Gender and Racial Differences in Awareness and Consideration of Curricular Programs - Exploring a Multistage Model of Major Choice

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Cart

The article examines how gender and race shape community college students’ awareness and consideration of college curricular programs and majors. Using survey data, it finds meaningful variation in both the size of awareness sets and the composition of consideration sets across groups. The study extends prior work by addressing the full major-sorting process rather than only final choices, offering guidance for administrators seeking timing and methods to support student decisions.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages19

Reading Time48 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Career segregation and education differences

Major choice as a policy lever

Sorting by gender, socioeconomic background, and race/ethnicity

AERA Open July-September 2020, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 1–19 DOI: 10. 1177/2332858420937023 Article reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© The Author(s) 2020. [http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero](http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero) Gender and Racial Differences in Awareness and Consideration of Curricular Programs: Exploring a Multistage Model of Major Choice Rachel Baker Gabe Avakian Orona University of California, Irvine One method for reducing gender and racial segregation in career fields is addressing sorting by major in college. However, previous research has not examined the full process of major sorting; few studies have explicitly explored the majors of which students are aware or the majors that students consider choosing. In this study, we use survey data from community college students to examine differences in the size and composition of awareness and consideration sets of groups of students. We find significant differences in the size of awareness sets and the composition of consideration sets in our sample. Applying the methodological advances from this study could help college administrators identify key opportunities, in timing or methodology, for supporting and guiding students’decisions. Keywords: major choice, segregation, community colleges Introduction Career fields in the United States are highly segregated by race, ethnicity, and gender (Blau et al., 2013; Gradinet al., 2015; Hegewisch & Hartmann, 2014; Mann & DiPrete, 2013; Queneau, 2009; Tomaskovic-Devey et al., 2006) . While gender segregation has decreased somewhat over the past five decades, the pace of integration has slowed significantly since 1990 (Blau et al., 2013; Buchmann & DiPrete, 2006), and segregation by race, which was improving through 1980, has stalled (Tomaskovic-Devey et al., 2006) . Additionally, segregation by ethnicity has grown significantly (Queneau, 2009); Latinx–White segregation is particularly severe (Alonso-Villar et al., 2012) . And while segregation does not necessarily imply a particular hierarchy, White men have historically had, and have continued to maintain, dominance in the occupational pecking order (Mintz & Krymkowski, 2010) . The implications of this segregation are serious. Career segregation is linked with inequalities in wages and occupational mobility, it can cement status expectations, and it can affect economic efficiency (England, 1992; TomaskovicDevey, 1993). Greater parity across career fields could have large implications for many important social and economic outcomes. A key contributor to segregation is differences in education between groups; quantitative differences (e.g., number of years completed, degrees earned) and qualitative differences (e.g., types of schools attended, programmatic concentrations within these schools) between groups account for much of the extant occupational segregation (Borghans & Groot, 1999; Sloane et al., 2019; Sookram & Strobl, 2009) . Given this, many current education policy reforms aim to equalize rates of postsecondary attendance between majority and marginalized groups or equalize the selectivity of colleges attended between these groups. These programs and policies could reduce occupational segregation. Another potential policy lever that could affect occupational segregation has received less attention: reducing differences in students’ curricular paths and major choices (Shaw & Baruti, 2010) . While far from a deterministic process (e.g., Robst, 2007), college major is predictive of occupational field. One’s major has a significant relationship with earnings and social mobility, even after accounting for the fact that different types of students select into different majors (Brown & Corcoran, 1997; Hamermesh & Donald, 2008; Lemieux, 2014; Roksa & Levey, 2010; Sloane et al., 2019; Thomas & Zhang, 2005; Wolniak et al., 2008) . Major choice affects stude

FAQs

What problem does the article address?

It studies how gender and race influence students’ awareness and consideration of curricular programs and major choices, an area linked to occupational segregation.

What data and method does the study use?

It uses survey data from community college students to analyze differences in the size and composition of awareness and consideration sets for groups of students.

What do the findings suggest for college administrators?

The methodological approach could help administrators identify key opportunities—through timing or methodology—to support and guide students’ decisions during major sorting.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Cart