IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/femeco/v30y2024i2p123-161.html

Women’s Colleges and Economics Major Choice: Evidence from Wellesley College Applicants

Author

Listed:
  • Kristin F. Butcher
  • Patrick J. McEwan
  • Akila Weerapana

Abstract

Many observers argue that diversity in Economics and STEM fields is critical, not simply because of egalitarian goals, but because who is in a field may shape what is studied by it. If increasing the rate of majoring in mathematically intensive fields among women is a worthy goal, then understanding whether women’s colleges causally affect that choice is important. Among all admitted applicants to Wellesley College, enrollees are 7.2 percentage points (94 percent) more likely to receive an Economics degree than non-enrollees (a plausible lower bound given negative selection into enrollment on math skills and major preferences). Overall, 3.2 percentage points – or 44 percent of the difference between enrollees and non-enrollees – is explained by college exposure to women instructors and students, consistent with a wider role for women’s colleges in increasing women’s participation in Economics.HIGHLIGHTS In US colleges, men are more than twice as likely as women to major in Economics.Enrollees are twice as likely as non-enrollees to major in Economics.The difference is a plausible lower bound given patterns of selection on observed variables.Over 40 percent of the difference is explained by the gender of students and faculty.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristin F. Butcher & Patrick J. McEwan & Akila Weerapana, 2024. "Women’s Colleges and Economics Major Choice: Evidence from Wellesley College Applicants," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 123-161, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:30:y:2024:i:2:p:123-161
    DOI: 10.1080/13545701.2024.2334886
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13545701.2024.2334886
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13545701.2024.2334886?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

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Elaine Kelly & Isabel Stockton, 2024. "A senior doctor like me: Gender match and occupational choice," IFS Working Papers W24/11, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    3. Todd Pugatch & Elizabeth Schroeder, 2026. "Using RCTs in economic education research," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 90-104, January.
    4. Lee, Wang-Sheng, 2024. "Single-Sex vs. Coeducational Schooling and STEM: Comparing Australian Students with Similar University Admission Scores," IZA Discussion Papers 17084, IZA Network @ LISER.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    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:taf:femeco:v:30:y:2024:i:2:p:123-161. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFEC20 .

    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.