-
Does PersonaIity Type Explain the Gender Gap in Economics?: Analysis and Pedagogy
- University of Michigan Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Does Personality Type Explain the Gender Gap in Economics? Analysis and Pedagogy Andrea L. Ziegert and Dennis Sullivan Nearly twenty years ago Siegfried (1979) reported that men outperformed women in introductory economics classes, and the existence of a "gender gap" became part ofthe professional literature. In a survey of more recent works, Ferber (1990) notes the importance of distinguishing between the stock of economic knowledge that a student has when they enter their first college economics course, and the flow or rate of learning that occurs during a college economics course. Two-thirds of the studies Ferber surveys found statistically significant stock differences in understanding economics which favored men, while men learned statistically significantly more than women in the classroom in one-third of the studies reviewed. In addition, the method of testing matters: men do better than women on multiple choice tests, while women do as well as men on essay tests. This gender gap in learning, is attributed, in part, to a "chilly classroom climate" (Bartlett and Ferber [1998]; Ferber [1990], and Hall and Sandler [1982]). Evidence suggests that instructors view women as less dedicated and less promising students than their male counterparts, and that instructors reinforce stereotypes of gender differences in career aspirations. For example, instructors may be less supportive of further graduate or professional study for women rather than for men in their classes. Other researchers have suggested that the lack of balance in the content of introductory texts contribute to the gender gap in learning (Feiner and Morgan (1987) and Ferber (1990)). Alternatively, Borg and Shapiro (1996) in a study of students in principles of macroeconomics courses, and Ziegert (1998) in a study of students in principles of microeconomics courses, find that differences in personality type partially explains the differences in learning between male and female students in both principles of economics courses. This essay builds upon the work on personality and learning, and poses the following research questions: 152 Does PersonaIity Type Explain the Gender Gap in Economics? Analysis and Pedagogy Andrea L. Ziegert and Dennis Sullivan Nearly twenty years ago Siegfried (1979) reported that men outperformed women in introductory economics classes, and the existence of a "gender gap" became part of the professional literature. In a survey of more recent works, Ferber (1990) notes the importance of distinguishing between the stock of economic knowledge that a student has when they enter their first college economics course, and the flow or rate of learning that occurs during a college economics course. Two-thirds of the studies Ferber surveys found statistically significant stock differences in understanding economics which favored men, while men learned statistically significantly more than women in the classroom in one-third of the studies reviewed. In addition, the method of testing matters: men do better than women on multiple choice tests, while women do as well as men on essay tests. This gender gap in learning, is attributed, in part, to a "chilly classroom climate" (Bartlett and Ferber [1998]; Ferber [1990], and Hall and Sandler [1982]). Evidence suggests that instructors view women as less dedicated and less promising students than their male counterparts, and that instructors reinforce stereotypes of gender differences in career aspirations. For example, instructors may be less supportive of further graduate or professional study for women rather than for men in their classes. Other researchers have suggested that the lack of balance in the content of introductory texts contribute to the gender gap in learning (Feiner and Morgan (1987) and Ferber (1990)). Alternatively, Borg and Shapiro (1996) in a study of students in principIes of macroeconomics courses, and Ziegert (1998) in a study of students in principles of microeconomics courses, find that differences in personality type partially explains the differences in learning between male and female students in both principles of economics courses. This essay builds upon the work on personality and learning, and poses the following research questions: 152 Does Personality Type Explain the Gender Gap? 153 Do differences in personality temperament between men and women explain any of the gender gap in economics knowledge (stock) and learning (flow)? (between group variation); and Is the effect of personality temperament on knowledge of economics and learning of economics the same for both women and men? That is, do men and women with identical personality temperaments learn economics equally well? (comparative within-group variation). Because most economists are unfamiliar with the role of personality type in classroom learning, a brief introduction is presented.l That introduction is followed by an...