View
213
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
MECHANISMS AND IMPACTS OF MECHANISMS AND IMPACTS OF GENDER PEER EFFECTS AT SCHOOLGENDER PEER EFFECTS AT SCHOOL
Victor Lavy Hebrew University
Analía Schlosser Tel Aviv University
February 2010
GENDER PEER EFFECTS IN THE CLASSROOM
Social scientists, policy makers, and parents have long
been concerned with the consequences of classroom
gender composition.
General view: social interactions between genders at
school play an important role in academic achievement
and career choices.
However, little scientific evidence supports these beliefs.
Not much is known about the mechanisms of gender
peer-effects.
“Our goal is to create all-girls public schools and college guidance programs in New York City and to create a network of top quality schools across the nation.…
The YWL Network currently includes four all-girls public schools in New York City, Chicago and Philadelphia and an affiliate school in Dallas. To expand options and opportunities, our Foundation seeks to build on our success and to extend our impact on public education.”
# of girls’ schools
# of boys’ schools
% boys in mixed schools
London 83 61 55%
Inner London 36 21 59%
Camden 4 1 61%
Islington 3 2 71%
Southwark 4 1 65%
Examine the extent of gender peer effects in the
educational production function (within a mixed gender environment) Looking separately at boys and girls.Explore the effects on achievements in different
stages of the schooling cycle: primary, middle, and high school.
Identify mechanisms of gender peer effects.Explore these mechanisms to assess role of
composition versus changes in students’ behavior.
OBJECTIVES OF THE PAPER
Observational studies based on comparison between students, mainly of girls, in single-sex and coed classes: reviews by U.S. Dept. of Education (2005), AAUW (1998).Mixed evidence.No account for selection or unobserved confounding
factors.Virtually no research on the effects for boys.
Quasi-experimental evidence within a mixed gender environment for elementary schools:Hoxby (2000): students have higher achievement when
they have more female peers.
STUDIES ON THE EFFECTS OF CLASSROOM GENDER COMPOSITION
RELATED RESEARCH OF PEER EFFECTS ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
Experimental evidence: Sacerdote (2001); Zimmerman (2003)
Changes in student’s peer composition: Hanushek et al. (2003); Hoxby & Weingarth (2005); Gibbons & Telhaj (2006); Lavy, Silva & Weinhardt (2009).
Within school variation: Angrist & Lang (2004); Gould, Lavy & Paserman (2005); Arcidiacono & Nicholson (2005); Ammermueller & Pischke (2006), Lavy, Paserman & Schlosser (2008).
Little empirical evidence on mechanisms See for e.g., Lazear (2001) model.
Rely on within school variation in the proportion of female students across adjacent cohorts.
Examine whether cohort-to-cohort changes in outcomes within the same grade and school are systematically associated with cohort-to-cohort changes in the proportion of female students.
The proportion of female students is measured at the grade and not at the class level because the latter might be endogenous.
Use placebo treatments for falsification tests: replace actual treatment with the proportion of girls in the t-1 and t+1 cohort in the same school.
IDENTIFICATION STRATEGY
We use repeated cross-sectional data to estimate a reduced-
form equation separately for boys and girls
(1)
yigst outcome of student i, in grade g, school s, and year t
αg grade effect; βs school effect; γt year effect
xigst student covariates
Sgst cohort covariates
Pgst proportion of female students in grade g, school s,
and year t
Models at the HS level include also school specific time trends. Standard errors are clustered at the school level.
IDENTIFICATION STRATEGY
Outcomes: High school: students achievement in matriculation exams
for the 1993-2003 cohorts. Elementary and middle schools: national tests and
questionnaires administered by the MOE for 2002-2005. Student’s questionnaire (grades 5th through 9th). Teacher’s questionnaire (all teachers). Student’s tests scores in math, science, Hebrew, and
English (5th and 8th grades). Students background characteristics: administrative records
collected by the Israeli MOE.Each record includes: student ID, school and class ID, and student demographics (gender, parental education, number of siblings, year of immigration, and ethnicity).
