. David Sjoquist & John Winters, 2015. "The effect of Georgia’s HOPE scholarship on college major: a focus on STEM," IZA Journal of Labor Economics, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-29, December.
    19. O. Poldin & D. Valeeva & M. Yudkevich, 2015. "Choice of specialization: do peers matter?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(44), pages 4728-4740, September.
    20. Jia, Ning, 2021. "Do stricter high school math requirements raise college STEM attainment?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).

    More about this item

    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:ucp:jhucap:doi:10.1086/726629. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JHC .

    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.