The downside of good peers: How classroom composition differentially affects men's and women's STEM persistence
Stefanie Fischer ()
Labour Economics, 2017, vol. 46, issue C, 211-226
This paper investigates whether class composition can help explain why women are disproportionately more likely to fall out of the “STEM” pipeline. Identification comes from a standardized enrollment process at a large public university that essentially randomly assigns freshmen to different mandatory introductory chemistry lectures. Using administrative data, I find that women who are enrolled in a class with higher ability peers are less likely to graduate with a STEM degree, while men's STEM persistence is unaffected. The effect is largest for women in the bottom third of the ability distribution. I rule out that this is driven solely by grades.
Keywords: Higher education; Gender; STEM; Classroom composition effects (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I20 I23 I24 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (15) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Working Paper: The Downside of Good Peers: How Classroom Composition Differentially Affects Men’s and Women’s STEM Persistence (2016)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:labeco:v:46:y:2017:i:c:p:211-226
Access Statistics for this article
Labour Economics is currently edited by A. Ichino
More articles in Labour Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().