Gender differences in performance under different evaluation schemes and the leaky pipeline in economics

Abstract

The leaky pipeline remains a persistent challenge to achieving gender diversity in the economics career. In this study, we contribute to the existing literature by investigating gender differences in academic performance in economics in Brazil in two distinct stages: undergraduate studies and graduate admission exams. We use individual-level data from the national admission exam for economics graduate programs (ANPEC exam) and undergraduate records from the University of São Paulo. Women are less likely to rank among the top 100 ANPEC applicants and perform worse than men in all exam subjects. Meanwhile, we find consistent evidence that female students perform similarly to their male counterparts in undergraduate courses with comparable content to those evaluated on the ANPEC exam. Since the students taking the ANPEC exam were exposed to the same higher education program, after controlling for observable characteristics, we can relate the differences in performance to the exam itself rather than to differences in learning abilities. While we cannot identify the source of the performance gap, as the ANPEC exam and undergraduate grading system vary in terms of stakes, grading scheme, risk, and competitiveness (all of which can potentially affect women and men differently), we argue that our evidence suggests the need to reconsider admission exam designs to address the leaky pipeline in economics.