STEM Graduates and Secondary School Curriculum

References

1. ↵
   1. Altonji, J.G.

   1995. “The Effects of High School Curriculum on Education and Labor Market Outcomes.” Journal of Human Resources 30(3): 409–38.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
2. ↵
   1. Altonji, J.,
   2. P. Arcidiacono, and
   3. A. Maurel

   . 2016. “The Analysis of Field Choice in College and Graduate School: Determinants and Wage Effects.” In Handbook of the Economics of Education, Volume 5, ed. Eric A. Hanushek, Stephen Machin, and Ludger Woessmann, 305–96. New York: Elsevier.
3. ↵
   1. Altonji, J.G.,
   2. E. Blom, and
   3. C. Meghir

   . 2012. “Heterogeneity in Human Capital Investments: High School Curriculum, College Major, and Careers.” Annual Review of Economics 4(1): 185–223.

   OpenUrlWeb of Science
4. ↵
   1. Anelli, M., and
   2. G. Peri

   . 2019. “The Effects of High School Peers’ Gender on College Major, College Performance and Income.” Economic Journal 129(618): 553–602.

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Angrist, J., and
   2. J.-S. Pischke

   . 2009. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6. ↵
   1. Arcidiacono, P.,
   2. E. Aucejo, and
   3. V.J. Hotz

   . 2016. “University Differences in the Graduation of Minorities in STEM Fields: Evidence from California.” American Economic Review 106 (3): 525–62.

   OpenUrl
7. ↵
   1. Arrow, K.

   1962. “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention.” In The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, 609–26. National Bureau of Economic Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8. ↵
   1. Autor, D.H.

   2003. “Outsourcing at Will: The Contribution of Unjust Dismissal Doctrine to the Growth of Employment Outsourcing.” Journal of Labor Economics 21(1): 1–42.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
9. ↵
   1. Betts, J.R., and
   2. H. Rose

   . 2004. “The Effect of High School Courses on Earnings.” Review of Economic Studies 86(2): 497–513.

   OpenUrl
10. ↵
    1. Breda, T.,
    2. J. Grenet,
    3. M. Monnet, and
    4. C. Van Effenterre

    . 2023. “How Effective are Female Role Models in Steering Girls towards STEM? Evidence from French High Schools.” Economic Journal 133: 1773–809.

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Broecke, S.

    2013. “Does Offering More Science at School Increase the Supply of Scientists?” Education Economics 21(4): 325–42.

    OpenUrl
12. ↵
    1. Burgess, S.,
    2. E. Greaves,
    3. A. Vignoles, and
    4. D. Wilson

    . 2015. “What Parents Want: School Preferences and School Choice.” Economic Journal 125(587): 1262–89.

    OpenUrl
13. ↵
    1. Buser, T.,
    2. M. Niederle, and
    3. H. Oosterbeek

    . 2014. “Gender, Competitiveness, and Career Choices.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 129(3): 1409–47.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
14. ↵
    1. Card, D., and
    2. A. Payne

    . 2020. “High School Choices and the Gender Gap in STEM.” Economic Inquiry 59(1): 9–28.

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Carrell, S.E.,
    2. M.E. Page, and
    3. J.E. West

    . 2010. “Sex and Science: How Professor Gender Perpetuates the Gender Gap.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 125(3): 1101–44.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
16. ↵
    1. Ceci, S.,
    2. D. Ginther,
    3. S. Kahn, and
    4. W. Williams

    . 2014. “Women in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape.” Education Economics 15(3): 75–141.

    OpenUrl
17. ↵
    1. Cortes, K.,
    2. J. Goodman, and
    3. T. Nomi

    . 2015. “Intensive Math Instruction and Educational Attainment: Long-Run Impacts of Double-Dose Algebra.” Journal of Human Resources 50(1): 108–58.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
18. ↵
    1. Deming, D.,
    2. J.S. Hastings,
    3. T. Kane, and
    4. D.O. Staiger

    . 2014. “School Choice, School Quality and Postsecondary Attainment.” American Economic Review 104(3): 991–1013.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
19. ↵
    1. Eccles, J.S., and
    2. M.-T. Wang

    . 2016. “What Motivates Females and Males to Pursue Careers in Mathematics and Science?” International Journal of Behavioral Development 40(2): 100–106.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
20. ↵
    1. Ellison, G., and
    2. A. Swanson

    . 2016. “Do Schools Matter for High Math Achievement? Evidence from the American Mathematics Competitions.” American Economic Review 109(6): 1244–77.

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    1. Gemici, A., and
    2. M. Wiswall

    . 2014. “Evolution of Gender Differences in Post-Secondary Human Capital Investments: College Majors.” International Economic Review 55(1): 23–56.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
22. ↵
    1. Gneezy, U.,
    2. M. Niederle, and
    3. A. Rustichini

    . 2003. “Performance in Competitive Environments: Gender Differences.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(3): 1049–74.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
23. ↵
    1. Goldin, C.