DATA
A. What originates the variation in the prop. female? Table A1: Decomposition of variance within and between
schools.
Figure 1a: Natural fluctuations in the prop. female across incoming cohorts that persist through their progression to higher grades. Similar to variation across cohorts within residential areas.
Figure 1b: Simulated within school SD similar to actual within school SD.
Figure 2: Larger variation in the prop. female in small schools but still sizeable in large schools.
Figure 3: Variation in the periphery of the country and in large metropolitan areas.
EVIDENCE ON THE VALIDITY OF THE IDENTIFICATION STRATEGY
B. Is this variation correlated with other changes across cohorts? Table 1: Balancing tests show that within school
changes in the prop. of female students are uncorrelated with any other changes in students background characteristics.
EVIDENCE ON THE VALIDITY OF THE IDENTIFICATION STRATEGY (cont.)
C. Do parents/students react to the prop. of female classmates by leaving a school? Unlikely in Elementary school or Middle school given
that there is no school choice.
Table 2: The likelihood that a boy/girl leaves a school is unrelated to the prop. female in his/her initial grade.
Nevertheless, at the high school level we use the prop. female students in 10th grade.
Virtually same results when limiting samples to towns that have only one school.
EVIDENCE ON THE VALIDITY OF THE IDENTIFICATION STRATEGY (cont.)
Table 3a: Descriptive stats. on matriculation outcomes: girls have higher achievements except in sciences.
Results for matriculation outcomes: Positive effects of the prop. female. Similar magnitude for boys and girls.
Table 3b: Falsification regressions with placebo treatments show no effect.
Table 4:: Heterogeneous effects by parental education and immigration status. Larger benefits for students with lower parental education and new immigrants.
RESULTS: EFFECTS ON HIGH SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT
RESULTS: EFFECTS ON HIGH SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT (cont.)
Table A2: Heterogeneous effects by school size: :
Similar effects in small and large schools suggesting that our results are relevant for schools of all sizes.
Non-linear effects:• Table A3: Evidence on within school switches across
quintiles over time.
• Table A4:: Impacts that grow with the increase in the prop. female. Largest when girls become a majority in the class (above 58 percent).
Table 5:
Primary school: significant effects on math and
science for boys and girls; similar estimates by
gender; no effect on language subjects.
10 points increase in the prop. female
increase in avg. score in math & science by 3.3% SD.
Middle school: positive effects on girls and boys’
math and English test scores, only significant for
girls.
RESULTS: EFFECTS ON PRIMARY AND MIDDLE SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT
Table 6 - Learning Environment: Less disruptions and less violence. Improved inter-student relationships. Improved teacher-student relationships.
Table 7 – Students’ FE estimates: using variation in the : using variation in the prop. female at the transition from elem. school to MS:prop. female at the transition from elem. school to MS:
Results remarkably similar to school FE results.Results remarkably similar to school FE results.
RESULTS: MECHANISMS
RESULTS: MECHANISMS (cont.)
Table 8 - Teacher Work Sentiments:: Less teaching fatigue / burnout.
No effect on teachers workload or work satisfaction.
Table 9:: Improved classroom environment due to
compositional change or due to changes in students’
behaviour?
Tables A6 & A8 - Falsification TestsTables A6 & A8 - Falsification Tests:: no effects.
RESULTS: MECHANISMS (cont.)
Three main contributions of the paper:
1. Estimate gender peer effects on student achievements in elementary, middle schools, and high school. Both boys and girls have higher achievement when they
have a higher prop. of female peers. The effects are similar for both genders and appear at
the three levels of education. Larger benefits for students with lower parental
education and new immigrants.
SUMMARY
Three main contributions of the paper:
1. Estimate gender peer effects on student achievements in elementary, middle schools, and high school.
2. Look into the “black box” by exploring the mechanisms of gender peer effects. A higher prop. of girls leads to an improved learning
environment.
SUMMARY
Three main contributions of the paper:
1. Estimate gender peer effects on student achievements in elementary, middle schools, and high school.
2. Look into the “black box” by exploring the mechanisms of gender peer effects.
3. Provide evidence showing that the improvement in classroom environment is driven by a change in the composition of students and not by changes in students behavior.
SUMMARY
Social choice of single sex classes or schools is not clear: the gain for girls from classroom gender segregation is offset by the loss for boys.
Inter- and intra-school resource allocation should consider variation in the proportion of female students across schools and grades.
Our results provide direct evidence of the possible consequences of imbalanced sex ratios in coed public schools.
We also provide indirect evidence showing that a better learning environment leads to higher achievement.
Important to distinguish between peer effects originated by congestion effects and those caused by changes in individual behavior.
IMPLICATIONS
Table A1. Decomposition of Variance in the Proportion of Female Students
Sum of squares
Share of total DF
Sum of squares
Share of total DF
Sum of squares
Share of total DF
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Between 7.7 32% 1,009 3.2 38% 394 27.2 85% 263
Within 16.5 68% 2,890 5.2 62% 1,683 4.9 15% 1,635
Total 24.2 3,899 8.4 2,077 32.0 1,899
Avg. enrollment 60 143 210
Secular and religiouselementary schools Secular middle schools Secular high schools
Table 1. Balancing Tests for the Proportion FemaleElementary schools Middle schools High schools
Schoolfixed effects
Schoolfixed effects
Schoolfixed effects +
school time trendsDependent variable (2) (4) (7)
Father's years of schooling -0.245 0.184 -0.097(0.228) (0.361) (0.414)
Mother's years of schooling -0.283 -0.647 -0.133(0.236) (0.435) (0.403)
Number of siblings 0.023 -0.379 0.012(0.077) (0.315) (0.254)
New immigrant 0.006 0.002 0.036(0.006) (0.012) (0.021)
EthnicityIsrael 0.007 -0.022 -0.059
(0.022) (0.029) (0.030)
Asia/Africa -0.014 -0.007 0.038(excluding Ethiopia) (0.015) (0.021) (0.025)
Ethiopia 0.012 -0.002 -0.001(0.009) (0.009) (0.004)
Europe/America -0.026 0.032 -0.002(excluding FSU) (0.012) (0.020) (0.018)
Former Soviet Union (FSU) 0.021 -0.001 0.024(0.014) (0.027) (0.028)
Number of students 213,393 270,857 404,929
Number of schools 1,010 264395
Table 2. School Transfers and Drop-outs as a Function of the Prop. of Female Students
Females Males Females Males Females Males(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Outcome means
Left the school in t+1 0.075 0.082 0.049 0.056 0.066 0.097
Regression estimates
Left the school in t+1 -0.028 -0.002 0.024 0.028 -0.023 -0.001(0.029) (0.032) (0.041) (0.045) (0.024) (0.030)
High schools
(10th grade)
Elementary schools
(1st grade)
Middle schools
(7th grade)
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics: Matriculation Exams Outcomes in High Schools
Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males(1) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
1993 0.510 65.2 59.0 0.585 0.502 19.3 17.9 0.579 0.668
1994 0.515 66.7 60.9 0.567 0.505 19.6 18.6 0.557 0.655
1995 0.509 67.2 61.2 0.576 0.488 20.1 18.7 0.556 0.633
1996 0.506 68.2 62.1 0.585 0.499 20.4 18.9 0.576 0.619
1997 0.508 70.3 65.0 0.644 0.535 21.0 19.7 0.575 0.614
1998 0.509 71.0 65.6 0.642 0.536 21.2 19.8 0.588 0.596
1999 0.507 71.8 65.1 0.666 0.552 21.4 19.9 0.604 0.591
