author: Coutinho, M. J., Oswald, D. P., & Best, A. M. 
year: 2006
title: "Differences in Outcomes for Female and Male Students in Special Education"
publisher: Career Development for Exceptional Individuals
uri: https://doi.org/10.1177/08857288060290010401
pubtype: article
discipline: education

country: United States
period: 1972-1994
maxlength: 72
targeting: implicit
group: young women with disabilities
data: National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS-88)

design: quasi-experimental
method:
sample: 13391
unit: individual
representativeness: national
causal: 0 # 0 correlation / 1 causal

theory:
limitations: sample does not include students with more severe impairments due to requirement of self-reporting; selection based on parent-reporting may introduce bias
observation:
  - intervention: education (special needs)
    institutional: 0
    structural: 1
    agency: 0
    inequality: disability; gender; income; age
    type: 1 # 0 vertical / 1 horizontal
    indicator: 0 # 0 absolute / 1 relative
    measures: female employment ratio, female income ratio
    findings: females with disabilities less likely to be employed, and earned less than males with disability; females less likely to obtain high school diploma; more likely to be biological parent
    channels: men employed more months, more hours per week than women; largest income difference in special education and low achievers
    direction: -1 # -1 neg / 0 none / 1 pos
    significance: 2 # 0 nsg / 1 msg / 2 sg

notes: more men than women in skilled/technical positions across all groups
annotation: |
  A study on the impact difference of special education between young men and women on their relative employment probabilities and incomes.
  It finds that, overall, young women with disabilities were significantly less likely to be employed, earned less than males with disabilities, had lower likelihood of obtaining a high school diploma and were more likely to be a biological parent.
  For the employment outcomes, the primary channels identified were men with disabilities being in employment both more months in the preceding period and more hours per week on average than women with disabilities.
  Overall, more women were employed in clerical positions and substantially more men employed in technical or skilled positions for both special education and the control samples.
  Similarly, for income there was a gender-based difference for the whole sample, though with substantial internal heterogeneity showing only marginal differences between men and women in the high-achieving subsample and the largest differences in the low-achieving and special needs subsample.
  The suggestions include a strengthening of personal agency to remain in education longer and delay having children through self-advocacy and -determination transition services for young women to supplement structural education efforts. 
  Some limitations include initial subsample selection based on parent-reporting possibly introducing selection bias and the special education sample not including students with more severe impairments due to the requirement of self-reporting.
