Journal of Policy Analysis and Management最新文献_第8页

Point/Counterpoint Introduction 观点/反观点介绍

IF 3.8 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22575

引用次数: 0

Help boys, but first do no harm 帮助男孩，但首先不要伤害他们

IF 3.8 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22578

Diane W. Schanzenbach

In his recent book, Richard Reeves (2022) brought to the fore the important challenges faced by men and boys. The rapidly changing economy and evolving social norms have been particularly hard on men, resulting in too many of them—one in nine prime-age men in 2022—not in the labor force. This in turn influences a range of additional social maladies including fewer marriages (and fewer children living with their fathers) and increased deaths of despair. Boys have been falling behind girls across a range of measures of academic success from pre-kindergarten through college. Reeves is absolutely right to point out these ways in which the modern male is struggling. Men's success matters—to families, to communities, to our economy and to society.To address these growing problems, Reeves suggests a series of reforms to policy and practice in education. Most of these I also endorse. More choices in educational options can help families find the best educational environment for their children to thrive. One size does not fit all in education. Some boys may be more likely to thrive in certain environments, such as the vocational high schools and apprenticeships endorsed by Reeves. They should also include a wider array of options such as single-sex public schools and charter schools.Reeves also recognizes the importance of mentoring for boys’ educational success. He calls for policies to encourage more men to become teachers—a worthy goal, to be sure. I would add to this menu wider use of individual, in-school tutoring, which has been shown to be a cost-effective way to improve boys’ achievement in high school (Guryan et al., 2023).Note that improving boys’ school performance does not imply harming girls’ performance. Skill development is not zero-sum, and when students learn more, they go on to add more to our shared economy. With this in mind, there is likely untapped potential both to improve educational outcomes and to close achievement gaps through improvements in curriculum, innovative use of educational technology, and in more traditional approaches such as reduced class size and increased school funding. We owe it to our nation's future to continuously improve education—which is especially needed as we work to offset the substantial learning losses during the COVID-19 pandemic (Hanushek & Woessman, 2020).One of Reeves's most provocative recommendations is to change the default rule for school entry age, so that boys start kindergarten a year older than girls. This practice is commonly called “redshirting.” It is here that Reeves and I part company. I think one-size-fits-all redshirting will on net be socially and financially costly.At first glance, Reeves's logic on redshirting is compelling. Boys are less mature than girls, and their brains develop differently. Boys have behavioral problems that improve with age. Girls might even benefit if they are in classes with m

