Educational Technology and Change Journal

By Jim Shimabukuro (assisted by Claude)
Editor

The transformation of American higher education over the past five decades has been nothing short of remarkable. Women, who were significantly underrepresented in college classrooms through the mid-twentieth century, first achieved parity in bachelor’s degree attainment around 1982 and have steadily widened their lead ever since. Today, according to recent data from the Pew Research Center, 47 percent of women ages 25 to 34 hold a bachelor’s degree compared to just 37 percent of men—a ten-percentage-point gap that represents a dramatic reversal from the educational landscape of previous generations. This trend extends across nearly every racial and ethnic group, with particularly stark disparities among Black and Latino populations, and shows few signs of abating. If current trajectories continue or intensify over the next decade, both sexes will face profound implications that reshape economic opportunity, family formation, mental health, social mobility, and the very fabric of American society.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MEN

The first and most immediate and quantifiable implication for men is the growing economic disadvantage that accompanies declining college participation. The college wage premium—the additional earnings commanded by degree holders—remains substantial despite recent plateaus, with college-educated workers earning approximately 71 percent more than their high school-educated counterparts as of recent measurements. For men specifically, the economic consequences are particularly severe. Research from the National Bureau of Economic Research documents that between 1973 and 2015, real hourly earnings for men with only a high school degree declined by more than 18 percent, while earnings for college-educated men increased substantially. This divergence has only accelerated in the twenty-first century as technological change and globalization have hollowed out middle-skill manufacturing and production jobs that once provided stable pathways to middle-class security for non-college-educated men.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reports that the employment gap between college-educated and non-college-educated workers now stands at nearly 12 percentage points—wider than employment gaps by race or gender. This disparity reflects not only differences in unemployment rates but, more importantly, differences in labor force participation, suggesting that men without college degrees are increasingly withdrawing from the workforce altogether. As women continue to outpace men in degree attainment, millions of young men will find themselves systematically excluded from the highest-growth, highest-paying sectors of the economy, facing instead a lifetime of diminished earning potential, limited career advancement, and economic precarity that compounds across decades. This earnings penalty translates into reduced retirement savings, lower homeownership rates, and diminished wealth accumulation—effects that will reverberate through families and communities for generations.

The second critical implication concerns the crisis in family formation among non-college-educated men. Research from the Institute for Family Studies demonstrates that working-class men marry and form families at dramatically lower rates than their college-educated counterparts—just 36 percent of working-class men were married with children in 2021, compared to 45 percent of college-educated men. This gap is not merely correlational but appears to be causally linked to economic prospects, with studies showing that jobs offering incomes above $60,000 per year, health insurance, and full-time employment increase family formation rates by 17 percentage points and explain nearly 80 percent of the difference between working-class and college-educated men’s marriage rates.

The declining marriage prospects stem from multiple reinforcing mechanisms. First, economic theory and empirical evidence suggest that marriage formation responds to male earning potential, with labor market shocks that reduce men’s relative earnings leading to decreased marriage rates. Second, educational homogamy—the tendency for people to marry others with similar educational backgrounds—has intensified, creating a “marriage market mismatch” as college-educated women increasingly outnumber college-educated men. While social norms have traditionally tolerated men marrying women with less education, the reverse remains less socially acceptable, leaving college-educated women with a shrinking pool of “marriageable” men who meet educational and economic expectations. Third, men who do not attend college miss out on the critical social networks and relationship-building opportunities that college provides during the formative years of young adulthood. As one study participant noted, working-class men increasingly “don’t really have a huge social group,” turning instead to online connections that facilitate isolation rather than relationship formation. This deterioration in family formation will perpetuate across generations, as research consistently shows that children raised by married, biological parents—particularly boys—have substantially better educational and economic outcomes, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of disadvantage.

The third implication addresses the alarming mental health consequences of male educational decline. Data from Northeastern Junior College reveals that while 44 percent of all students seek therapy, 38 percent seek medical treatment, and 13 percent seek psychiatric care, only one-fourth of these students are male—despite men reporting higher rates of mental health struggles as a reason for considering dropping out of college. More than 40 percent of male college students considered quitting in 2022, with emotional stress and mental health cited as primary reasons. This reluctance to seek help reflects deeply ingrained cultural patterns in which boys are socialized to solve their own problems and view help-seeking, particularly for mental health, as weakness.