    2013. “Notes on Women and the Undergraduate Economics Major.” CSWEP Newsletter (15): 4–6.
24. 1. Goldin, C.

    2014. “A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter.” American Economic Review 104(4): 1091–119.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. ↵
    1. Goodman, J.

    2019. “The Labor of Division: Returns to Compulsory High School Math Coursework.” Journal of Labor Economics 37(4): 1141–82.

    OpenUrl
26. ↵
    1. Görlitz, K., and
    2. C. Gravert

    . 2018. “The Effects of a High School Curriculum Reform on University Enrollment and the Choice of College Major.” Education Economics 26(3): 321–36.

    OpenUrl
27. ↵
    1. Iaria, A.,
    2. C. Schwarz, and
    3. F. Waldinger

    . 2018. “Frontier Knowledge and Scientific Production: Evidence from the Collapse of International Science.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 133 (2): 927–91.

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Joensen, J.S., and
    2. H.S. Nielsen

    . 2009. “Is There a Causal Effect of High School Math on Labor Market Outcomes?” Journal of Human Resources 44(1): 171–98.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
29. ↵
    1. Joensen, J.S., and
    2. H.S. Nielsen

    . 2016. “Mathematics and Gender: Heterogeneity in Causes and Consequences.” Economic Journal 126(593): 1129–63.

    OpenUrl
30. ↵
    1. Kahn, S., and
    2. D. Ginther

    . 2018. “Women and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).” In The Oxford Handbook of Women and the Economy, ed. Susan L. Averett, Laura M. Argys, and Saul D. Hoffman. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
31. ↵
    1. Kugler, A.D.,
    2. C.H. Tinsley, and
    3. O. Ukhaneva

    . 2017. “Choice of Majors: Are Women Really Different from Men?” Economics of Education Review 81: 102079.

    OpenUrl
32. ↵
    1. Levine, P.B., and
    2. D.J. Zimmerman

    . 1995. “The Benefit of Additional High-School Math and Science Classes for Young Men and Women.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 13(2): 137–49.

    OpenUrl
33. ↵
    1. Mokyr, J.

    2002. The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
34. ↵
    1. Morando, G.

    2020. “The Effect of Studying Mathematics on Degree Choices.” Unpublished.
35. ↵
    1. Moser, P.,
    2. A. Voena, and
    3. F. Waldinger

    . 2014. “German Jewish Emigres and US Invention.” American Economic Review 104(10): 3222–55.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
36. ↵
    1. Niederle, M., and
    2. L. Vesterlund

    . 2007. “Do Women Shy Away from Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much?” Quarterly Journal of Economics 122(3): 1067–101.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
37. ↵
    1. Niederle, M., and
    2. A.H. Yestrumskas

    . 2008. “Gender Differences in Seeking Challenges: The Role of Institutions.” NBER Working Paper 13922. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
38. ↵
    1. Park, H.,
    2. J.R. Behrman, and
    3. J. Choi

    . 2018. “Do Single-Sex Schools Enhance Students’ STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) Outcomes?” Economics of Education Review 62(C): 35–47.

    OpenUrl
39. ↵
    1. Porter, C., and
    2. D. Serra

    . 2020. “Gender Differences in the Choice of Major: The Importance of Female Role Models.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 12(3): 226–54.

    OpenUrl
40. ↵
    1. Reuben, E.,
    2. M. Wiswall, and
    3. B. Zafar

    . 2015. “Preferences and Biases in Educational Choices and Labour Market Expectations: Shrinking the Black Box of Gender.” Economic Journal 127(604): 2153–86.

    OpenUrl
41. ↵
    1. Riegle-Crumb, C.,
    2. B. King,
    3. E. Grodsky, and
    4. C. Muller

    . 2012. “The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? Prior Achievement Fails to Explain Gender Inequality in Entry to STEM College Majors over Time.” American Education Research Journal 49(6): 1048.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
42. ↵
    1. Stinebrickner, R., and
    2. T.R. Stinebrickner

    . 2014. “A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout.” Review of Economic Studies 81(1): 426–72.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
43. ↵
    1. UK Government

    . 2004. “Science & Innovation Investment Framework 2004–2014.” Technical report. London: Department of Education, HM Treasury, Department of Health, Department of Trade and Industry.
44. 1. UK Government

    . 2006. “Science & Innovation Investment Framework 2004–2014: Next Steps.” Technical report. London: Department of Education, HM Treasury, Department of Health, Department of Trade and Industry.
45. ↵
    1. Waldinger, F.

    2016. “Bombs, Brains, and Science: The Role of Human and Physical Capital for the Creation of Scientific Knowledge.” Review of Economics and Statistics 98(5): 811–31.

    OpenUrl
46. ↵
    1. Wiswall, M., and
    2. B. Zafar

    . 2017. “Preference for the Workplace, Investment in Human Capital, and Gender.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 133(1): 457–507.

    OpenUrl
47. ↵
    1. Zafar, B.

    2013. “College Major Choice and the Gender Gap.” Journal of Human Resources 48(3): 545–95.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text