理查德-里夫斯（Richard Reeves，2022 年）在他最近的著作中，将男人和男孩所面临的重要挑战摆在了突出位置。快速变化的经济和不断演变的社会规范对男性的影响尤为严重，导致太多男性--2022 年，每九个壮年男性中就有一个没有加入劳动力大军。这反过来又影响了一系列其他的社会弊病，包括婚姻数量减少（与父亲生活在一起的孩子数量减少）和绝望死亡人数增加。在从学前班到大学的一系列学业成功率衡量标准中，男孩一直落后于女孩。里夫斯非常正确地指出了现代男性的这些挣扎方式。男性的成功对家庭、社区、经济和社会都很重要。为了解决这些日益严重的问题，里夫斯建议对教育政策和实践进行一系列改革。其中大部分我也表示赞同。更多的教育选择可以帮助家庭找到最适合孩子成长的教育环境。教育不能 "一刀切"。有些男孩可能更容易在某些环境中茁壮成长，比如里夫斯认可的职业高中和学徒制。里夫斯还认识到指导对男孩教育成功的重要性。他呼吁制定政策，鼓励更多的男性成为教师，这无疑是一个值得追求的目标。在此基础上，我还想补充一点，即更广泛地使用个人校内辅导，这已被证明是提高男生高中学习成绩的一种具有成本效益的方法（Guryan 等人，2023 年）。技能发展并非零和，当学生学到更多知识时，他们会为我们的共同经济做出更大贡献。有鉴于此，通过改进课程、创新性地使用教育技术，以及更传统的方法（如缩小班级规模和增加学校资金），在提高教育成果和缩小成绩差距方面都可能存在尚未开发的潜力。为了我们国家的未来，我们有责任不断改进教育--在我们努力抵消 COVID-19 大流行期间造成的大量学习损失时，尤其需要这样做（Hanushek & Woessman, 2020）。这种做法通常被称为 "redshirting"。正是在这里，里夫斯和我分道扬镳。我认为，"一刀切 "的 "转学 "在社会和经济上都会付出代价。男孩不如女孩成熟，他们的大脑发育也不同。男孩的行为问题会随着年龄的增长而改善。如果女生与更成熟、行为更规范的男生同班，她们甚至会从中受益。深入思考后，我们会发现，对于一个相对孤立的问题而言，普遍推行 "补课 "是一项成本高昂、"一刀切 "的政策。有许多更便宜、更好的解决方案可以更直接地应对挑战。而受里夫斯提案影响的男孩及其家庭肯定会付出巨大的代价--他们的职业生涯起步晚了，高中辍学的风险增加了，而且在延迟入园之前，还需要额外一年的托儿费用。此外，尽管推迟入学可能对某些儿童有帮助，但许多男孩和一些女孩都不会从推迟入学中受益。撇开这些理论和成本效益方面的考虑不谈，经验证据总体上并不支持里夫斯的政策建议。我们可以用一种成本更低、更有针对性、更有效的方式帮助有困难的男孩，而不是推迟他们的入学时间。"留级生"（redshirted）--redshirting（留级生）一词借用自大学体育运动--比他们最初的年龄资格晚一年开始上幼儿园。家长们倾向于这样做，因为他们认为孩子在进入小学前需要更多的时间来发展技能，而且在整个学年中，他们在班级中的年龄相对较大，会对他们更有利。从经验上看，被转入小学的男孩大多是夏季出生的男孩，他们来自高收入家庭。但里夫斯并不是为了提高幼儿园入学准备和低年级的成功率而主张转入小学。相反，他认为，在男女生大脑发育差异最大的高中阶段，多一年的年龄最有益。虽然女孩与年龄较大的男孩分在一组，可能会在学业上得到一些帮助，但同时男孩的成绩也会因分组而受到一定的影响。可能还有其他非学业方面的影响需要考虑，比如对青少年怀孕和使用药物等危险行为的潜在影响。我们如何协调这些差异？回顾一下，Elder 和 Lubotsky（2009 年）的研究比较了各州不同入学截止年龄的学生，而 Cascio 和 Schanzenbach（2016 年）的研究则比较了在同一所学校就读的不同月份出生的学生。在前者中，各州可能根据学生的年龄分布采用了不同的课程和其他做法。换句话说，在入学截止日期较晚的州（因此学生平均年龄较大），幼儿园课程和幼儿园教师可能会比在入学截止日期较早的州（因此学生平均年龄较小）更先进。另一方面，Cascio 和 Schanzenbach 比较了绝对年龄不同但在同一所学校和同一间教室就读的学生，这些学生在很大程度上接触到相同的课程和教学方法。总之，我们当然需要关注提高男生成绩的问题。但我们不应改变男孩的默认入学年龄。这项政策的成本很可能远远超过潜在的收益。我们可以而且应该做得更好，通过改变学校的政策和做法，以更恰当、更有针对性的方式应对男孩在成长过程中面临的独特挑战。对于一小部分能从推迟入学年龄中受益的孩子来说，这一决定应由家长在听取学校意见的基础上做出，而不是由 "一刀切 "的政策来决定。

