A comparison of A-level performance in economics and business studies: How much more difficult is economics?
AbstractThis paper uses A-Level Information System data to compare academic performance in two subjects often viewed as relatively close substitutes for one another at A-level. The important role of GCSE achievement is confirmed for both subjects. There is evidence of strong gender effects and variation in outcomes across Examination Boards. A counterfactual exercise suggests that if the sample of Business Studies candidates had studied Economics nearly 40% of those who obtained a grade C or better in the former subject would not have done so in the latter. The opposite exercise suggests that 12% more Economics candidates would have achieved a grade C or better if they had taken Business Studies. In order to render a Business Studies A-level grade comparable with an Economics one in terms of relative difficulty, we estimate that a downward adjustment of 1.5 UCAS points should be applied to the former subject. This adjustment is lower than that suggested by correction factors based on conventional subject pair analysis for these two subjects
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Education Economics.
Volume (Year): 13 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CEDE20
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Machin, Stephen & Oswald, Andrew, 2000. "UK Economics and the Future Supply of Academic Economists," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(464), pages F334-49, June.
- Machin, Stephen J & Stewart, Mark B, 1990. "Unions and the Financial Performance of British Private Sector Establishments," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(4), pages 327-50, Oct.-Dec..
- Chesher, Andrew & Irish, Margaret, 1987. "Residual analysis in the grouped and censored normal linear model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-2), pages 33-61.
- repec:ese:iserwp:99-17 is not listed on IDEAS
- Booth, Alison L & Burton, Jonathan & Mumford, Karen, 2000.
"The Position of Women in UK Academic Economics,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(464), pages F312-33, June.
- Adnett, Nick & Bougheas, Spiros & Davies, Peter, 2002.
"Market-based reforms of public schooling: some unpleasant dynamics,"
Economics of Education Review,
Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 323-330, August.
- Nick Adnett & Spiros Bougheas & Peter Davies, . "Market-Based Reforms of Public Schooling: Some Unpleasant Dynamics," Working Papers 994, Staffordshire University, Business School.
- Ray Bachan & Michael Barrow, 2006. "Modelling Curriculum Choice at A-level: Why is Business Studies More Popular than Economics?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 5(2), pages 58-80.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.