[Solution]SBSD-LTD Round

The fact that “Coding for the future” was implemented across all of the schools in 2006 is critical for our identification strategy. All of the…

The fact that “Coding for the future” was implemented across all of the schools in 2006 is critical for our identification strategy. All of the 2001 cohort received the program, whereas the 2005 cohort did not. However, the girls who attended the same schools from different cohorts should be reasonably similar. This is a strong assumption, but one can be proved using previous data from the SBSD-LTD Round 1 and Round 2. The Kellog Institute considers Cohorts 1 and 2 as a “super-cohort,” given their similarities in trends and overall characteristics. For this reason, Cohort 2 will serve as our treatment group, and Cohort 1 will serve as our control group. Question 1: Is there an effect of the “Coding for the future” computer-assisted learning program on the choice of pursuing a STEM degree in college for girls? For this question, we want to look at the differences in our outcome 1 (enrollment in STEM degree at the end of freshman year) between girls in our treatment and control groups. Given that we only have one occasion for this outcome variable, we will be using a propensity score matching strategy to answer this question. This is a non-parametric strategy that finds subjects that are as statistically close to each other as possible in every single observable variable except for the treatment variable and compares the outcome variable between them. The steps we will follow are outlined:

Assignment status: Solved by our experts

>>>Click here to get this paper written at the best price. 100% Custom, 0% plagiarism.<<<

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *