No abstract

No abstract

Despite gender parity in earned bachelor’s degrees, large gender gaps persist across fields of study. The dominant explanatory framework in this area of research assesses how gender differences in individual-level attributes predict gaps in major choice. The authors argue that individualistic accounts cannot provide a complete explanation because they fail to consider the powerful effects of the gendered institutional environments that inform and shape young men’s and women’s choices. The authors propose a cultural-organizational approach that considers how institutional characteristics and cultural contexts on college campuses may influence gendered choices and thus be associated with patterns of gender segregation across fields of study. The results of an analysis of institutional data on all U.S. degree-granting colleges and universities reveal substantial interinstitutional variation in gender segregation. Furthermore, structural and contextual institutional features related to peer culture, curricular focus, institutional commitment to gender equity, and the gender proportionality of the student body correlate with heightened or diminished levels of segregation.

In many parts of the world, the rewards attached to a university degree vary significantly according to the name of the institution one attends, particularly in countries with highly stratified postsecondary systems. Because the Canadian higher education system is relatively homogenous and non‐hierarchical, it has been generally accepted that Canadian graduates enter the labour market on equal footing regardless of where they matriculate. We test this assumption through an experimental audit study that compares employers’ responses to fictitious matched job applications from equally qualified bachelor's degree recipients from three Ontario universities: Brock, Queen's, and Waterloo. Not all employers make a distinction between the paired applications; but when they do, Waterloo is favoured. In these cases, even though applicants had the same field of study, academic achievement and work experience, employers singled out Waterloo applicants for a response 84% more often than those from Brock. These findings indicate that institutional affiliation matters in Canada, and suggests that graduates from some institutions fare significantly better in the labour market than their equally accomplished peers from other institutions. We conclude that even in relatively non‐hierarchical systems with comparatively minimal structural or resource variation, status hierarchies emerge that privilege some graduates over others.

No abstract