作为市场结果的等级差异

IF 1.7 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Donald G. Freeman
{"title":"作为市场结果的等级差异","authors":"Donald G. Freeman","doi":"10.1080/00220489909596091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Grade point averages (GPAs) for college courses have been increasing at least since the 1960s (Kolevzon 1981). Grade inflation has been the subject of a considerable literature investigating the causes (McKenzie 1975; Kolevzon 1981; Dickson 1984), consequences (Millman et al. 1983; Sabot and WakemanLinn 1991; Shea 1994), and suggested remedies (Zangenehzadeh 1988). Perhaps less well documented is that grade inflation has occurred at different rates across university departments, causing average GPAs to diverge across disciplines. In particular, grades in the sciences, including economics, tend to be lower than grades in the humanities and in pre-professional fields (Shea 1994; Becker 1997). Sabot and Wakeman-Linn (1991) documented the division of colleges into highand low-grading departments as a byproduct of their work on grade inflation. They found that this division is affecting enrollment patterns, with students abandoning \"harder\" or low-grading disciplines like math or science in favor of \"softer\" or high-grading disciplines. Thus, grade divergence may be exacerbating the shortage of technically qualified graduates by skewing enrollment away from science and engineering. Similarly, the recent decline in economics majors may reflect student aversion to tougher grading practices in economics relative to other disciplines (Becker 1997). I offer an economic explanation for grade divergence. My hypothesis is that, given equal money prices per credit hour across disciplines, departments manage their enrollments by \"pricing\" their courses with grading standards commensurate with the market benefits of their courses, as measured by expected incomes.I analyzed grade divergence using a cross-section of 59 fields of study from a recently published survey of college graduates by the National Center for Education Statistics, A Descriptive Summary of 1992-93 Bachelor's Degree Recipients: 1 year later (NCES 1996). The survey tracks 1992-93 college graduates to determine outcomes from postsecondary education, including returns to investment in education. Using this sample, I found evidence consistent with the economic explanation of grade divergence: Graduates from high-grading fields of study have lower earnings than graduates from low-grad-","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"60 1","pages":"344-351"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"46","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Grade Divergence as a Market Outcome\",\"authors\":\"Donald G. Freeman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00220489909596091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Grade point averages (GPAs) for college courses have been increasing at least since the 1960s (Kolevzon 1981). Grade inflation has been the subject of a considerable literature investigating the causes (McKenzie 1975; Kolevzon 1981; Dickson 1984), consequences (Millman et al. 1983; Sabot and WakemanLinn 1991; Shea 1994), and suggested remedies (Zangenehzadeh 1988). Perhaps less well documented is that grade inflation has occurred at different rates across university departments, causing average GPAs to diverge across disciplines. In particular, grades in the sciences, including economics, tend to be lower than grades in the humanities and in pre-professional fields (Shea 1994; Becker 1997). Sabot and Wakeman-Linn (1991) documented the division of colleges into highand low-grading departments as a byproduct of their work on grade inflation. They found that this division is affecting enrollment patterns, with students abandoning \\\"harder\\\" or low-grading disciplines like math or science in favor of \\\"softer\\\" or high-grading disciplines. Thus, grade divergence may be exacerbating the shortage of technically qualified graduates by skewing enrollment away from science and engineering. Similarly, the recent decline in economics majors may reflect student aversion to tougher grading practices in economics relative to other disciplines (Becker 1997). I offer an economic explanation for grade divergence. My hypothesis is that, given equal money prices per credit hour across disciplines, departments manage their enrollments by \\\"pricing\\\" their courses with grading standards commensurate with the market benefits of their courses, as measured by expected incomes.I analyzed grade divergence using a cross-section of 59 fields of study from a recently published survey of college graduates by the National Center for Education Statistics, A Descriptive Summary of 1992-93 Bachelor's Degree Recipients: 1 year later (NCES 1996). The survey tracks 1992-93 college graduates to determine outcomes from postsecondary education, including returns to investment in education. Using this sample, I found evidence consistent with the economic explanation of grade divergence: Graduates from high-grading fields of study have lower earnings than graduates from low-grad-\",\"PeriodicalId\":51564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Education\",\"volume\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"344-351\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"46\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909596091\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Education","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909596091","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 46