{"title":"Help boys, but first do no harm","authors":"Diane W. Schanzenbach","doi":"10.1002/pam.22578","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22578","url":null,"abstract":"In his recent book, Richard Reeves (2022) brought to the fore the important challenges faced by men and boys. The rapidly changing economy and evolving social norms have been particularly hard on men, resulting in too many of them—one in nine prime-age men in 2022—not in the labor force. This in turn influences a range of additional social maladies including fewer marriages (and fewer children living with their fathers) and increased deaths of despair. Boys have been falling behind girls across a range of measures of academic success from pre-kindergarten through college. Reeves is absolutely right to point out these ways in which the modern male is struggling. Men's success matters—to families, to communities, to our economy and to society.To address these growing problems, Reeves suggests a series of reforms to policy and practice in education. Most of these I also endorse. More choices in educational options can help families find the best educational environment for their children to thrive. One size does not fit all in education. Some boys may be more likely to thrive in certain environments, such as the vocational high schools and apprenticeships endorsed by Reeves. They should also include a wider array of options such as single-sex public schools and charter schools.Reeves also recognizes the importance of mentoring for boys’ educational success. He calls for policies to encourage more men to become teachers—a worthy goal, to be sure. I would add to this menu wider use of individual, in-school tutoring, which has been shown to be a cost-effective way to improve boys’ achievement in high school (Guryan et al., 2023).Note that improving boys’ school performance does not imply harming girls’ performance. Skill development is not zero-sum, and when students learn more, they go on to add more to our shared economy. With this in mind, there is likely untapped potential both to improve educational outcomes and to close achievement gaps through improvements in curriculum, innovative use of educational technology, and in more traditional approaches such as reduced class size and increased school funding. We owe it to our nation's future to continuously improve education—which is especially needed as we work to offset the substantial learning losses during the COVID-19 pandemic (Hanushek & Woessman, 2020).One of Reeves's most provocative recommendations is to change the default rule for school entry age, so that boys start kindergarten a year older than girls. This practice is commonly called “redshirting.” It is here that Reeves and I part company. I think one-size-fits-all redshirting will on net be socially and financially costly.At first glance, Reeves's logic on redshirting is compelling. Boys are less mature than girls, and their brains develop differently. Boys have behavioral problems that improve with age. Girls might even benefit if they are in classes with m","PeriodicalId":48105,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy Analysis and Management","volume":"43 2","pages":"623-628"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/pam.22578","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140537710","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Minding the (achievement) gap 关注（成绩）差距

IF 3.8 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22577

Diane W. Schanzenbach

Fundamentally, Reeves and I agree about the importance of boys’ educational under-achievement and the need to openly discuss and address it. I emphasize that when boys fail to thrive in school, it has downstream consequences not only for their own lives but for our nation's economic growth. Further, boys’ success need not come at the expense of girls’ success. This is not zero-sum; we all benefit when children reach their potential.I must push back against the narrative that these gaps are being hidden from public view and researchers have not taken them seriously. Nothing could be further from the truth.An old adage in business circles is “what gets measured gets done.” Indeed, a pillar of the school accountability movement is providing clear, disaggregated data at the state, district, and local levels so that parents and community members can better understand and monitor student achievement.Reeves argues that we often choose to ignore gender gaps, stating “At the extreme, gender-neutrality veers into gender-blind approach: some school districts, for example, do not even routinely track differences in outcomes by gender.” Such actions would be in violation of the law. Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; 2015), states must publicly report school accountability data in a manner must be disaggregated by a number of categories, including gender.In his Point in this exchange (and also in his book, Reeves, 2022), Reeves describes results from a randomized experiment aimed at improving academic performance among college students. In the experiment, students were offered academic support services, financial incentives ranging from $1000 to $5000 for attaining high grades, or both. While the treatment improved women's grades and academic standing, it had no effect on men's outcomes (Angrist et al., 2009). Reeves goes on to conclude, “Josh Angrist and co-authors wrote in 2009: ‘These gender differences in the response to incentives and services constitute an important area for further study.’ They do indeed. But as far as I can see, nobody has heeded this call.”On the contrary, many have heeded the call. The Angrist et al. (2009) article has more than 700 citations, many of these citations came from studies that have attempted to better understand gender gaps and how to design policies to improve outcomes for males and females. (Indeed, there is a large literature on this topic; see Croson and Gneezy, 2009, for a review.) Many of these have been randomized-controlled trials, generally considered to be the gold standard of research. Curiously, none of these are cited in Reeves's work. Below I summarize primarily the work on higher education relevant to the Angrist et al. (2009) quote, but I also note that there is also substantial work on pre-K, elementary and secondary schools, and labor market outcomes.When it comes to financial incentiv

