IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoedu/v81y2021ics0272775721000030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Upper Secondary School Flexibility on Sorting and Educational Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Berggren, Andrea
  • Jeppsson, Louise

Abstract

This paper estimates the causal impact of an upper secondary curriculum reform in Sweden that increased students’ course-taking flexibility in year 2000. In the most popular upper secondary program, it led to a significant decrease in mandatory mathematics requirements. Using administrative Swedish data, we estimate the causal impact of the reform on tertiary education outcomes and expected earnings using a differences-in-discontinuity identification strategy. The method compares students born immediately before and after the cutoff date. The inclusion of students born in neighboring non-reform cutoff years enables us to disentangle the school starting age effect from the unconfounded effect of the reform. We find no negative effects of the reduced mathematics requirements. Rather, we find a positive effect of the reform on students’ probability of enrolling in, and earning a degree from, tertiary education. Our heterogeneity analysis suggests that relatively disadvantaged students were not negatively affected by the reform.

Suggested Citation

  • Berggren, Andrea & Jeppsson, Louise, 2021. "The Impact of Upper Secondary School Flexibility on Sorting and Educational Outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:81:y:2021:i:c:s0272775721000030
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2021.102080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775721000030
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econedurev.2021.102080?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. Joseph G. Altonji, 1995. "The Effects of High School Curriculum on Education and Labor Market Outcomes," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(3), pages 409-438.
    2. Malamud, Ofer & Pop-Eleches, Cristian, 2011. "School tracking and access to higher education among disadvantaged groups," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1538-1549.
    3. Pedro Carneiro & Katrine V. Løken & Kjell G. Salvanes, 2015. "A Flying Start? Maternity Leave Benefits and Long-Run Outcomes of Children," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(2), pages 365-412.
    4. Georg Graetz & Oskar Nordström Skans & Björn Öckert, 2020. "Family background and the responses to higher SAT scores," CEP Discussion Papers dp1698, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Katja Görlitz & Christina Gravert, 2018. "The effects of a high school curriculum reform on university enrollment and the choice of college major," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 321-336, May.
    6. Joseph G. Altonji & Erica Blom & Costas Meghir, 2012. "Heterogeneity in Human Capital Investments: High School Curriculum, College Major, and Careers," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 185-223, July.
    7. Sandra E. Black & Paul J. Devereux & Kjell G. Salvanes, 2011. "Too Young to Leave the Nest? The Effects of School Starting Age," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(2), pages 455-467, May.
    8. Heather Rose & Julian R. Betts, 2004. "The Effect of High School Courses on Earnings," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(2), pages 497-513, May.
    9. Manudeep Bhuller & Magne Mogstad & Kjell G. Salvanes, 2017. "Life-Cycle Earnings, Education Premiums, and Internal Rates of Return," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(4), pages 993-1030.
    10. Johannes S. Kunz & Kevin E. Staub, 2016. "Subjective completion beliefs and the demand for post-secondary education," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0120, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    11. Thomas Buser & Muriel Niederle & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2014. "Gender, Competitiveness, and Career Choices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(3), pages 1409-1447.
    12. Marianne Bertrand & Magne Mogstad & Jack Mountjoy, 2021. "Improving Educational Pathways to Social Mobility: Evidence from Norway’s Reform 94," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(4), pages 965-1010.
    13. Han Yu & Naci Mocan, 2018. "The Impact of High School Curriculum on Confidence, Academic Success, and Mental and Physical Well-Being of University Students," NBER Working Papers 24573, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Benoît Rapoport & Claire Thibout, 2018. "Why do boys and girls make different educational choices? The influence of expected earnings and test scores," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01781858, HAL.
    15. David S. Lee & Thomas Lemieux, 2010. "Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 281-355, June.
    16. Peter Fredriksson & Björn Öckert, 2014. "Life‐cycle Effects of Age at School Start," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(579), pages 977-1004, September.
    17. Joshua Goodman, 2019. "The Labor of Division: Returns to Compulsory High School Math Coursework," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(4), pages 1141-1182.
    18. 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.
    19. Benoît Rapoport & Claire Thibout, 2018. "Why do boys and girls make different educational choices? The influence of expected earnings and test scores," Post-Print hal-01781858, HAL.