摘要

至少从20世纪60年代开始,大学课程的平均绩点(gpa)一直在增长(Kolevzon 1981)。成绩膨胀一直是研究其原因的大量文献的主题(McKenzie 1975;Kolevzon 1981;Dickson 1984),后果(Millman et al. 1983;Sabot and wakemanlin, 1991;Shea 1994),并提出了补救措施(Zangenehzadeh 1988)。也许文献记载较少的是,大学各院系的分数膨胀率不同,导致各学科的平均绩点存在差异。特别是,包括经济学在内的科学成绩往往低于人文学科和专业预科领域的成绩(Shea 1994;贝克尔1997)。Sabot和Wakeman-Linn(1991)记录了将大学划分为高分和低分系的现象,这是他们研究分数膨胀的副产品。他们发现,这种分化正在影响招生模式,学生们放弃了数学或科学等“较难”或评分较低的学科,转而选择了“较软”或评分较高的学科。因此,年级差异可能会使理工科毕业生的入学人数减少,从而加剧技术合格毕业生的短缺。同样,最近经济学专业的学生人数下降可能反映了学生对经济学相对于其他学科更严格的评分做法的厌恶(Becker 1997)。我为等级差异提供了一个经济学解释。我的假设是,在各学科每学时的货币价格相同的情况下,院系管理招生的方式是,用与课程的市场效益相称的评分标准(以预期收入衡量)来“定价”课程。我从国家教育统计中心最近发表的一项对大学毕业生的调查中,使用59个研究领域的横截面来分析年级差异,该调查是1992-93年学士学位获得者的描述性总结:一年后(NCES 1996)。这项调查追踪了1992年至1993年的大学毕业生,以确定高等教育的成果,包括教育投资的回报。通过这个样本,我发现了与等级差异的经济学解释相一致的证据:高等级专业的毕业生收入低于低等级专业的毕业生
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Grade Divergence as a Market Outcome
Grade point averages (GPAs) for college courses have been increasing at least since the 1960s (Kolevzon 1981). Grade inflation has been the subject of a considerable literature investigating the causes (McKenzie 1975; Kolevzon 1981; Dickson 1984), consequences (Millman et al. 1983; Sabot and WakemanLinn 1991; Shea 1994), and suggested remedies (Zangenehzadeh 1988). Perhaps less well documented is that grade inflation has occurred at different rates across university departments, causing average GPAs to diverge across disciplines. In particular, grades in the sciences, including economics, tend to be lower than grades in the humanities and in pre-professional fields (Shea 1994; Becker 1997). Sabot and Wakeman-Linn (1991) documented the division of colleges into highand low-grading departments as a byproduct of their work on grade inflation. They found that this division is affecting enrollment patterns, with students abandoning "harder" or low-grading disciplines like math or science in favor of "softer" or high-grading disciplines. Thus, grade divergence may be exacerbating the shortage of technically qualified graduates by skewing enrollment away from science and engineering. Similarly, the recent decline in economics majors may reflect student aversion to tougher grading practices in economics relative to other disciplines (Becker 1997). I offer an economic explanation for grade divergence. My hypothesis is that, given equal money prices per credit hour across disciplines, departments manage their enrollments by "pricing" their courses with grading standards commensurate with the market benefits of their courses, as measured by expected incomes.I analyzed grade divergence using a cross-section of 59 fields of study from a recently published survey of college graduates by the National Center for Education Statistics, A Descriptive Summary of 1992-93 Bachelor's Degree Recipients: 1 year later (NCES 1996). The survey tracks 1992-93 college graduates to determine outcomes from postsecondary education, including returns to investment in education. Using this sample, I found evidence consistent with the economic explanation of grade divergence: Graduates from high-grading fields of study have lower earnings than graduates from low-grad-
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Economic Education offers original articles on teaching economics. In its pages, leading scholars evaluate innovations in teaching techniques, materials, and programs. Instructors of introductory through graduate level economics will find the journal an indispensable resource for content and pedagogy in a variety of media. The Journal of Economic Education is published quarterly in cooperation with the National Council on Economic Education and the Advisory Committee on Economic Education of the American Economic Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信