Cuppla things... One is that it is disproportionately White men who are applying to higher education in smaller numbers -- part of it is the ideological issue that has seen White men generally in the US more likely to vote for Mr Trump and MAGA -- they see higher ed as being "against them", when part of the change is the catch-up of students of color -- not being discriminated IN FAVOR, so much as no longer being discriminated AGAINST (as much), which of course was the entire point of DEI -- white men as a group, and MAGA in particular, still do not understand that.
What I have read suggests that the large increase in women in higher education to a great extent simply has to do with the fact that the fields of employment that have grown the most over the last, say, 30 years, are ones which disproportionately employ women. Healthcare and personal care, which are more likely to employ women, are expected to grow about 17% between 2024 and 2034. IT jobs also saw a large increase, but it is not nearly as people-dense -- and the effect of AI on this field is at this moment unclear.
The opportunity cost of attending college is likely higher for men who tend to have more opportunities in blue collar fields. If men view college as one option, but not the only option, it seems reasonable they might invest less time preparing for college, too.
I remember reading a fascinating post on Marginal Revolution a long time ago that considered some of the underlying issues here. It was an interesting take on comparative advantage in that young women tended to be generalists who were interested in lots of different fields, but men were more likely to specialize in particular fields (business and engineering).
If they couldn't go into those programs, they weren't interested in going to college at all.
Here was the kicker: Put (too) simply the only men who are good enough to get into university are men who are good at STEM. Women are good enough to get into non-STEM and STEM fields. Thus, among university students, women dominate in the non-STEM fields and men survive in the STEM fields.
Im sure there is some anecdotal explanations out there but im curios what the true reason is too. My best guess is that they get discouraged and exit the Labor Market at higher rates? Even then that might explain a portion but not the whole picture
Maybe they have higher opportunity costs? Phillip, in the comments, mentions a distaste of higher education and skepticism. That might be an element too.
Then the question shifts to why young men are skeptical? Also what defines young. Do I count as 31. I have 2 masters degrees. I think this is a trend that maybe too complex to pin on a singular cause but that want to influence these young men will do their best to find a scapegoat.
Solid breakdown of how removing gender balancing will accelerate campus imbalances. The underlying point about men entering with lower GPAs and test scores before affirmative tilts even happen is the quiet part nobody wants to deal with. I worked on a community college retention pilot a few years back and noticed male students were already behind in noncognitive factors like attendance and assignment completion, not just test scores. The real fire is prob in middle school when boys start checkingout academically, not senior year when they're deciding on apps.
This is interesting. In Oman we also have the girls outperforming boys in K-12 and in higher education. It is very difficult to balance between the gender rights and the balance in the workforce. I am wondering how is the situation with the workforce in the USA. In Oman despite the female students outperformance in education, the job market has greater male participation .
Fascinating data. If the split started to happen around the rise of PCs and then mobile phones then I think there may be something about how different brains react to technology.
Maybe it's okay if less young men go to college right away. Maybe they can be put to work in other ways or find other ways to become productive members of society. The traditional college experience has already been evolving. It's sad to me in some ways but it may be necessary.
You are correct, we have no data on what the optimal gender ratios should be, or if such a thing exists. The book "Of Boys and Men" does suggest that men's development is slower than women's and that might explain the difference in preparation.
There seems to be some kind of societal shift going on with (mostly white) men. It’s hard for me to put my finger on it but it ties in with the rise of “manosphere” figures like Andrew Tate. It seems like a growing portion of that demographic is becoming less social and slower to mature. Maybe that helps account for what you mentioned about men coming into college with lower grades, higher absenteeism, etc.
Cuppla things... One is that it is disproportionately White men who are applying to higher education in smaller numbers -- part of it is the ideological issue that has seen White men generally in the US more likely to vote for Mr Trump and MAGA -- they see higher ed as being "against them", when part of the change is the catch-up of students of color -- not being discriminated IN FAVOR, so much as no longer being discriminated AGAINST (as much), which of course was the entire point of DEI -- white men as a group, and MAGA in particular, still do not understand that.