从根本上说，里夫斯和我都认为男孩教育成绩不佳的问题非常重要，有必要公开讨论并解决这个问题。我强调，如果男孩不能在学校茁壮成长，不仅会对他们的生活，而且会对我们国家的经济增长造成下游影响。此外，男孩的成功不必以女孩的成功为代价。这并不是零和；当孩子们发挥出他们的潜能时，我们都会受益。我必须反驳这样一种说法，即这些差距被隐藏在公众视线之外，研究人员也没有认真对待这些差距。商业界的一句老话是 "量力而行"。事实上，学校问责制运动的一个支柱就是在州、学区和地方层面提供清晰的分类数据，以便家长和社区成员更好地了解和监督学生的成绩。里夫斯认为，我们经常选择忽视性别差距，他说："在极端情况下，性别中立会变成性别盲目的方法：例如，有些学区甚至不按性别对成绩差异进行常规跟踪。这种行为是违法的。根据《每个学生都能成功法案》（ESSA；2015 年），各州必须公开报告学校的问责数据，数据必须按照包括性别在内的多个类别进行分类。在此次交流的《观点》（以及他的著作《里夫斯，2022 年》）中，里夫斯介绍了一项旨在提高大学生学业成绩的随机实验的结果。在实验中，学生可以获得学业支持服务，也可以获得 1000 美元到 5000 美元不等的经济奖励，或者两者兼得。虽然这项措施提高了女生的成绩和学术地位，但对男生的结果却没有影响（Angrist 等人，2009 年）。里夫斯继续总结道："乔希-安格里斯特和合著者在 2009 年写道：'在对激励措施和服务的反应方面存在的这些性别差异，构成了一个有待进一步研究的重要领域。的确如此。但就我所见，没有人响应这一号召。"恰恰相反，许多人响应了这一号召。安格里斯特等人（2009 年）的文章被引用了 700 多次，其中许多引用来自于试图更好地理解性别差距以及如何设计政策来改善男性和女性结果的研究。(事实上，有关这一主题的文献很多；参见 Croson 和 Gneezy，2009 年，综述）。其中许多都是随机对照试验，通常被认为是研究的黄金标准。奇怪的是，里夫斯的著作中没有引用这些试验。下面，我将主要总结与 Angrist 等人（2009 年）的引文相关的高等教育方面的研究，但我也要指出，学前教育、中小学和劳动力市场成果方面也有大量研究。有两个著名的随机实验为大学生提供了经济激励，结果发现不同学生的成绩水平会产生不同的影响，这可能与性别有关。在荷兰的一项实验中，Leuven 等人（2010 年）发现，经济激励措施提高了大学生在一年内通过所有一年级要求的可能性，但只针对高能力学生。激励措施对低能力学生的成绩有负面影响。在意大利一所大学进行的一项实验中，如果学生在本科一年级获得的学分和考试成绩名列前茅，就会获得小额（250 欧元）或大额（700 欧元）奖金（De Paola 等人，2012 年）。这些奖金提高了学生的学习成绩，但不同级别的奖金差异不大，大额奖金提高了 0.19 个标准差，小额奖金提高了 0.16 个标准差。与荷兰的结果类似，影响主要集中在高能力学生中，对低能力学生没有影响。与成绩水平的差异相一致，意大利的研究发现，有提示性证据表明女性的点估计值更大（De Paola et al.Mayer 等人（2015 年）发现，适度的奖学金似乎比女性更能提高男性获得的学分和入学率（尽管他们没有检验不同群体之间的统计差异）。相比之下，Cohodes 和 Goodman（2014 年）发现不同性别的学生在择优资助对入学率、大学质量或毕业率的影响方面没有差异。Dynarski 等人（2021 年）研究了一项随机实验的影响，该实验在一所精选的旗舰大学中提前承诺免学费。

