Discussion Rubric
Rubric: I will be grading on four things: (1) citation of the readings and outside sources, (2) whether or
not the questions were addressed, (3) originality in response, (4) if they are responding to another
student, how did they respond to the original response instead of talking past them
(1) Students will be expected to properly cite both the weekly reading and an outside source. This
source can be a book, news article, or even a personal experience. I want to see evidence that they've at
least engaged with the reading on some level, not only that they've read it, but thought about how they
could connect what they've learned with something else in their experience.
0 points for no sources,
1 Citing both in a superficial manner. They might mention a statistic, but don't explain its significance
with relation to the question,
2 Citing both sources properly and using facts presented to build and defend their point.
(2) Students will have to answer the questions fully. By this I mean, they must address each part of the
question, and not just address part of it.
0 Talks past the original post, posting something that isn't relevant,
0.5 Gives a lazy or nonsubstantive answer. An example would be, "I agree/disagree" without defending
their argument in any substantive manner. Makes assertions without backing them up
1 Makes substantive point that address the question but don't dig that deeply into the question, the
premises behind it, or show interest in the material
2 Makes substantive, insightful points that show a deep understanding of the material, effort on the
poster's point. Shows that the student engaged with the weekly reading.
(3) I don't want students to just repeat each other. I want them to dig for unique answers to the
question
0-1 Largely regurgitates statements made by others or the main reading. Doesn't show much
independent thought
2 Brings in differing, nuanced perspective to material, that others may not have considered.
(4) Response
Students will have to respond to other students, and their responses will largely be graded on the above
points, and they'll be expected to actually respond to other students and not just talk past them.
Students will have to respond to two other posts. They can respond to the original post in a thread or to
responses to that post. The grade will be the average of the two responses.
CHAPTER 12 - DISCRIMINATION IN THE LABOR MARKET
INTRODUCTION
The major portion of this chapter concerns racial discrimination in the labor market. To
what degree is continuing discrimination a cause of observed income disparities by race? To
isolate its influence requires controlling for other causal factors, such as differences in
education, skills, age, and geographic location.
It is suggested that about two-thirds of the earnings disparity is due to non-market
discrimination (education, residence), one-sixth due to past market discrimination (work
skills, experience), and one-sixth due to current labor market discrimination. These three
factors interact to create disparities in occupational patterns, unemployment rates and
duration, training, and thus earnings.
Much labor market discrimination is unintended, being based on world-of-mouth
recruitment practices. Labor unions' role is considered and a brief history provided.
Managers tend to reflect the interests and attitudes of their customers and/or workers. This
may present a barrier to achieving equality.
Also considered is class and sex discrimination in the labor market. The former implies that
the poor will fare worse in the job market because of reduced access to hiring channels and
prejudice. Considering the latter, occupational segregation, as it does with racial
discrimination, plays a significant role.
Some other things to note:
Gary Becker's Theory
In his book The Economics of Discrimination, Becker devised a model that incorporated
personal prejudice into the hiring decision. Equally qualified minorities may get hired only
if paid a wage below those of whites, to accommodate this disutility. However, this would
give a cost advantage to the non-discriminating employer. Thus, market forces may limit the
extent of wage discrimination.
Statistical Discrimination
If employers are risk averse, they may hire on the basis of group averages. Say members of
group A average higher performance than those in group B. It is "safer" to hire group A types,
even though some group B members will outperform some group A members. This result
may be expected especially if employers cannot tell ahead of time which applicants are the
most productive. For example, hiring a male may be safer than hiring a female, since she is
statistically more likely to need maternity leave.
How to Prove Discrimination
In the past, discrimination was quite blatant. An excellent example of this is help wanted
advertising prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Darity and Mason, in the spring 1998 issue
of the Journal of Economic Perspectives (vol. 12, No. 2), show a selection of these from
newspapers in major cities. It was not unusual for an employer to specify the race, marital
status, age, height, or gender preferences for available positions.