The consequences of untreated mental health issues among less-educated men manifest in what economists term “deaths of despair”—mortality from drug overdoses, alcohol-related liver disease, and suicide. Men already face substantially higher rates of these deaths than women, and research demonstrates that single and divorced men face elevated risk compared to married men. College-educated Americans now live approximately 8.5 years longer than those without bachelor’s degrees, compared to a gap of just 2.5 years three decades ago. As educational attainment diverges by gender, men will disproportionately experience the health penalties associated with lower education levels, including higher rates of chronic disease, substance abuse, and premature mortality. The combination of economic precarity, social isolation, relationship failure, and cultural stigma around help-seeking creates a perfect storm for mental health deterioration among men excluded from higher education—a crisis that will claim tens of thousands of lives over the next decade if current trends persist.

The fourth critical implication concerns the collapse of social mobility pathways for men from disadvantaged backgrounds. Research using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth demonstrates that young men raised by married, biological parents are almost 20 percentage points more likely to graduate college than to end up in prison or jail. Conversely, men from working-class, single-parent, or low-income households face compounding disadvantages that begin in elementary school, where boys fall behind in reading and math test scores, continue through high school, where boys are nine percent less likely to graduate than girls, and culminate in drastically reduced college enrollment and completion rates.

The American Institute for Boys and Men documents that men from minority backgrounds face particularly severe challenges, with only 37 percent of Black male high school graduates ages 18 to 24 enrolled in college in 2022, down from 42 percent in 2011. The educational gender gap among Black Americans has reached 12 percentage points, among Latinos nine points, and among whites ten points. As college increasingly becomes the primary engine of upward mobility in the American economy, men from disadvantaged backgrounds will find themselves trapped in a cycle of poverty, with limited opportunities to improve their economic circumstances. This represents not merely individual hardship but a systematic failure of one of the core promises of American society—that education provides a ladder for advancement regardless of family background. The concentration of educational failure among already marginalized populations threatens to entrench and deepen existing inequalities along lines of race, class, and geography for the next generation.

The fifth implication, perhaps the most difficult to quantify but equally significant, involves the crisis of male identity and social belonging. Scholars like Richard Reeves have observed that many young men, particularly from working-class backgrounds, simply “don’t see college as being a place for them.” This perception reflects a broader cultural shift in which educational environments from kindergarten through college have become increasingly feminized in structure, expectations, and personnel. The share of male teachers has declined from 33 percent in 1980 to 23 percent today, depriving boys of male role models who demonstrate that academic achievement and college completion are compatible with masculine identity.

Throughout their educational careers, boys observe girls consistently outperforming them—earning higher GPAs, taking more advanced coursework, graduating high school at higher rates, enrolling in college in greater numbers, and completing degrees more successfully. This persistent underperformance relative to female peers contributes to a perception that “educational excellence is being coded more female,” leading many young men to disengage from academic pursuits altogether. The labor force participation rate for young men ages 16 to 24 has plummeted from 84 percent in 1980 to 60 percent today, suggesting widespread withdrawal not merely from education but from productive social participation more broadly. If college comes to be seen primarily as a female domain while men increasingly lack clear pathways to economic stability, social status, and meaningful identity, American society risks producing a generation of young men who are adrift, purposeless, and potentially susceptible to destructive ideologies or behaviors. The challenge of constructing positive masculine identity in an economy and culture that increasingly devalues traditional male strengths while failing to cultivate the skills valued in modern labor markets represents perhaps the most existential crisis facing boys and men in the coming decade.

IMPLICATIONS FOR WOMEN

The first and perhaps most paradoxical implication for women is that their dramatic educational advantages have not translated into commensurate gains in corporate leadership or economic power. Despite representing approximately 60 percent of college students and earning 59 percent of bachelor’s degrees, 63 percent of master’s degrees, and 57 percent of doctorates, women hold less than one-third of senior management roles and just over 10 percent of Fortune 500 CEO positions according to data from Catalyst. This disparity reflects what researchers have termed the “broken rung”—the first critical step from entry-level positions to management, where women face their greatest promotional disadvantage. For every 100 men promoted to management positions, only 81 women achieve the same advancement, with the gap particularly pronounced for women of color.

The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and other economic research institutions document that the college wage premium has largely stagnated over the past two decades, and crucially, women continue to earn approximately 82 cents for every dollar earned by men—a figure virtually unchanged since 2002. Among college graduates specifically, women earn 70 to 75 percent of what their male counterparts earn, and this gap widens rather than narrows at higher organizational levels. Women with bachelor’s degrees earn an average of $56,700 annually compared to $75,200 for men with identical credentials, and the disparity is so severe that male workers with bachelor’s degrees actually earn more than female workers with master’s degrees. As women continue to dominate higher education over the next decade, they will confront the sobering reality that educational credentials alone are insufficient to overcome systemic barriers to leadership advancement and wage equality. The result will be millions of highly educated women whose talents and capabilities are systematically underutilized, generating frustration, economic inefficiency, and social tension around unfulfilled promises of meritocracy.