{"title":"Minding the (achievement) gap","authors":"Diane W. Schanzenbach","doi":"10.1002/pam.22577","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22577","url":null,"abstract":"Fundamentally, Reeves and I agree about the importance of boys’ educational under-achievement and the need to openly discuss and address it. I emphasize that when boys fail to thrive in school, it has downstream consequences not only for their own lives but for our nation's economic growth. Further, boys’ success need not come at the expense of girls’ success. This is not zero-sum; we all benefit when children reach their potential.I must push back against the narrative that these gaps are being hidden from public view and researchers have not taken them seriously. Nothing could be further from the truth.An old adage in business circles is “what gets measured gets done.” Indeed, a pillar of the school accountability movement is providing clear, disaggregated data at the state, district, and local levels so that parents and community members can better understand and monitor student achievement.Reeves argues that we often choose to ignore gender gaps, stating “At the extreme, gender-neutrality veers into gender-blind approach: some school districts, for example, do not even routinely track differences in outcomes by gender.” Such actions would be in violation of the law. Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; 2015), states must publicly report school accountability data in a manner must be disaggregated by a number of categories, including gender.In his Point in this exchange (and also in his book, Reeves, 2022), Reeves describes results from a randomized experiment aimed at improving academic performance among college students. In the experiment, students were offered academic support services, financial incentives ranging from $1000 to $5000 for attaining high grades, or both. While the treatment improved women's grades and academic standing, it had no effect on men's outcomes (Angrist et al., 2009). Reeves goes on to conclude, “Josh Angrist and co-authors wrote in 2009: ‘These gender differences in the response to incentives and services constitute an important area for further study.’ They do indeed. But as far as I can see, nobody has heeded this call.”On the contrary, many have heeded the call. The Angrist et al. (2009) article has more than 700 citations, many of these citations came from studies that have attempted to better understand gender gaps and how to design policies to improve outcomes for males and females. (Indeed, there is a large literature on this topic; see Croson and Gneezy, 2009, for a review.) Many of these have been randomized-controlled trials, generally considered to be the gold standard of research. Curiously, none of these are cited in Reeves's work. Below I summarize primarily the work on higher education relevant to the Angrist et al. (2009) quote, but I also note that there is also substantial work on pre-K, elementary and secondary schools, and labor market outcomes.When it comes to financial incentiv","PeriodicalId":48105,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy Analysis and Management","volume":"43 2","pages":"632-635"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/pam.22577","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140537896","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Response to Diane W. Schanzenbach 对 Diane W. Schanzenbach 的答复

IF 3.8 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22589

Richard Reeves

引用次数: 0

The case for helping boys and men in education 帮助男孩和男子接受教育的理由

IF 3.8 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22581

Richard Reeves

When feminist scholars cite a “gendered injustice,” it was once a safe bet that they would be referring to inequities disfavoring girls or women. No longer. The feminist philosopher Cordelia Fine, for example, now uses the term to describe the wide gaps in U.S. education where, as a group, boys and men are lagging behind their female peers (Fine, 2023).There are wide gender gaps favoring girls and women at every stage in the education system. But the ones getting the most attention are in higher education. On college campuses, the educational underperformance of men becomes suddenly obvious: they aren't there. There is a bigger gender gap in higher education today than in 1972, when Title IX was passed. Back then, 57% of bachelor's degrees went to men. Within a decade the gap had closed. In 2021, 58% of degrees went to women.1 We have Title IX–level gender gaps, just the other way around.This gap is the result of both lower rates of college enrollment and lower rates of completion. In 2021, 51% of women graduating high school enrolled in a 4-year college, compared to 36% of men. Immediate enrollment rates into a 2-year college had no gender gap, at 18% for women and 19% for men. Having enrolled, women are more likely to complete their degree, and especially to do so quickly. Among women matriculating at a 4-year public college, 47% will have graduated 4 years later; for men the equivalent graduation rate is 37%.These gaps reflect disparities that have emerged much earlier in the education system. There is a small and shrinking gender gap on the SAT and no gender gap on the ACT.2 (This is one reason why colleges and universities which go test-optional in admissions see an increase of 4 percentage points in the female share of students.) But there are wide gender gaps on most other measures, most importantly on GPA. The most common high school grade for girls is now an A; for boys, it is a B (Fortin et al., 2013). Girls now account for two-thirds of high schoolers in the top decile of students ranked by GPA, while the proportions are reversed on the bottom rung. Girls are also much more likely to be taking Advanced Placement, Honors, and International Baccalaureate classes (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012).“There is now wide consensus that gender inequalities are unfair, and lead to wasted human potential,” says Francisco Ferreira (2018), Amartya Sen Chair in Inequality Studies at the London School of economics, commenting on education gaps. He adds, echoing Fine: “That remains true when the disadvantaged are boys, as well as girls.”Narrowing gender gaps in educational outcomes is an important goal for policy; and today, that means concentrating on boys and men.There are three broad policy approaches to tackling these challenges: gender-neutral, gender-sensitive, and gender-based.Gender-neutral policies aim at improving over