It is hard today to observe this degree of disparate treatment. Instead, a focus on outcomes
(disparate impact) is used. The case of Griggs v. Duke Power Company is a relevant example
(see below). Also of interest is whether pay differences between races or sexes reflect
voluntary occupational choices or discrimination. A typical research approach is the residual
method. Data on years of schooling, work experience, labor force attachment, geographic
residence, etc. are used to establish the expected wage in the absence of discrimination. The
unexplained (residual) earnings gap is then attributed to discrimination.
To appreciate the limitations of this approach I ask that you try to construct a model of class
performance (grade). Which variables should be included (study hours, IQ, etc.)? Do such
variables completely explain grades? To what should any residual variance be attributed?
One attempt to measure racial discrimination is conducted by Bertrand and Mullainathan in
the September 2004 issue of the American Economic Review. They conduct an experiment
where they send out a large number of fake job applications, each with similar
characteristics. However, some application have names that are typically associated with
being Black, such as “Jamal” or “Lakisha”, and others have typically do not have this
association, such as “Emily” or “Greg”. They find that “White-sounding” names received 50%
more callbacks than similar applications with “Black-sounding” names. Does this prove the
existence of pervasive racial discrimination? What other associations could people make
with these names? Could this be classist bias instead of racial bias? Does that make a
difference?
Court Cases
The case of Griggs v. Duke Power Company (1971), established the notion that the "effect" of
a hiring procedure may result in unfair discrimination (i.e., that persons not selected on the
basis of some test score could have equivalent opportunities for job success as those selected
by the test). Griggs also stipulated that tests must be job related and not abstract, and that if
the plaintiff demonstrates disparate impact, the burden of persuasion for indicating how a
selection procedure is valid shifts to the defendant. Moreover, even if a defendant can
validate a test, it must adopt less discriminatory selection procedures if such procedures
exist.
The case of Wards Cove v. Croson (1989) raised serious questions concerning the operating
principles established by the Griggs case. It appeared to shift the burden of persuasion of
demonstrating validity, once disparate impact has been alleged, to the plaintiff rather than
to the defendant. In addition, the decision eliminated the need for the defendant to show the
predictive validity of a selection procedure.
Duncan Index of Segregation
This is a measure of the amount of segregation between groups in the work force (or in
education). The number indicates the normalized proportion of individuals that would have
to be moved in order to fully integrate the work force (or schools). A value of 1 (100%)
represents complete segregation; a value of 0 represents complete integration.
Say there are two types of jobs (A, B) and two types of workers (1, 2). What percentage of
group 1 workers would have to be moved from the job type where they are over-represented
to achieve equal percentages? What percentage of group 2 workers would have to move to
achieve equal percentages of group 2 workers in each job type? Sum these two percentages.
(See American Sociological Review, April 1955).
Web Links
Table 12.1 can be updated at http://www.census.gov.
Table 12.2 can be updated at ftp://146.142.4.23/pub/suppl/EMPSIT.CPSEED17.TXT (and
CPSEED19.TXT).
Tables 12.3, 12.4, and 12.6 can be updated at http://stats.bls.gov (Usual Weekly Earnings,
Characteristics of the Employed, and Women in the Labor Force: A Databook).
The NBER has some more studies on discrimination (http://www.nber.org).
CHAPTER 11 - DISCRIMINATION IN EDUCATION
INTRODUCTION
This is the first of two chapters that deal with discrimination- a barrier to the acquisition or
utilization of one's human capital.
First off, it is necessary to consider the meaning and nature of discrimination, and related
concepts of prejudice and racism. There are both costs and benefits associated with
discrimination; a two-sector labor market, where one sector discriminates, can illustrate
some of these. Discrimination is not always blatant; ascertaining it may depend on the
observation of end results or controlling for other explanatory factors.
In education, blacks and whites go into the educational system more equal than they come
out. The existence of school and classroom segregation is documented and its link to unequal
opportunities drawn. Changes in the legal aspects of racial discrimination, by Supreme Court
rulings, are noted.
