<p>I half-seriously agree with Claudia Goldin’s half-serious hypothesis, that women are keenly aware when they look stupid and don’t like it, while men don’t – as is easily verified by observation!</p>
<p>The chart shows that more than 30% of the men who received a C+ or below in introductory economics went on to major in economics. If they subsequently caught on to the field, or went on to get reasonably good jobs despite lower GPA’s, then the advice that men should take fewer risks would not be good advice.</p>
<p>This study seems to me to fall into the category of “analysis of women’s shortcomings.” They are too grade focused! They want people patting them on the back!</p>
<p>There are several alternative explanations that are more rational: Women might believe (rightly or wrongly) that they must outperform men to have the same chances as men. Certainly there are a number of studies that tend to show this. So the fact that women tend not to major in economics if they receive a low grade at first might be due to what women have heard of the marketplace, and not their personal shortcomings. Also, it is not clear to me that enrollment in an introductory economics course is an indicator of intent to major in economics, or even of thinking of majoring in economics. Perhaps a higher fraction of the men in the first course are actually considering a major in economics.</p>
<p>It would also be interesting to know how prior coursework in economics fits into the picture. Some high schools teach AP micro- and macro-econ and many don’t. I suspect that there are still many high schools that do not teach economics at all.</p>
<p>This study rang true to me–whether it’s nature or nurture, I do think it’s more likely that a woman will think a B or C in economics means that’s not the best major for her, while a man will think it doesn’t really represent how smart he is.</p>
<p>Given that this is Harvard, are B+ and lower grades actually relevant in the overall scheme of things when most grades are A and A-? I.e. not that many Harvard students are getting B+ and lower grades.</p>
<p>The Washington Post piece mentions “Econ 101”; there is no such course number at Harvard. There are Economics 10a-10b, an introductory sequence, and choices of intermediate sequences, 1010a-1010b (requires frosh calculus) and 1011a-1011b (requires multivariable calculus).</p>
<p>I don’t know about Harvard, but at Yale plenty of students get Bs and B+s, often in their intended majors. What I find interesting is the suggestion that this is more discouraging for women than it is for men. If that’s true, it might explain some of the exodus of women from STEM majors. It might be controversial, because it’s something that could happen without any bias in the actual grading.</p>
<p>I don’t know about econ or psych, but the article said that STEM classes tend to grade lower than humanities courses. If there is one group that is more sensitive to lower grades than another group, that disparity could drive numbers from STEM into humanities.</p>
<p>Interesting. I got my one and only A- in Macroeconomics for my MBA and loved it so much that I went on to concentrate in economics, getting all A’s in the remaining courses. That one A- kept me at a 3.99 GPA instead of a 4.0. </p>
<p>The reason for mentioning psychology is that psychology is typically one of the most heavily female of the liberal arts majors. Note that both economics and psychology are social studies subjects.</p>
<p>I’ve always assumed econ was on the mathy end of social sciences, but I’m no expert. Certainly, many women go on to STEM and econ majors even if they get some Bs–but if it’s true that a significantly larger percentage of men do so, then that’s worth considering.</p>
<p>Economics does require more math, although not at the introductory course level. Perhaps the disparity between economics and psychology may have more do to with grades in preparatory courses other than introductory economics and psychology, such as the additional math courses needed before taking intermediate economics.</p>
<p>Ec10 at Harvard is a gut. For years, students majoring in other disciplines would take the class to fulfill the social science core curriculum requirement. The class does not require a background in calculus – only basic algebra skills are required. Fun class + easy material = painless GPA booster. It is a run-of-the-mill introductory economics class (one semester of micro + one semester of macro) that is fairly well taught. Classes consist of weekly lectures + one small group recitation session per week. A moderately good student with sub-par study habits (by Harvard standards) should be able to earn at least a B+ in the class. If a student is considering Ec as his/her field of concentration, then an A- can be attained with moderate effort.</p>
<p>In most cases, any grade below a B+ in Ec10 would be an indicator that the student doesn’t have much aptitude for the subject.</p>
<p>I agree with Hunt–men tend to think they’re up to the task despite the grades they receive and women tend to think they are only as worthy as the grades they receive.
My dad’s attitude got me through several tough courses in college. While my mom would fret over a low grade and I’d be doubting myself, my dad always had his eye on the ultimate prize–a career in my chosen profession. He’d say shrug it off and keep on going to the goal. Don’t let hurdles get in your way.</p>
<p>This isn’t absolute by any means, but my observation is that there is a marked gender difference between the people who always say “I know I failed that test” (but actually did well) and those who say “That test was easy” (but didn’t actually do that well). Whether this difference is caused by nature or nurture I hesitate to speculate.</p>
<p>“When comparing across men and women, grades play a more important role in men’s decision making while preferences play a bigger role in women’s choices.”</p>
<p>Looking at the actual numbers, there does not appear to be a consistent difference between genders, such as women consistently being more sensitive to grades and men consistently being less sensitive to grades. Instead there are large differences for different majors and in some cases progression to 2nd course vs progression to 3rd course. In some cases, the chance or progression depends more on how the grade in that course compares to their overall GPA than the grade itself. For example, looking at only the progression to 2nd course, women seem much more sensitive to grades in psychology than men, while men seem much more sensitive to grades in computer science than women. I suspect this relates to women being more likely to take psychology with intention of a major instead of an elective, and men being more likely to take CS with intention of a major instead of an elective. The students taking the class as a major are more likely to change their mind about later courses after a bad grade.</p>
<p>The former tends to be much more quantitatively oriented than the latter. (And to me, that is the obvious difference in this finding. Compare AP Calc BC with AB by gender; the former is primarily guys, while the latter is closer to parity. But perhaps guys have stronger math backgrounds going into Econ 101.))</p>
<p>Interesting question. Some time ago there was an article in the NYT about the “STEM death march” whereby students entering elite schools were least likely to complete a STEM major. It was hard to tell whether this was a result of grade deflation in STEM classes or because tippy-top students who chose elite schools were a self-selected group that chose these schools rather than state schools because these schools offered more enticing majors outside of STEM. </p>
<p>I think any discussion of grade deflatioon and attrition from STEM majors also needs to address pervasive academic sandbagging in intro classes. Students are entering these classes with vastly different levels of preparation at most schools and especially at elite schools that do not offer different levels for students who come in with different backgrounds.</p>
<p>Many students leave STEM majors early if there is any chance they might want to consider law school or a field that hires from diverse majors, rather than risk a GPA that would put them below a cut-off. This is especially likely if a STEM degree does not offer any employment advantage over a degree in a major known for higher GPA. Students who have stumbled in a STEM class or two might also be encouraged by advisors to re-think their suitability for a STEM major.</p>