Skip to main content

What happened to the men?

This weekend an article appeared in the Wall Street Journal about the enrollment of young men in colleges across America.  If you don't have a subscription, James Murphy did a good job of summarizing and critiquing the story in this Twitter thread. If you're not proficient on Twitter, you can read the whole thread unrolled here

The story cites 2020 enrollment data from the National Clearinghouse, which is fast; I only have data from IPEDS which trails a year, but is much more accurate and granular.  There are two important points to make here: Not having data for 2020 means I can't document or leap to conclusions about what happened in 2020; and even if I did have 2020 data, one year's data point and discussions with a handful of people does not a trend make, so I wouldn't leap to conclusions anyway, even if I did have the data.

In fact, the trend has been a long time developing and a long time coming.  That it's continuing is hardly surprising to anyone who's watched this for a while.

Promo: If you like Higher Ed Data Stories and use it in your job, you can support the effort by buying me a coffee (or a beer, or web hosting, as the case may be) via a click here.  Public and private high school counselors should always use this site guilt-free, for free, for ever.

This visualization will show you the long term trends, breaking out headcount of men and women undergraduates on the left, and percentage change since the first year selected on the right.  Both total (top) and new freshman students (bottom) are included.

As you can see, the trend is pretty clear, but is it surprising? Or troubling?  Is it even uniform?  The first two questions are for you to decide, but the answer to the third is pretty clear, as James's tweets indicated.  Consider making a few clicks and watch the data change.

I recommend you click first on the "Sector" control and choose "Public, four-year and above."  Or, if you want, click on "Big 10" under "Football Conference."  Interesting?

Now reset (using the controls at the bottom) and choose "Public, two-year.  In that case, you see a very different trend: Community colleges are in fact suffering, and have been for some time.  

Note the spike in male (and female) enrollment right after the recession of 2007 and beyond.  And note the falloff in the last several years.  While most economists think there is no such thing as a "negative beta industry" (where business is better when the economy is worse and vice versa) higher education would be one of the contenders.  And community colleges are on the leading edge of that trend.

There is, it seems, more economic opportunity for young men without a college degree than there is for women without a college degree.  There always has been, of course, but 50 years ago educational opportunity for women was constrained, too.  When that opportunity shrinks, college becomes more viable.  When it expands, it becomes less important in the short term.  There is some support in the data for this theory: On another blog I write, you can see that completions in Oregon community colleges, while falling overall, have been more dramatically affected in vocational and technical programs (use the second tab on the visualization here).

Girls are better students than boys at almost all levels (which makes you wonder why their standardized college admissions tests scores are lower, or is that just me?) so it's probably not surprising that they would pursue higher education--and persist--at higher rates.

Maybe we just need to figure out why they don't seem to like the Big 10.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

On Rankings, 1911, and Economic Mobility

If you're alive today, you have lived your whole life with college rankings.  Yes, even you.  You may not have knows you were living in the time of college rankings, but indeed, you have been, unless you were born before 1911 (or maybe earlier.)  If you're interested, you can read this Twitter thread from 2020 where I discuss them and include snippets of those 1911 rankings as well as those from 1957, written by Chesley Manly. You can read for yourself, or you can trust me, that in fact the rankings as we know them have been surprisingly consistent over time, and most people would have only minor quibbles with the ratings from 1911.  Perhaps that's because they have always tended to measure the same thing. But what if we did different rankings?  No, not like the Princeton Review where they make an attempt to measure best party school, or best cafeteria food, or worst social life.  Something more quantifiable and concrete, although still, admittedly, a hard thing to get rig

Freshman Migration, 1986 to 2020

(Note: I discovered that in IPEDS, Penn State Main Campus now reports with "The Pennsylvania State University" as one system.  So when you'd look at things over time, Penn State would have data until 2018, and then The Penn....etc would show up in 2020.  I found out Penn State main campus still reports its own data on the website, so I went there, and edited the IPEDS data by hand.  So if you noticed that error, it should be corrected now, but I'm not sure what I'll do in years going forward.) Freshman migration to and from the states is always a favorite visualization of mine, both because I find it a compelling and interesting topic, and because I had a few breakthroughs with calculated variables the first time I tried to do it. If you're a loyal reader, you know what this shows: The number of freshman and their movement between the states.  And if you're a loyal viewer and you use this for your work in your business, please consider supporting the costs