当女权主义学者提到 "性别不公 "时，曾经可以肯定他们指的是对女孩或妇女不利的不公平现象。现在不再是了。例如，女权主义哲学家科迪莉亚-费恩（Cordelia Fine）现在用这个词来描述美国教育中存在的巨大差距，即作为一个群体，男孩和男人落后于他们的女性同龄人（Fine，2023 年）。但最受关注的是高等教育。在大学校园里，男性在教育方面的不足突然变得显而易见：他们不在那里。与 1972 年通过《第九章》时相比，如今高等教育中的性别差距更大。当时，57% 的学士学位由男性获得。十年内，这一差距已经缩小。2021 年，58% 的学位由女性获得。1 我们的性别差距达到了《第九章》的水平，只是反过来而已。这种差距是较低的大学入学率和较低的毕业率造成的。2021 年，51% 的高中毕业女生进入四年制大学，而男生只有 36%。两年制大学的即时入学率没有性别差异，女性为 18%，男性为 19%。入学后，女性更有可能完成学业，尤其是快速完成学业。在四年制公立大学中，47% 的女生在四年后毕业，而男生的毕业率为 37%。SAT 考试中的性别差距很小，而且正在缩小，而 ACT 考试中没有性别差距。2 （这也是为什么在录取时可以选择考试的高校的女生比例会增加 4 个百分点的原因之一）。但在其他大多数指标上，男女生的差距都很大，其中最重要的是 GPA。现在，女生最常见的高中成绩是 A，而男生则是 B（Fortin 等人，2013 年）。现在，在按 GPA 排名的前十分之一学生中，女生占三分之二，而在后十分之一学生中，女生和男生的比例正好相反。伦敦经济学院阿马蒂亚-森（Amartya Sen）不平等研究主席弗朗西斯科-费雷拉（Francisco Ferreira，2018 年）在谈到教育差距时说："现在人们普遍认为，性别不平等是不公平的，会导致人类潜能的浪费。缩小教育成果中的性别差距是政策的一个重要目标；如今，这意味着要集中关注男孩和男人。应对这些挑战的政策方法大致有三种：性别中立、性别敏感和基于性别的。当然，在任何评估中都可能会考虑性别差异，以及种族、民族或社会经济背景等因素。但也可能不考虑，特别是如果没有缩小性别差异的具体意图。在极端情况下，不分性别的做法会变成无视性别差异的做法：例如，有些学区甚至不按常规跟踪性别差异的结果。对性别问题有敏感认识的政策并不局限于男性或女性，其实施的明确目标是为男性或女性提供更多帮助。基于性别的政策仅限于一种性别或另一种性别，其明确目标是帮助女性或男性，通常是在竞争环境向一方或另一方倾斜的情况下，本着试图创造公平竞争环境的精神，或者在出于社会福利原因（如政治代表权）而认为结果平等具有内在重要性的领域。她区分了与性别差距有关的 "有意 "教育政策和 "一般 "教育政策，后者 "没有与性别有关的特定意图，但对女性产生了意外影响"。关键的区别在于，我增加了一个中间类别：在我的框架中，对性别问题有敏感认识的政策是 "一般 "的，因为它们并不局限于一种性别，但又是 "有意 "的，因为它们会对其中一种性别产生更大的影响。在政治领域，妇女配额或仅限女性候选人的候选名单就是基于性别的改革的例子，我在其他地方也曾提出过这样的观点（见 Reeves，2021 年）。

