2011
DOI: 10.1257/app.3.2.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanisms and Impacts of Gender Peer Effects at School

Abstract: We present in this paper evidence about the effects and mechanisms of gender peer effects in elementary, middle, and high schools. For identification, we rely on idiosyncratic variations in gender composition across adjacent cohorts within the same schools. We find that an increase in the proportion of girls improves boys and girls' cognitive outcomes. These academic gains are mediated through lower levels of classroom disruption and violence, improved inter-student and student-teacher relationships, and lesse… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
396
6

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 395 publications
(456 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
22
396
6
Order By: Relevance
“…There is also evidence that the average share of boys in schools has a positive effect on the average math test scores of natives 17 . This result is at odds with the findings by Hoxby, 2000, andSchlosser, 2007. The latter study, for instance, finds that educational outcomes in Israel primary, middle and high schools are higher when the proportion of boys is smaller 18 .…”
Section: The Resultsmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…There is also evidence that the average share of boys in schools has a positive effect on the average math test scores of natives 17 . This result is at odds with the findings by Hoxby, 2000, andSchlosser, 2007. The latter study, for instance, finds that educational outcomes in Israel primary, middle and high schools are higher when the proportion of boys is smaller 18 .…”
Section: The Resultsmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…This educational pathway e¤ect, captured by the third term in equation (B-2), becomes larger, the larger the impact of the track attended in period 1 on the track attended in period 2 (i.e., the larger the academic and institutional switching costs,  ¤  versus  ¤  ), and the larger the e¤ect of peers in period 2 on wages in period 3 (i.e.,  (ii) The educational pathway e¤ect of attending a high (versus a low) track school in period 1, operating through track completion in period 2, on wages in period 32 The intuitive argument here again ignores the e¤ect of the switching costs on the indi¤erence thresholdŝ  ¤ July and ¤ June  We have con…rmed that this relation holds in equilibrium using extensive simulations. 33 Again, this argument here considers the direct e¤ects only and ignores the e¤ects of  3 2 and  3 2 on the indi¤erence thresholds, but we con…rmed that this relation holds in equilibrium using extensive simulations. 38 3 is larger the higher the institutional and academic switching costs (  and   )and, provided that switching costs are positive, the higher the importance of peers in period 2 ( 3 2 ).…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Performance in this study is academic achievement rather than business outcomes. Other studies looking at peer e ects in education include Hoxby (2000), Lavy and Schlosser (2010) and Oosterbeek and Van Ewijk (2010). company with a pro t objective and shareholders for the duration of one year. Students face strong incentives, both individually and as a team, to perform a substantial and truly joint task of setting up and running a company with the objective of maximizing pro t and shareholder value.…”
Section: Matsa and Miller Compare Listed And Unlisted Companies And Cmentioning
confidence: 99%