What I have read suggests that the large increase in women in higher education to a great extent simply has to do with the fact that the fields of employment that have grown the most over the last, say, 30 years, are ones which disproportionately employ women. Healthcare and personal care, which are more likely to employ women, are expected to grow about 17% between 2024 and 2034. IT jobs also saw a large increase, but it is not nearly as people-dense -- and the effect of AI on this field is at this moment unclear.
Here is an article on employment by gender published by the American Institute of Boys and Men: https://aibm.org/research/jobs-by-gender/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CManagement%20in%20Business%2C%20Science%20and,%E2%80%9CThe%20HEAL%20Economy%E2%80%9D). -- I notice that Melinda French Gates was a prominent donor in 2024.
Great point on the industries growing and their correlation to gender.
The opportunity cost of attending college is likely higher for men who tend to have more opportunities in blue collar fields. If men view college as one option, but not the only option, it seems reasonable they might invest less time preparing for college, too.
I remember reading a fascinating post on Marginal Revolution a long time ago that considered some of the underlying issues here. It was an interesting take on comparative advantage in that young women tended to be generalists who were interested in lots of different fields, but men were more likely to specialize in particular fields (business and engineering).
If they couldn't go into those programs, they weren't interested in going to college at all.
That sounds like a great post. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'll try to find it.
I dug around and am pretty sure it was based on a summary of a Card & Payne paper: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/09/gender-gap-stem-not-think.html
Here was the kicker: Put (too) simply the only men who are good enough to get into university are men who are good at STEM. Women are good enough to get into non-STEM and STEM fields. Thus, among university students, women dominate in the non-STEM fields and men survive in the STEM fields.
Im sure there is some anecdotal explanations out there but im curios what the true reason is too. My best guess is that they get discouraged and exit the Labor Market at higher rates? Even then that might explain a portion but not the whole picture
Maybe they have higher opportunity costs? Phillip, in the comments, mentions a distaste of higher education and skepticism. That might be an element too.
Then the question shifts to why young men are skeptical? Also what defines young. Do I count as 31. I have 2 masters degrees. I think this is a trend that maybe too complex to pin on a singular cause but that want to influence these young men will do their best to find a scapegoat.
Great article and research highlighted here!
Solid breakdown of how removing gender balancing will accelerate campus imbalances. The underlying point about men entering with lower GPAs and test scores before affirmative tilts even happen is the quiet part nobody wants to deal with. I worked on a community college retention pilot a few years back and noticed male students were already behind in noncognitive factors like attendance and assignment completion, not just test scores. The real fire is prob in middle school when boys start checkingout academically, not senior year when they're deciding on apps.
This is interesting. In Oman we also have the girls outperforming boys in K-12 and in higher education. It is very difficult to balance between the gender rights and the balance in the workforce. I am wondering how is the situation with the workforce in the USA. In Oman despite the female students outperformance in education, the job market has greater male participation .
It’s interesting to see the disconnect between academic achievement and labor market outcome across gender. Something doesn’t add up
Fascinating data. If the split started to happen around the rise of PCs and then mobile phones then I think there may be something about how different brains react to technology.
Maybe it's okay if less young men go to college right away. Maybe they can be put to work in other ways or find other ways to become productive members of society. The traditional college experience has already been evolving. It's sad to me in some ways but it may be necessary.
You are correct, we have no data on what the optimal gender ratios should be, or if such a thing exists. The book "Of Boys and Men" does suggest that men's development is slower than women's and that might explain the difference in preparation.
My take on how and why this problem trickles up from lower grades through higher ed: https://shavaflav.substack.com/p/boys-and-the-trickle-up-failure-of
There seems to be some kind of societal shift going on with (mostly white) men. It’s hard for me to put my finger on it but it ties in with the rise of “manosphere” figures like Andrew Tate. It seems like a growing portion of that demographic is becoming less social and slower to mature. Maybe that helps account for what you mentioned about men coming into college with lower grades, higher absenteeism, etc.