IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

About SES & educational expectations: interrelations in the determination of higher education baccalaureate attainment

Listed author(s):
  • Milagros, Nores

Community colleges and four-year colleges provide two differing alternatives to post secondary education. High school seniors face several options upon high school completion: entering the labor market, entering a community college (for a two-year degree or as a step towards a baccalaureate) or attending a four-year institution. Selection into each of these is clearly not a random process, but one related to previous educational experiences, family characteristics and social class, and educational expectations, among others. Attempting to address this issue of self selection, Rouse (1994 & 1995) explicitly posed the question of the democratization versus diversion effects of community colleges. Her work provides evidence of a rational behavior on the part of two-year college students who respond to price and proximity of such institutions (1994), and of the existence of primarily a democratization effect (1994 & 1995). This paper proposes a variation on the work by Rouse (1995) and Leigh and Gill (2003) by inquiring into the effect of SES in relation to students’ educational expectations. It builds on these two models. The underlying hypothesis is that expectations are not independent from SES and therefore examining social class differences and their interaction with educational expectations would support the theory of endogeneity between educational expectations and socioeconomic background. We directly control for expectations and interactions between SES and expectations, as well as considering variations to modeling SES and use alternative estimation methods for bounded probabilities (Logit and Biprobit) and compare these to their approaches. W find the effect of expectations on the probability for middle and middle-high class students’ proved steeper than for the everyone but low SES students. Effect on expected probabilities increasing with SES. These results disappear when estimation methods are improved, using logits and bivariate probit methods, instead of OLS and IVs (explicitly modeling expectations). However, the democratization effect remains significant through all estimations, and strengthens when estimation methods are improved. Out estimates therefore reinforced the findings by Rouse (1995) and Leigh and Gill (2003) of a positive democratization effect that outweighs any diversion effects.

If 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.

File URL:
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 10095.

in new window

Date of creation: Apr 2007
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:10095
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany

Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2459
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-992459
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

in new window

  1. Monks, James, 2000. "The returns to individual and college characteristics: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 279-289, June.
  2. Kane, Thomas J & Rouse, Cecilia Elena, 1995. "Labor-Market Returns to Two- and Four-Year College," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 600-614, June.
  3. Leigh, D. E. & Gill, A. M., 2003. "Do community colleges really divert students from earning bachelor's degrees?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 23-30, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:10095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.