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