BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//eluceo/ical//2.0/EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:10f0521eacc03b4dc02261a1c7932a02
DTSTAMP:20240502T154130Z
SUMMARY:Dr. Peter Arcidiacono\, Duke University 
DESCRIPTION: \n\nEQUILIBRIUM GRADE INFLATION WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR FEMALE I
 NTEREST IN\nSTEM MAJORS\n\nWe estimate an equilibrium model of grading pol
 icies where professors\nset both an intercept and a returns to studying an
 d ability.\nProfessors value enrollment\, learning\, and student study tim
 e and set\ntheir policies taking into the account the policies of the othe
 r\nprofessors. Students respond to grading policies in their selection of\
 ncourses and how much to study conditional on enrolling. Men and women\nar
 e allowed to have different preferences over course types\, the\nbenefits 
 associated with higher grades\, and the cost of exerting more\neffort. Two
  decompositions are performed. First\, we separate out how\nmuch of the di
 fferences in grading policies across fields is driven by\ndifferences in d
 emand for courses in those fields and how much is due\nto differences in p
 rofessor preferences across fields. Second\, we\nseparate out differences 
 in female/male course taking across fields is\ndriven by i) differences in
  cognitive skills\, ii) differences in the\nvaluation of grades\, iii) dif
 ferences in the cost of studying\, and iv)\ndifferences in field preferenc
 es. We then use the structural\nparameters to evaluate restrictions on gra
 ding policies. Restrictions\non grading policies that equalize grade distr
 ibutions across classes\nresult in higher (lower) grades in science (non-s
 cience) fields but\nmore (less) work being required. As women are willing 
 to study more\nthan men\, this restriction on grading policies results in 
 more women\npursuing the sciences and more men pursuing the non-sciences.\
 n 
DTSTART:20180209T190000Z
DTEND:20180209T203000Z
LOCATION:Gerri C. LeBow Hall\, 3220 Market Street\, 722\, Philadelphia\, PA
  19104
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR