{"title":"Relative age, college satisfaction, and student perceptions of skills gained","authors":"P. Wesley Routon , Jay K. Walker","doi":"10.1016/j.rie.2025.101037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>School starting age policies typically result in academic cohorts where the oldest students are approximately a full year older than their youngest peers. A student’s relative age in their cohort has been shown to have significant effects on a growing list of outcomes, academic and non-academic. On average, relatively older students have been found to perform better in school, particularly during early education. Some evidence exists they continue to fare better in post-college labor markets. Soft skills, satisfaction with education, and collegiate differentials, generally, have received less attention. Using a sample of students from hundreds of U.S. colleges and universities, we estimate the effects of relative age on student satisfaction with higher education and their perceived gains in 13 knowledge and skill categories during undergraduate tenure. College GPAs are also examined. Controlling for other factors, relatively older students report smaller gains in a large number of skill and knowledge categories. In none of the categories available for analysis do they report higher average gains. This does not appear due to academic achievement or involvement, as they also earn similar grades, on average, and report feeling similarly satisfied with their overall collegiate experience and instruction specifically. Thus, while relatively older students earn similar grades and leave college no less satisfied, they perceive to have benefited less from higher education in terms of skill and knowledge gains.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46094,"journal":{"name":"Research in Economics","volume":"79 2","pages":"Article 101037"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944325000146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
School starting age policies typically result in academic cohorts where the oldest students are approximately a full year older than their youngest peers. A student’s relative age in their cohort has been shown to have significant effects on a growing list of outcomes, academic and non-academic. On average, relatively older students have been found to perform better in school, particularly during early education. Some evidence exists they continue to fare better in post-college labor markets. Soft skills, satisfaction with education, and collegiate differentials, generally, have received less attention. Using a sample of students from hundreds of U.S. colleges and universities, we estimate the effects of relative age on student satisfaction with higher education and their perceived gains in 13 knowledge and skill categories during undergraduate tenure. College GPAs are also examined. Controlling for other factors, relatively older students report smaller gains in a large number of skill and knowledge categories. In none of the categories available for analysis do they report higher average gains. This does not appear due to academic achievement or involvement, as they also earn similar grades, on average, and report feeling similarly satisfied with their overall collegiate experience and instruction specifically. Thus, while relatively older students earn similar grades and leave college no less satisfied, they perceive to have benefited less from higher education in terms of skill and knowledge gains.
期刊介绍:
Established in 1947, Research in Economics is one of the oldest general-interest economics journals in the world and the main one among those based in Italy. The purpose of the journal is to select original theoretical and empirical articles that will have high impact on the debate in the social sciences; since 1947, it has published important research contributions on a wide range of topics. A summary of our editorial policy is this: the editors make a preliminary assessment of whether the results of a paper, if correct, are worth publishing. If so one of the associate editors reviews the paper: from the reviewer we expect to learn if the paper is understandable and coherent and - within reasonable bounds - the results are correct. We believe that long lags in publication and multiple demands for revision simply slow scientific progress. Our goal is to provide you a definitive answer within one month of submission. We give the editors one week to judge the overall contribution and if acceptable send your paper to an associate editor. We expect the associate editor to provide a more detailed evaluation within three weeks so that the editors can make a final decision before the month expires. In the (rare) case of a revision we allow four months and in the case of conditional acceptance we allow two months to submit the final version. In both cases we expect a cover letter explaining how you met the requirements. For conditional acceptance the editors will verify that the requirements were met. In the case of revision the original associate editor will do so. If the revision cannot be at least conditionally accepted it is rejected: there is no second revision.