Scholarlink

<p>Equity gaps in education are typically associated with the disadvantage of a historically underserved group. They are usually labeled according to these groups (group labels) and/or the opportunities or outcomes (focal labels) in which they differ. However, this labeling practice favors a static understanding of equity gaps. As an alternative, we introduce the notion of dynamic equity gaps. Dynamic equity gaps are based on a labeling practice in which a non-static relation between group and focal variables is reflected in the label. We propose a four-step procedure to identify and examine dynamic equity gaps and provide an illustrative example using data from 328 secondary school students. Step (1): Focus on the equity gap; students with parents in STEM occupations tend to have a better average grade in STEM subjects. Step (2): Retrodictive focus; the more students identify with the STEM field, the higher their STEM grades tend to be. Step (3): Prospective focus: Students with parents in STEM occupations tend to identify stronger with STEM. Step (4): Holistic focus; the positive effect of being a pupil whose parents work in STEM is partially explained via higher identification with STEM.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Introducing dynamic equity gaps: a theoretical framework and an empirical illustration in STEM

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月22日

查看全文
  • Johanna Pfeuffer,
  • Heidrun Stoeger,
  • Wilma Vialle,
  • Albert Ziegler

摘要

Equity gaps in education are typically associated with the disadvantage of a historically underserved group. They are usually labeled according to these groups (group labels) and/or the opportunities or outcomes (focal labels) in which they differ. However, this labeling practice favors a static understanding of equity gaps. As an alternative, we introduce the notion of dynamic equity gaps. Dynamic equity gaps are based on a labeling practice in which a non-static relation between group and focal variables is reflected in the label. We propose a four-step procedure to identify and examine dynamic equity gaps and provide an illustrative example using data from 328 secondary school students. Step (1): Focus on the equity gap; students with parents in STEM occupations tend to have a better average grade in STEM subjects. Step (2): Retrodictive focus; the more students identify with the STEM field, the higher their STEM grades tend to be. Step (3): Prospective focus: Students with parents in STEM occupations tend to identify stronger with STEM. Step (4): Holistic focus; the positive effect of being a pupil whose parents work in STEM is partially explained via higher identification with STEM.