Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Mar 18.

Published in final edited form as: Econ Educ Rev. 2017 Nov 8;62:35–47. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.10.007

Table 5.

Causal Effects of Single-Sex Schools on STEM Outcomes (KEEP)

	OLS Regression				Multinomial Logit Model
	Math		Science		Expecting university &		Actually attending university &
	Math		Science		a STEM major	a non-STEM major	a STEM major	a non-STEM major
	Interest	Self- efficacy	Interest	Self- efficacy	(vs. expecting no university)		(vs. no university attendance)
Panel A. Girls
All-girls schools (vs. coed)	−0.163 (0.438)	−0.063 (0.279)	−0.110 (0.306)	−0.198 (0.178)	−0.100 (0.712)	0.411 (0.447)	−0.154 (0.596)	0.347 (0.286)
Private schools (vs. public)	−0.192 (0.339)	−0.047 (0.224)	−0.214 (0.302)	−0.115 (0.167)	−0.100 (0.755)	−0.382 (0.433)	0.105 (0.652)	−0.044 (0.309)
Constant	3.487 ^*** (0.246)	2.464 ^*** (0.207)	3.141 ^*** (0.371)	2.636 ^*** (0.230)	0.336 (1.124)	2.261 ^*** (0.589)	−1.429 (0.880)	−0.587 (0.435)
R² (or Log pseudolikelihood)	0.014	0.002	0.010	0.012	−164.2		−225.6
Panel B. Boys
All-girls schools (vs. coed)	0.011 (0.150)	−0.067 (0.438)	0.978 ^*** (0.302)	0.719 ^** (0.301)	0.910 (0.444)	−0.050 (0.430)	0.897 ^*** (0.263)	0.255 (0.444)
Private schools (vs. public)	0.056 (0.182)	0.186 (0.420)	−0.683 ^** (0.420)	−0.487 ^* (0.262)	−0.288 (0.520)	0.123 (0.347)	−0.095 (0.304)	−0.642 (0.537)
Constant	2.944 ^*** (0.359)	2.129 ^*** (0.449)	3.754 ^*** (0.375)	3.030 ^*** (0.393)	0.981 (0.949)	1.627 ^** (0.687)	−1.196 ^** (0.570)	−0.103 (0.347)
R² (or Log pseudolikelihood)	0.001	0.003	0.040	0.031	−183.2		−203.6

Note : We use 232 female students in 15 schools and 208 male students in 14 schools.

^*

significant at 10%

^**

significant at 5%

^***

significant at 1%.