2000 0.505 72.2 65.3 0.678 0.559 21.5 19.8 0.607 0.584
All 0.508 69.2 63.1 0.619 0.523 20.6 19.2 0.581 0.619
Matriculation statusAverage score
Proportion of female students
Number of advanced level
subjects in science
Number of credit units10th grade
cohort
Table 3a. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Scholastic Outcomes in High School
Outcomemeans Full model
Outcomemeans Full model
(1) (2) (4) (5) (12)
Average Score 69.2 6.314 63.1 7.918 0.599(2.142) (2.702)
Matriculation status 0.619 0.099 0.523 0.049 0.501(0.041) (0.045)
Number of credit units 20.6 1.455 19.2 1.389 0.979(0.855) (1.050)
0.581 0.141 0.619 0.227 0.295(0.072) (0.076)
0.559 0.086 0.473 0.084 0.794(0.047) (0.046)
Year effects Y YSchool Fixed Effects Y YSchool Time Trend Y YEnrollment (2nd Poly) Y YIndividual Pupil Controls Y YCohort Mean Controls Y Y
Number of students 205,891 199,038Number of schools 264 264
H0: πFem=π
Males
p-value
Number of advanced level subjects in science
Matriculation diploma that meets university requirements
MalesFemales
Table 3b. Falsification Tests for the Effect of Proportion Female on Scholastic Outcomes in High School
Prop. femalein t-1
Prop. femalein t+1
Prop. femalein t-1
Prop. femalein t+1
Outcome (7) (8) (9) (10)
Average score 3.117 -1.686 0.220 -0.040(2.249) (2.564) (2.920) (2.644)
Matriculation status 0.021 0.028 0.016 -0.004(0.043) (0.046) (0.045) (0.047)
Number of credit units 0.369 0.080 -0.663 0.410(0.871) (0.898) (1.112) (0.985)
0.026 -0.001 -0.018 0.012(0.075) (0.066) (0.075) (0.074)
Matriculation diploma that meets 0.006 0.018 0.036 0.026university requirements (0.039) (0.043) (0.042) (0.045)
MalesFemales
Number of advanced level subjects in science
Table 4. Heterogeneous Effects by SES
Low parental education
High parental education(avg.>12)
New immigrants
Low parental education
High parental education(avg.>12)
New immigrants
Outcome (2) (3) (4) (6) (7) (8)
Average score 8.168 3.113 34.066 11.509 3.168 5.897
(2.639) (2.960) (11.278) (3.628) (2.822) (13.697)65.43 75.33 53.62 58.21 70.52 47.95
Matriculation status 0.135 0.032 0.221 0.050 0.017 0.233(0.055) (0.048) (0.138) (0.063) (0.055) (0.142)
0.518 0.769 0.481 0.407 0.679 0.401
Number of credit units 2.142 0.022 8.496 1.328 0.420 3.967(1.114) (1.083) (3.834) (1.416) (1.123) (4.815)
18.78 23.49 16.55 16.67 22.75 15.65
Number of advanced level 0.101 0.110 0.255 0.120 0.319 0.209subjects in science (0.073) (0.112) (0.249) (0.085) (0.108) (0.269)
0.369 0.883 0.469 0.375 0.941 0.507
Matriculation diploma that 0.097 0.047 0.259 0.078 0.054 0.083meets university requirements (0.058) (0.053) (0.134) (0.061) (0.055) (0.125)
0.437 0.736 0.385 0.343 0.648 0.315
Number of students 115,949 82,577 13,729 107,616 83,665 12,787
Females Males
Table A2. Heterogeneous effects by School Size
Outcomemeans
School fixed
effectsOutcome
means
School fixed
effectsOutcome
means
School fixed
effectsOutcome
means
School fixed
effectsOutcome (2) (3) (4) (5) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Average score 66.63 5.062 70.17 6.601 60.25 11.943 64.22 4.570(3.050) (2.957) (3.992) (3.607)
Matriculation status 0.561 0.070 0.642 0.111 0.461 0.025 0.547 0.080(0.060) (0.056) (0.061) (0.065)
Number of credit units 19.58 1.680 21.01 1.033 17.88 1.817 19.69 1.228(1.108) (1.231) (1.401) (1.492)
Number of advanced 0.444 0.042 0.634 0.221 0.476 0.202 0.675 0.248subjects in science (0.081) (0.113) (0.083) (0.118)
Matriculation diploma 0.490 0.063 0.586 0.094 0.403 0.052 0.500 0.123that meets university requirements
(0.062) (0.069) (0.058) (0.069)
Avg. SD(prop. female) 0.061 0.039 0.061 0.039
Females MalesAverage enrollment
<200Average enrollment
>=200Average enrollment
<200Average enrollment
>=200
Table A4. Nonlinear Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Matriculation Outcomes
Quintile II III IV V II III IV V
Min. 0.446 0.503 0.541 0.587 0.446 0.503 0.541 0.587Max. 0.503 0.541 0.587 1 0.503 0.541 0.587 1Mean 0.479 0.522 0.561 0.652 0.479 0.522 0.561 0.652Median 0.481 0.522 0.560 0.631 0.481 0.522 0.560 0.631
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Average Score 0.667 0.709 0.861 1.608 1.143 0.643 1.341 1.954(0.567) (0.616) (0.613) (0.676) (0.509) (0.537) (0.567) (0.698)
Matriculation status 0.007 0.003 0.006 0.026 0.007 0.001 0.005 0.013
(0.010) (0.010) (0.010) (0.012) (0.008) (0.008) (0.009) (0.012)
0.310 0.392 0.348 0.576 0.350 0.241 0.348 0.593(0.218) (0.226) (0.228) (0.254) (0.210) (0.213) (0.220) (0.284)
0.006 0.023 0.024 0.042 0.032 0.040 0.045 0.058(0.017) (0.018) (0.018) (0.020) (0.015) (0.015) (0.015) (0.021)
0.003 0.003 0.004 0.024 0.011 0.008 0.013 0.021(0.010) (0.010) (0.011) (0.012) (0.009) (0.009) (0.009) (0.012)
Matriculation diploma that meets university requirements
Number of advanced level subjects in science
Note: The mean prop. female in Q1 is 0.309 and the median is 0.345.
MalesFemales
Number of credit units
Table A3. Quintiles of the Proportion Femalein High Schools
Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5
Range 0.000-0.446 0.446-0.503 0.503-0.541 0.541-0.587 0.587-1.000Mean 0.309 0.479 0.522 0.561 0.652Median 0.345 0.481 0.522 0.56 0.631
Number of students 64,994 84,770 95,525 87,610 72,030
Quintile 1 24 70 56 36 22
Quintile 2 1 124 103 58Quintile 3 1 126 71
Quintile 4 0 93
Quintile 5 8
B. School Transitions Across Quintiles
A. Summary Statistics
Table 5. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Achievement in Elementary and Middle schools
Females Males Females Males(3) (7) (3) (7)
Math 0.366 0.218 0.773 0.360(0.155) (0.159) (0.282) (0.283)
Science and Technology 0.301 0.432 -0.088 -0.190(0.169) (0.167) (0.307) (0.329)
Hebrew 0.078 0.131 0.335 0.031(0.148) (0.157) (0.249) (0.326)
English 0.077 -0.088 0.540 0.295(0.172) (0.156) (0.229) (0.260)
Average score in 0.350 0.310 0.327 0.123Math and Science (0.135) (0.142) (0.256) (0.279)
Average score in 0.098 0.065 0.390 0.174Hebrew and English (0.132) (0.132) (0.200) (0.255)
8th grade 5th grade
Table 6. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on the Classroom Environment
Females Males Females Males(7) (8) (9) (10)
Classroom disruption and violence
1 4.88 4.85 -0.254 -0.218(0.089) (0.080)
2 3.28 3.37 -0.669 -0.525(0.114) (0.111)
3 1.67 1.74 -0.247 -0.239(0.071) (0.075)
Average effect -0.302 -0.233
(0.058) (0.049)
School fixed effects
Full sample (5th through 9th grade)
Outcome means
Frequently the classroom is noisy and not conducive to learning
There are many fights among students in my classroom
Sometimes I'm scared to go to school because there are violent students
Inter-student relationships
4 5.16 5.13 0.293 0.097(0.068) (0.060)
5 4.33 4.10 0.440 0.316(0.088) (0.085)
Average effect 0.302 0.155(0.057) (0.049)
Students in my class help each other
I feel well adjusted socially in my class
c 1Kc
Kc
k 1
kc kc
Table 6. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on the Classroom Environment (cont.)
