MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W32004288 · doi:10.1364/ol.385246

An Intersectional Analysis of the Female Postsecondary Advantage: Gender, race, and College Selectivity

2013· article· en· W32004288 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gökhan Savaş

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInnovation Group of JinanChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusHigher educationRace (biology)PsychologyPostsecondary educationMedical educationDemographyPolitical scienceSociologyGender studiesMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation utilizes nationally representative data from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002) to investigate two sets of research questions: 1) Among those who have completed high school or received a GED, to what extent do school behaviors, attitudes toward school/teacher and parental involvement impact gender and racial/ethnic differences in precollege achievement?; 2) Among those who have completed high school or received a GED, to what extent are gender and racial/ethnic differences explained by students' pre-college academic achievement, educational and parental expectations net of socio-economic background, family structure and high school characteristics? Two theoretical perspectives are used: gender role theory and oppositional culture. The results suggest that gender role theory partially explains why females who have completed high school have higher precollege achievement especially high school GPA. It finds that females are better classroom citizens and have more positive school values compared to males. They also have higher educational and parental expectations. Regardless of race/ethnicity, among those who complete high school or the equivalent, females outperform males in high school GPA. The results suggest that oppositional culture does not account for racial/ethnic differences in precollege achievement or college enrollment especially because black students who complete high school do not have lower educational expectations. Also, racial/ethnic differences in school behaviors and attitudes do not explain why black and Hispanic students have lower academic achievement in this population. In terms of race/ethnicity in precollege achievement, among those who have completed high school, white students have great advantages over both black and Hispanic students. The study largely supports structural explanations related to SES and high school characteristics. In terms of college enrollment, high school GPA is the most important factor. Among those who have completed high school, females have a great advantage over males in overall college enrollment and the female advantage also exists within each racial/ethnic group. However, the advantage of females in both selective and nonselective 4-year colleges is explained by gender differences in high school GPA. Among high school graduates, once males are similar to females in terms of high school GPA, these two groups are not different in 4-year college enrollment. For racial/ethnic differences in college enrollment, the study finds that black and Hispanic students have the lowest rate of college enrollment, and they are less likely to go to any college compared to their white peers. However, there is a net black/Hispanic advantage in overall college enrollment, suggesting that when black, Hispanic, and white students have completed high school and have similar socioeconomic background and precollege achievement, black and Hispanic students are more likely than are white students to go to any colleges and especially selective colleges. As was the case for pre-college achievement, the results largely support structural explanations when it comes to racial/ethnic differences in college enrollment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207