Advertisement

Journal of Economics and Finance

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 166–185 | Cite as

Does attending predominately-female schools make a difference? Labor market outcomes for women

  • Sherrilyn M. Billger
Article

Abstract

This study explores the effects of attending predominately-female high schools on labor market outcomes. The existing literature about these schools is quite limited, and most research focuses on role-model effects at coeducational schools. Since returns to predominately-female high school attendance are likely to be upward biased due to selection, data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth are used to explore the determinants of such attendance. Girls who are raised Catholic, who are nonwhite, or who live in urban areas are more likely to enroll in predominately-female schools. Though women who attended these schools are no more or less likely to enter the workforce, they do earn a 19.7% higher wage than women who attended coeducational high schools. Controlling for personal characteristics as well as selection into predominately-female schools and into the workforce, the estimated wage differential falls to 12.6%.

Keywords

Labor Force Participation Wage Differential Labor Market Outcome National Longitudinal Survey Wage Regression 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. 1998.Separated by Sex: A Critical Look at Single-Sex Education for Girls.Google Scholar
  2. Ballou, D., and M. Podgursky. 1997.Teacher Pay and Teacher Quality. Kalamazoo: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.Google Scholar
  3. Behrman, J. R., M. R. Rosenzweig, and P. Taubman. 1996. “College Choice and Wages: Estimates Using Data on Female Twins.”Review of Economics and Statistics 78: 672–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Betts, J. R. (2001) “The Impact of School Resources on Women’s Earnings and Educational Attainment: Findings from the National Longitudinal Survey of Young Women.”Journal of Labor Economics 19: 635–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blau, F. D., M. A. Ferber, and A. E. Winkler. 2005.The Economics of Women, Men, and Work, 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Boozer, M., and C. Rouse. 1995. “Intraschool Variation in Class Size: Patterns and Implications.”Journal of Urban Economics 50: 163–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brewer, D. J., E. R. Eide, and R. G. Ehrenberg. 1999 “Does it Pay to Attend an Elite Private College? Cross-Cohort Evidence on the Effects of College Type on Earnings”.Journal of Human Resources 34: 104–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butcher, K. F., and A. Case. 1994. “The Effect of Sibling Sex Composition on Womens’ Education and Earnings.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 109: 531–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Card, D. 1995. “Earnings, Schooling, and Ability Revisited.”Research in Labor Economics 14: 23–48.Google Scholar
  10. Card, D., and A. B. Krueger. 1998. “School Resources and Student Outcomes.”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 559: 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Card, D., and A. B. Krueger. 1992. “Does School Quality Matter? Returns to Education and the Characteristics of Public Schools in the United States.”Journal of Political Economy 100: 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiswick, B. R., and S. Koutroumanes. 1996. “An Econometric Analysis of the Demand for Private Schooling.”Research in Labor Economics 15: 209–37.Google Scholar
  13. Coleman, J., T. Hoffer, and S. Kilgore. 1982.High School Achievement: Public, Catholic, and Private Schools Compared. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Dale, S. B., and A. B. Krueger. 2002. “Estimating the Payoff to Attending a More Selective College: An Application of Selection on Observables and Unobservables.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 117: 1491–1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ehrenberg, R., D. Goldhaber, and D. Brewer. 1995. “Do Teacher’s Race, Gender, and Ethnicity Matter: Evidence from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 48: 547–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Evans, M. O. 1992. “An Estimate of Race and Gender Role-Model Effects in Teaching High School.”Journal of Economic Education 23: 209–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fishe, R., R. P. Trost, and P. Lurie. 1981. “Labor Force Earnings and College Choice of Young Women: An Examination of Selectivity Bias and Comparative Advantage.”Economics of Education Review 1: 169–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frazis, H. 1992. “Wages, Family Background, and Endogenous Schooling.”Bureau of Labor Statistics Office of Research and Evaluation Working Paper, March.Google Scholar
  19. Heckman, J. J. 1979. “Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error.”Econometrica 47: 153–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heckman, J. 1991. “Male-Female Differences in Hourly Wages: The Role of Human Capital, Working Conditions, and Housework.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 44: 746–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hoxby, C. M. 2000a. “The Effects of Class Size and Composition on Student Achievement: New Evidence from Natural Population Variation.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 1239–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoxby, C. M. 2000b. “Peer Effects in the Classroom: Learning from Gender and Race Variation.”NBER working paper No. 7867.Google Scholar
  23. Hoxby, C. M. 1994. “Do Private Schools Provide Competition for Public Schools?”NBER working paper No. 4978.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, L. 1978. “Unionism and Wage Rates: A Simultaneous Equations Model with Qualitative and Limited Dependent Variables.”International Economic Review 19: 415–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lewin, T. 1999. “Girls’ Schools Gain, Saying Coeducational Isn’t Equal.”New York Times. 11 April.Google Scholar
  26. Maddala, G. S. 1994. “Selectivity Problems in Longitudinal Data.”Econometric Methods and Applications 2: 213–40.Google Scholar
  27. Maddala, G.S. 1986. “Disequilibrium, Self-Selection, and Switching Models.” inHandbook of Econometrics, vol. 3, edited by Z. Griliches and M.D. Intriligator. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1633–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maddala, G. S. 1983.Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Mincer, J., and S. Polachek. 1974. “Family Investment in Human Capital: Earnings of Women.”Journal of Political Economy 82: S76-S108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neal, D. 1997. “The Effects of Catholic Secondary Schooling on Educational Achievement.”Journal of Labor Economics 15: 98–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rothstein, D. S. 1993. “Generating Equality? An Economic Analysis of Labor Market and Educational Outcomes of Single-Sex Versus Coed College Education” M.S. Thesis, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  32. Vella, F. 1994. “Gender Roles and Human Capital Investment: The Relationship between Traditional Attitudes, and Female Labour Market Performance.”Economica 61: 191–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Economics and Finance 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sherrilyn M. Billger
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsIllinois State UniversityNormal

Personalised recommendations