Females Males Females Males(7) (8) (9) (10)
Teacher-student relationships6 4.26 4.21 -0.240 -0.282
(0.109) (0.105)
7 4.11 3.97 0.153 0.326(0.090) (0.091)
8 4.10 3.93 0.158 0.293(0.088) (0.088)
0.146 0.220(0.067) (0.059)
Number of students 241,416 242,834
Number of schools 1,302 1,302
Average effect (sign of item 6 is reversed)
Students frequently talk back to teachers
There is mutual respect between teachers and students
There are good relationships between teachers and students
School fixed effectsFull sample (5th through 9th grade)
Outcome means
We follow 5th and 6th grade elementary school students from years 2002 & 2003 to middle school in 2004 & 2005.
We examine how changes in the proportion of female peers (due to transition from ES to MS) are associated with changes in students assessments of the classroom environment.
(3)
ES = Elementary School; MS=Middle Schoolyigst outcome of student i, in grade g, school s, and cohort t
αg grade effect
γt cohort effect
βs school effect (elementary + middle school)
xigst student covariates
Sgst cohort covariates
Pgst prop. female
EFFECTS ON CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT: STUDENT’S FIXED EFFECTS ESTIMATES
Table 7. Student’s FE Estimates of the Effects on the Classroom Environment
Females Males(1) (2)
Classroom disruption and violence1 -0.337 -0.230
(0.214) (0.222)
2 -0.838 -0.486(0.278) (0.293)
3 -0.323 -0.271(0.195) (0.230)
Average effect -0.321 -0.195(0.107) (0.091)
Inter-students relationships4 0.399 -0.045
(0.189) (0.191)
5 0.455 0.058(0.210) (0.256)
Average effect 0.301 0.001(0.111) (0.116)
Teachers-students relationships6 -0.386 -0.388
(0.255) (0.245)
7 0.202 0.326
(0.204) (0.253)
8 0.345 0.403(0.214) (0.229)
0.211 0.229(0.115) (0.112)
Frequently the classroom is noisy and not conducive to learning
Students frequently talk back to teachers
There are many fights among students in my classroom
There is mutual respect between teachers and students
I feel well adjusted socially in my class
Students in my class help each other
There are good relationships between teachers and students
Sometimes I'm scared to go to school because there are violent students
Average effect (sign of item 6 is reversed)
Table 8. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Teachers’ Fatigue and Job Satisfaction
Number of teachers
Number of schools
I feel burned-out
I feel that I have too much
workloadI am satisfied with my work
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
means 17,529 1,038 2.564 4.180 5.456(s.d.) (1.488) (1.472) (0.817)
Full sample 17,529 1,038 -0.265 -0.017 0.006
(0.188) (0.176) (0.092)
Math & grammar teachers 16,837 1,037 -0.380 -0.039 0.032
(0.193) (0.178) (0.094)
1st through 4th grade teachers 10,611 1,030 -0.637 -0.180 -0.002(0.244) (0.238) (0.117)
A. Effects of the proportion of female students (elementary schools)
Table 8. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Teachers’ Fatigue and Job Satisfaction (cont.)
