Achievement Differences by Race and Gender in an Economics Classroom

Binkai Chen^*
*Correspondence: Binkai Chen, Department of Economics, Central University of Finance and Economics, Changping, Beijing, China, Email:

Introduction

In this essay, we examine the achievement gaps by gender, race, and ethnicity over the course of four semesters of an intermediate economics course. We discover that, on average, under-represented minority (URM) kids perform worse on tests, and that there are significant differences between male and female students in this racial achievement gap. Male URM students scored less on final exams than male non-URM students; however this difference disappears when preparation differences are taken into account. However, even after accounting for prior preparation, female URM students still performed noticeably lower than female non-URM students. We also examine the results of surveys and low-stakes tests about study habits, and we discover that the theory of stereotype threat consistently best describes our findings. Since it's doubtful that these problems are specific to our classroom, we provide [1].

Around the world, undergraduate economics programmes have disproportionately low participation rates for women and students from underrepresented groups (URM), and this underrepresentation is particularly acute for URM women. According to the 2019 American Economic Association Professional Climate Survey Final Report the majority of non-white respondents (15%) were Asian, while just 30% of responding AEA members were women. 79% of respondents were also white. Even though black women earn 6.8% of all bachelor's degrees in social science fields, they only received 2% of bachelor's degrees in economics in 2017 and 0.6% of doctoral degrees. This suggests that the intersection of gender and race appears to have a particularly noticeable impact on field participation. Our study looks at a problem that has not yet been addressed in the literature on economic achievement discrepancies. Although there is evidence of a gender accomplishment disparity in economics, to our knowledge, the majority of the study on URM students in economics focuses on major selection rather than academic performance. We do not believe it is unrealistic to think that such a gap exists beyond our institution given the lack of racial diversity in the economics major and field. Even less is known about how, if at all, the gender difference between URM and non-URM students differs from the gender gap between URM and non-URM male students [2].

We discover that URM students perform much worse on final exams than non-URM students, and that there are significant gender differences in this accomplishment gap. The disparity between URM and non-URM male performance is eliminated after accounting for variations in GPA and pre-class math abilities, but the gap between URM and non-URM female performance is still big and significant. This achievement disparity between female URM and non-URM pupils has a number of possible causes. According to student selfreported study statistics, there is no evidence to support the assumption that female URM students study less or employ less effective study techniques. Stereotype threat, widely researched psychological phenomena that can happen in high-stakes situations and impacts pupils who belong to groups that are the target of negative stereotypes, is the explanation for the observed achievement disparity that is most consistent with our findings. The pupils from that demographic group have a higher emotional and cognitive load when faced with the widely held idea that a given ethnic or gender group is typically less successful in certain fields [3].

Description

To more effectively implement measures for addressing these vulnerabilities, it is our intention to identify particularly vulnerable demographic categories and understand why these groups are vulnerable. In the discussion that follows, we offer a number of tactics that teachers might implement to assist less prepared pupils and lessen stereotype threat. By doing this, we intend to equip educators with the resources they require to encourage the academic achievement of all of their undergraduate students, which will in turn lead to a higher and more diverse engagement in the field as a whole. The socioeconomic determinants of pay, marital status, consumer spending, education, and jobs of adult women and adult males by race and ethnicity are examined in this article to examine inequities. It examines the ranking, or hierarchy, of wages and salaries by sex and race in the United States. Women often make less than their male counterparts, with White and Asian males continuously having greater incomes than Hispanic women. The research also looks at the microeconomic and demographic discrepancies those women of all races and ethnicities experience in comparison to men, as well as the causes of these differences. Based on one's self-identified race group and a binary interpretation of sex, the data revealed consistent hierarchical trends [4].

An introduction to the economics of race and gender is covered in Economics 69a, with a focus on political concerns. In order to comprehend how economists simulate individual decision-making and to acquire insight, we will learn and apply the methods of microeconomic analysis. A look at how microeconomic theory can account for some of the changes that women and minorities have faced in the previous century in the US and other nations [5].

We'll look at several issues, such as:

• C Why do women in married households often specialise in household tasks? What has changed throughout time, and how and why?

• C What effects did the US welfare reform have on low-income women?

• C Why is women's salaries lower than men's?

• C Why do black Americans make less money than white people?

Conclusion

Five problem sets will be due throughout the semester on the dates provided below, along with quizzes. On the due date, complete problem sets must be turned in at the start of class. Any late problem sets, including those submitted in response to medical crises will not be accepted. I will deduct the lowest score from your problem sets from the grade in order to account for illness and unavoidable conflicts. In other words, you must submit four out of the five problem sets. If you submit all five, I will use the best four grades when determining your problem set grade.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Jacob, Brian A., and Jens Ludwig. "The effects of housing assistance on labor supply: Evidence from a voucher lottery." Am Econ Rev 102 (2012): 272-304.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Murray, Michael P. "A reinterpretation of the traditional income–leisure model, with application to in-kind subsidy programs." J Public Econ 14 (1980): 69-81.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Shroder, Mark. "Does housing assistance perversely affect self-sufficiency? A review essay." J Housing Econ 11 (2002): 381-417.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Arkhangelsky, Dmitry. “Synthetic difference in differences.” National Bur Econ Res (2019).

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Carlson, Deven. "Long-term earnings and employment effects of housing voucher receipt." J Urban Econ 71 (2012):128-150.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at