Working Paper: NBER ID: w26556
Authors: Thomas Ahn; Peter Arcidiacono; Amy Hopson; James R. Thomas
Abstract: Substantial earnings differences exist across majors with the majors that pay well also having lower grades and higher workloads. We show that the harsher grading policies in STEM courses disproportionately affect women. To show this, we estimate a model of student demand courses and optimal effort choices of students conditional on the chosen courses. Instructor grading policies are treated as equilibrium objects that in part depend on student demand for courses. Restrictions on grading policies that equalize average grades across classes helps to close the STEM gender gap as well as increasing overall enrollment in STEM classes.
Keywords: STEM; gender gap; grading policies; enrollment; education economics
JEL Codes: I23; J16
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| harsher grading policies in STEM courses (A22) | lower grades in STEM (I24) |
| lower grades in STEM (I24) | deter women from pursuing these fields (J16) |
| higher workloads (J29) | deter women from pursuing STEM (J16) |
| equalizing grading standards across courses (A23) | increased female enrollment in STEM (I24) |
| equalizing grading standards (I24) | close the gender gap (J16) |
| grading policies (I28) | affect women disproportionately (J16) |
| higher grades (I24) | higher utility for women (J16) |
| grades (Y40) | course selection and persistence (I21) |