Another type of discrimination in education is by class, i.e., the poor. The way schools are
generally financed puts fewer resources into schools predominantly attended by poor
children. This contributes to lower levels of education attained. It is possible that class
discrimination has become a stronger force in our society than racial discrimination.
Another issue is sex discrimination in education. Course tracking and cultural influences
steer females in different directions than males. This implies women enter the labor market
with less valuable human capital, to their financial disadvantage.
Some other things to think about
What Constitutes Discrimination?
If we observe unequal treatment, we may suspect discriminatory behavior. Yet in a market
economy, equal outcomes are not expected since brains, entrepreneurship, luck, and drive
are not equally distributed. If a basketball team signs only players above six feet tall, does
this discriminate against those under six feet? And would/should this be illegal? What about
a police department that requires applicants to have a high school degree, be over five feet
six inches tall, weigh at least 150 pounds, and be under 40 years old? One could argue that
these are required for performance. Nevertheless, certain groups will have a hard time
meeting the requirements: women, hispanics, blacks, short people, thin people, and those
over 40. Do these characteristics have a bearing on performance, i.e., could an applicant
without a high school degree, under five foot six and 150 pounds, and over age 40 perform
satisfactorily? These questions can be tied to the relevancy standard and the case of Griggs
v. Duke Power Company (see next chapter).
Discrimination and Production Possibility Curve
Besides the moral and ethical dimensions of discrimination, there is an economic impact.
According to Andrew Brimmer (in Economic Perspectives on Affirmative Action, by Simms,
University Press of America, 1995), racial discrimination cost the American economy about
$240 billion in 1993. This was about 3.8% of GDP. This comes from lagging minority
educational achievement (less quantity and quality of education) and continued job market
discrimination (working at jobs beneath skill levels). The loss from gender discrimination
was estimated in 1975 to be 3% of GDP. If both these figures still hold and are applied to
today’s GDP of over $13 trillion implies losses of more than $800 billion!
Remember your old friend from Econ 160, the Production Possibility Frontier (PPF)? Being
on the curve means using all resources and using them efficiently. Discrimination puts us
inside the curve. This means we are sacrificing potential output and income.
Gainers and Losers
Who wins and who loses from discrimination? Some gainers include skilled white males (the
political "elite") and firms that don't discriminate (lower labor costs). Losers include
minorities, women, unskilled whites, and firms that do discriminate.
The Supreme Court
The contrast between Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
shows the change in our societal attitudes toward discrimination in education. Look these
up if you’re interested. If you provide me with a summary for the above two cases (does not
have to be long – 150 words each), you will get 2 additional points on your final exam. The
deadline for this extra-credit assignment is Wednesday, August 2.
De Facto Segregation
Although explicit segregation in schools is unlawful, we do observe substantial segregation.
Some of this is from individual housing location choices of households and the way schools
and school districts are sited. Many whites moved to the suburbs, where there are few
minorities. Other whites send their children to private schools. More details on this are
presented in chapter 16. A Vox article listed below contains data on how school segregation
has gone up in recent decades.
Try to think if you can identify good schools and bad schools in your community. What
accounts for the difference? How could class and race integration be promoted?
Gender Differences
Review the gender distribution of educational degrees (figure 11.5). Why do fewer women
get Ph.D’s in economics? Why do fewer men get master’s degrees in education? Should
women's colleges be abolished? How about traditionally black colleges? Aren't such
institutions inherently discriminatory?
Web Links
1. Reports on school segregation can be found at
http://www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu
2. Data on school enrollments, dropout rates, literacy, and educational attainment by
race and gender are available at http://www.nces.ed.gov and
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/educ-attn.html
3. An interesting visualization of how school districts are drawn and how this may
affect school quality.
https://www.vox.com/2018/3/5/17080218/school-segregation-getting-worsedata
Purchase answer to see full
attachment