{"title":"The case for helping boys and men in education","authors":"Richard Reeves","doi":"10.1002/pam.22581","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22581","url":null,"abstract":"When feminist scholars cite a “gendered injustice,” it was once a safe bet that they would be referring to inequities disfavoring girls or women. No longer. The feminist philosopher Cordelia Fine, for example, now uses the term to describe the wide gaps in U.S. education where, as a group, boys and men are lagging behind their female peers (Fine, 2023).There are wide gender gaps favoring girls and women at every stage in the education system. But the ones getting the most attention are in higher education. On college campuses, the educational underperformance of men becomes suddenly obvious: they aren't there. There is a bigger gender gap in higher education today than in 1972, when Title IX was passed. Back then, 57% of bachelor's degrees went to men. Within a decade the gap had closed. In 2021, 58% of degrees went to women.1 We have Title IX–level gender gaps, just the other way around.This gap is the result of both lower rates of college enrollment and lower rates of completion. In 2021, 51% of women graduating high school enrolled in a 4-year college, compared to 36% of men. Immediate enrollment rates into a 2-year college had no gender gap, at 18% for women and 19% for men. Having enrolled, women are more likely to complete their degree, and especially to do so quickly. Among women matriculating at a 4-year public college, 47% will have graduated 4 years later; for men the equivalent graduation rate is 37%.These gaps reflect disparities that have emerged much earlier in the education system. There is a small and shrinking gender gap on the SAT and no gender gap on the ACT.2 (This is one reason why colleges and universities which go test-optional in admissions see an increase of 4 percentage points in the female share of students.) But there are wide gender gaps on most other measures, most importantly on GPA. The most common high school grade for girls is now an A; for boys, it is a B (Fortin et al., 2013). Girls now account for two-thirds of high schoolers in the top decile of students ranked by GPA, while the proportions are reversed on the bottom rung. Girls are also much more likely to be taking Advanced Placement, Honors, and International Baccalaureate classes (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012).“There is now wide consensus that gender inequalities are unfair, and lead to wasted human potential,” says Francisco Ferreira (2018), Amartya Sen Chair in Inequality Studies at the London School of economics, commenting on education gaps. He adds, echoing Fine: “That remains true when the disadvantaged are boys, as well as girls.”Narrowing gender gaps in educational outcomes is an important goal for policy; and today, that means concentrating on boys and men.There are three broad policy approaches to tackling these challenges: gender-neutral, gender-sensitive, and gender-based.Gender-neutral policies aim at improving over","PeriodicalId":48105,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy Analysis and Management","volume":"43 2","pages":"614-622"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/pam.22581","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140537709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

IF 3.8 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22563

引用次数: 0

Conflicting economic policies and mental health: Evidence from the UK national living wage and benefits freeze 相互冲突的经济政策与心理健康：来自英国国家生活工资和福利冻结的证据

IF 2.3 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-07 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22592

Lateef Akanni, Otto Lenhart, Alec Morton

This study evaluates the mental health effects of two simultaneously implemented but conflicting policies in the UK: the National Living Wage and the benefits freeze policy. We employed the Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) DID estimator to evaluate the heterogeneous policy effects, and we found that NLW leads to positive improvements in mental health. Also, we find the negative impact of the benefits freeze policy constricts the NLW effects. Our result is robust to the sensitivity analysis of the parallel trend assumption and the comparison group definition. Additional results support the psychosocial hypothesis that increased job satisfaction is strongly correlated with improvements in mental health. Also, we found evidence of substitution effects between work hours and leisure. Overall, our findings suggest that the effects of the NLW cannot be understood in isolation from the way the entire suite of policy instruments operates on earnings and liveable income for affected low wage workers.

本研究评估了英国两项同时实施但相互冲突的政策对心理健康的影响：全国生活工资和福利冻结政策。我们采用 Callaway 和 Sant'Anna（2021 年）的 DID 估计器来评估异质性政策效应，结果发现，全国生活工资会带来积极的心理健康改善。同时，我们还发现福利冻结政策的负面影响制约了无劳动能力效应。我们的结果对平行趋势假设和对比组定义的敏感性分析是稳健的。其他结果支持社会心理假设，即工作满意度的提高与心理健康的改善密切相关。此外，我们还发现了工作时间与休闲时间之间存在替代效应的证据。总之，我们的研究结果表明，不能脱离整套政策工具对受影响的低薪工人的收入和生活收入的影响来理解无法律约束力工资的效果。

引用次数: 0

Does one plus one always equal two? Examining complementarities in educational interventions 一加一总是等于二吗？研究教育干预措施的互补性

IF 2.3 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22594

Umut Özek

Public policies targeting individuals based on need often impose disproportionate burden on communities that lack the resources to implement these policies effectively. In an elementary school setting, I examine whether community-level interventions focusing on similar needs and providing resources to build capacity in these communities could improve outcomes by improving the effectiveness of individual-level interventions. I find that the extended school day policy that targets lowest-performing schools in reading in Florida significantly improved the effectiveness of the third-grade retention policy in these schools. These complementarities were large enough to close the gap in retention effects between targeted and higher-performing schools.