    20. Martin Söderström & Roope Uusitalo, 2010. "School Choice and Segregation: Evidence from an Admission Reform," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 112(1), pages 55-76, March.
    21. Jerik Hanushek & Dennis Kimko, 2006. "Schooling, Labor-force Quality, and the Growth of Nations," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 154-193.
    22. Rapoport, Benoît & Thibout, Claire, 2018. "Why do boys and girls make different educational choices? The influence of expected earnings and test scores," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 205-229.
    23. Ofer Malamud & Cristian Pop-Eleches, 2010. "General Education versus Vocational Training: Evidence from an Economy in Transition," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 43-60, February.
    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. Biewen, Martin & Schwerter, Jakob, 2019. "Does More Math in High School Increase the Share of Female STEM Workers? Evidence from a Curriculum Reform," IZA Discussion Papers 12236, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Lenka Fiala & John Eric Humphries & Juanna Schrøter Joensen & Uditi Karna & John A. List & Gregory F. Veramendi, 2022. "How Early Adolescent Skills and Preferences Shape Economics Education Choices," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 112, pages 609-613, May.
    3. Justman, Moshe & Méndez, Susan J., 2018. "Gendered choices of STEM subjects for matriculation are not driven by prior differences in mathematical achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 282-297.
    4. Canaan, Serena, 2020. "The long-run effects of reducing early school tracking," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    5. Gordon Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth & Anders Stenberg, 2020. "High School Majors, Comparative (Dis)Advantage, and Future Earnings," NBER Working Papers 27524, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. De Philippis, Marta, 2016. "STEM graduates and secondary school curriculum: does early exposure to science matter?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67679, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Daniel Kreisman & Kevin Stange, 2020. "Vocational and Career Tech Education in American High Schools: The Value of Depth Over Breadth," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 11-44, Winter.
    8. Dahl, Gordon B. & Rooth, Dan-Olof & Stenberg, Anders, 2020. "Long-Run Returns to Field of Study in Secondary School," IZA Discussion Papers 13508, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Mikko Silliman & Hanna Virtanen, 2022. "Labor Market Returns to Vocational Secondary Education," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 197-224, January.
    10. Hemelt, Steven W. & Lenard, Matthew A., 2020. "Math acceleration in elementary school: Access and effects on student outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    11. Leighton, Margaret & Speer, Jamin D., 2023. "Rich Grad, Poor Grad: Family Background and College Major Choice," IZA Discussion Papers 16099, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Falch, Torberg & Nyhus, Ole Henning & Strøm, Bjarne, 2014. "Causal effects of mathematics," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 174-187.
    13. Gurantz, Oded & Hurwitz, Michael & Smith, Jonathan, 2020. "Sibling effects on high school exam taking and performance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 534-549.
    14. Friedman-Sokuler, Naomi & Justman, Moshe, 2020. "Gender, culture and STEM: Counter-intuitive patterns in Arab society," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    15. Joensen, Juanna Schrøter & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Spillovers in education choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 158-183.
    16. Jia, Ning, 2021. "Do stricter high school math requirements raise college STEM attainment?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Roychowdhury, Punarjit, 2021. "(Em)Powered by Science? Estimating the Relative Labor Market Returns to Majoring in Science in High School in India," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    18. Silliman, Mikko & Virtanen, Hanna, 2019. "Labor Market Returns to Vocational Secondary Education," ETLA Working Papers 65, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    19. Katja Görlitz & Christina Gravert, 2018. "The effects of a high school curriculum reform on university enrollment and the choice of college major," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 321-336, May.
    20. Dominique Cappelletti & Maria Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2022. "Math ability, gender stereotypes about math ability, and educational choices. Combining experimental and survey data," Working Papers 07/2022, University of Verona, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Educational economics; Upper secondary school curriculum; Course selection; Tertiary education; Returns to education; Reform evaluation; Human capital;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H0 - Public Economics - - General
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • I26 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Returns to Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    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:81:y:2021:i:c:s0272775721000030. 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.