Number of teachers
Number of schools
I feel burned-out
I feel that I have too
much workloadI am satisfied with my work
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
6,844 1,001 0.238 0.054 -0.158(0.041) (0.043) (0.022)
6,844 1,001 0.150 0.074 -0.091(0.030) (0.031) (0.017)
6,844 1,001 0.190 0.056 -0.091(0.030) (0.033) (0.017)
6,844 1,001 -0.332 -0.079 0.180(0.042) (0.041) (0.023)
6,844 1,001 -0.345 -0.087 0.179(0.043) (0.042) (0.024)
Students frequently talk back to teachers
There are good relationships between teachers and students
There is mutual respect between teachers and students
There are many fights among students in my classroom
B. Within school associations with classroom environment (grades 5th and 6th)
Frequently the classroom is noisy and not conducive to learning
Table 9. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Student's Behavior
Females Males Females Males(7) (8) (9) (10)
Self-discipline1 4.905 4.867 0.048 -0.005
(0.058) (0.058)
2 5.722 5.542 0.035 -0.006(0.031) (0.044)
3 1.392 2.210 0.060 0.228(0.053) (0.082)
4 2.855 3.082 0.206 -0.019(0.104) (0.101)
5 4.783 4.480 -0.080 0.173(0.093) (0.096)
-0.029 -0.009
(0.043) (0.041)
I know what behavior is allowed or forbidden in school
When I have a problem at school there is always someone I can turn to (from the teaching staff)
Outcome means
This year I was involved in many fights
Sometimes the teachers treat me badly
Average effect(signs of items 3,4 are reversed)
School fixed effects
I understand well my teachers scholastic requirements
Full sample (5th through 9th grade)
Table 9. Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Student's Behavior (cont.)
Females Males Females Males(7) (8) (9) (10)
Study Efforts6 3.260 3.000 0.086 0.056
(0.085) (0.091)
7 2.222 2.060 0.049 0.006(0.092) (0.087)
8 3.046 2.765 0.045 0.109(0.089) (0.095)
9 2.152 2.115 0.102 -0.078(0.092) (0.092)
Average effect 0.052 0.015(0.049) (0.047)
School fixed effects
Full sample (5th through 9th grade)
Weekly hours spent on homework in Math
Weekly hours spent on homework in English
Weekly hours spent on homework in Science and Technology
Weekly hours spent on homework in Hebrew
Outcome means
Table A7. Student FE Estimates of the Effect of Proportion Female on Own Behavior
Females Males(1) (2)
Self-discipline1 0.143 -0.045
(0.150) (0.165)
2 -0.064 0.034(0.102) (0.136)
3 0.026 0.192(0.143) (0.234)
4 0.155 0.269(0.265) (0.254)
5 -0.118 0.230(0.230) (0.234)
-0.030 -0.026(0.081) (0.075)
Study Efforts6 0.007 -0.117
(0.241) (0.231)
7 0.058 -0.066(0.218) (0.232)
8 -0.106 -0.004(0.249) (0.255)
9 0.405 -0.111(0.229) (0.261)
Average effect 0.058 -0.042(0.102) (0.098)
Weekly hours spent on homework in English
Weekly hours spent on homework in Science and Technology
Weekly hours spent on homework in Hebrew
I know what behavior is allowed or forbidden in school
When I have a problem at school there is always someone I can turn to (from the teaching staff)
This year I was involved in many fights
I understand well my teacher's scholastic requirements
Sometimes the teachers treat me badly
Weekly hours spent on homework in Math
Average effect(signs of items 3,4 are reversed)
Figure 1a: Variation in the Proportion Female within Schools and within Neighborhoods, 2002-2006
05
1015
0 .1 .2 .3.062
1st grade 5th grade
avg. cohort size in 1st grade=61.516 - avg. cohort size in 5th grade=62.203
05
1015
0 .1 .2 .3.056
Age 6 By Zip Code
average cohort size =80.493
Figure 1b: Actual and Simulated Within School Standard Deviation in Elementary Schools
05
10
15
0 .1 .2 .3 .4.061
Actual Simulated
Figure 2: Within School Standard Deviation in the Proportion Female by School Size
A. Elementary Schools
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Average annual enrollment
B. Middle Schools
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Average annual enrollment
C. High Schools
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Average annual enrollment
Figure 3: Within School Standard Deviation in the Proportion Female by Town Size
C. High Schools
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
- 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000
Town Size
A. Elementary Schools
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
- 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000
Town Size
B. Middle Schools
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
- 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000
Town Size
+
+ +
Recommended