针对个人需求的公共政策往往会给缺乏资源的社区带来过重的负担，而这些社区又缺乏有效实施这些政策的资源。在小学环境中，我研究了社区层面的干预措施是否能通过提高个人层面干预措施的有效性来改善结果，社区层面的干预措施侧重于类似的需求，并为这些社区的能力建设提供资源。我发现，在佛罗里达州，针对阅读成绩最差学校的延长上课时间政策极大地改善了这些学校三年级留级政策的效果。这些互补性足以缩小目标学校与成绩较好学校之间的留级效果差距。

引用次数: 0

A review of the effects of legal access to same-sex marriage 同性婚姻合法化的影响回顾

IF 2.3 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-03-23 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22587

M. V. Lee Badgett, Christopher S. Carpenter, Maxine J. Lee, Dario Sansone

On June 26, 2015, the United States Supreme Court extended nationwide legal access to same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, following a series of court cases and legislative activities at the state and district levels. Similar policies have diffused throughout other countries, especially in western Europe and the Americas. Researchers have used the staggered rollout of legal same-sex marriage and related policies in the U.S. and elsewhere, along with improved data on lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, to study the effects of marriage equality. In this paper, we review this evidence, focusing on outcomes such as societal attitudes, marriage take-up, family formation, employment, time use, health insurance coverage, and health. We discuss conceptual frameworks for understanding the likely effects of same-sex marriage; methodological considerations for studying treatment effects; the policy context surrounding legal same-sex marriage, including the 2023 Respect for Marriage Act; and important areas for future research.

2015年6月26日，美国最高法院在 "奥伯格费尔诉霍奇斯案"（Obergefell v. Hodges）中将同性婚姻的合法准入扩大到全国范围，此前在州和地区层面还发生了一系列法庭案件和立法活动。类似的政策已在其他国家，特别是西欧和美洲推广开来。研究人员利用美国和其他国家交错推出的合法同性婚姻和相关政策，以及有关女同性恋者、男同性恋者和双性恋者的改进数据，来研究婚姻平等的影响。在本文中，我们回顾了这些证据，重点关注社会态度、结婚率、家庭组建、就业、时间使用、医疗保险覆盖率和健康等结果。我们讨论了理解同性婚姻可能产生的影响的概念框架；研究治疗效果的方法考虑；围绕合法同性婚姻的政策背景，包括 2023 年的《尊重婚姻法案》；以及未来研究的重要领域。

引用次数: 0

Policy research institutes’ role in the development of evidence for evidence-based policymaking in the United States 政策研究机构在为美国循证决策提供证据方面的作用

IF 2.3 3区管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Pub Date : 2024-03-19 DOI: 10.1002/pam.22593

Richard V. Burkhauser, Susan V. Burkhauser

Policy research institutes in the United States play an important role in the creation of evidence for evidence-based policymaking. This is the case with respect to their advocacy for the gathering and broad dissemination of “Big Data” and in the publication of policy analysis in the academic literature using these data. But they play a much more significant role, via non-refereed working papers, in predicting the possible behavioral and distributional consequences of currently proposed policies being considered by the executive and legislative branches of government. Historically, however, policy research institutes, both inside and outside the Beltway, have also played a less understood role. This role is the nurturing of those mostly academic-based economists who, as members of the Council of Economic Advisers, eventually end up advising presidents of the United States and their staff on the state of economic knowledge regarding the economic problems these policymakers are called to solve via evidence-based policymaking.

美国的政策研究机构在为循证决策提供证据方面发挥着重要作用。他们倡导收集和广泛传播 "大数据"，并利用这些数据在学术文献中发表政策分析。但是，它们通过非参考性工作文件，在预测政府行政和立法部门正在考虑的当前拟议政策可能产生的行为和分配后果方面发挥着更为重要的作用。然而，从历史上看，政策研究机构（包括 "环城 "内外的政策研究机构）还扮演了一个鲜为人知的角色。这种作用就是培养那些主要以学术为基础的经济学家，他们作为经济顾问委员会的成员，最终会就这些决策者需要通过循证决策来解决的经济问题的经济知识状况，向美国总统及其幕僚提供建议。

引用次数: 0