The second critical implication concerns the ongoing caregiving penalty that women disproportionately bear, which severely undermines the economic returns on their educational investments. Research consistently demonstrates that working mothers face a seven percent wage penalty per child relative to working women without children, even after controlling for work experience, education, job characteristics, and other variables. Conversely, fathers receive a 2.1 percent earnings boost per child, reflecting persistent social expectations and workplace structures that assume men are ideal workers unencumbered by family responsibilities while women are primary caregivers regardless of their educational credentials or career ambitions.

The caregiving challenge extends beyond motherhood to encompass elder care, family member illness, and other unpaid domestic labor that falls disproportionately to women. These responsibilities create career interruptions that occur precisely during the critical years when professionals are building networks, relationships, and the expertise necessary for advancement to senior positions. McKinsey research indicates that most jobs in shrinking occupations—those most vulnerable to automation and displacement—are held disproportionately by women, while jobs requiring higher skills and offering higher wages are growing. However, women’s ability to transition into these opportunities is constrained by caregiving obligations that limit geographic mobility, long working hours, and the kind of intensive career focus that organizational structures continue to reward.

Over the next decade, as women’s educational advantages widen, the disconnect between their human capital investments and their constrained career trajectories will intensify. Highly educated women will increasingly find themselves in what economists call “time poverty”—possessing strong credentials but unable to fully deploy them in the labor market due to inflexible workplace structures and inadequate social support for caregiving. Without fundamental reforms in workplace policies, parental leave, childcare infrastructure, and cultural expectations around caregiving responsibilities, women’s dominance in higher education will yield diminishing marginal returns, producing frustration and unfulfilled potential on a massive scale.

The third implication addresses the growing marriage market imbalance created by women’s educational dominance. With women earning 47 percent of bachelor’s degrees compared to men’s 37 percent, and with educational homogamy—the preference for similarly educated partners—remaining strong, college-educated women face a substantial shortage of college-educated male partners. This mismatch is exacerbated by persistent gender norms that make it socially acceptable for men to marry women with less education while the reverse remains less common. As Richard Reeves and other scholars have documented, it is becoming “more and more difficult for women with a college degree to find dating and marriage partners.”

The implications extend beyond individual disappointment to broader social and economic consequences. Research demonstrates that college-educated women are more likely to delay marriage or remain unmarried compared to previous generations, with college-educated adults ages 25 and older showing marriage rates of 65 percent compared to 50 percent for those with only high school education—a gap that has widened substantially since 1990 when both groups had marriage rates above 60 percent. For women who do marry less-educated men, household dynamics may be complicated by income reversals and status inconsistencies that challenge traditional gender norms and can create relationship stress.

The next decade will see millions of highly educated women navigating relationship markets characterized by scarcity of educational peers, particularly in communities where male college enrollment has declined most precipitously. This will force difficult choices about whether to compromise on educational matching, remain single, or delay family formation—choices with profound implications for fertility rates, child-rearing patterns, and women’s overall life satisfaction. The concentration of college-educated women in urban centers and coastal regions while non-college populations increasingly dominate rural and inland areas will exacerbate geographic sorting and cultural division, making relationship formation across educational lines even more challenging.

The fourth critical implication concerns the disproportionate student debt burden that women’s educational dominance creates. While women earn more degrees than men, research from multiple sources demonstrates that women hold more college debt, make higher monthly payments despite earning less, and take longer to repay their loans. The combination of higher educational attainment, lower lifetime earnings due to the persistent wage gap, and career interruptions for caregiving creates a perfect storm of financial vulnerability for educated women.

Data from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study reveals that women’s debt burdens have grown substantially over recent decades, with women increasingly bearing the costs of educational credentials that do not yield proportionate economic returns. This is particularly pronounced among women who pursue advanced degrees—whether in fields like education and social work that offer important social value but modest financial rewards, or in traditionally male-dominated fields like business and law where women still face wage penalties and advancement barriers.

Over the next decade, as women continue to outpace men in college enrollment and degree completion, the aggregate student debt held by women will grow substantially. This debt will constrain women’s economic choices, delaying homeownership, business formation, retirement savings, and family formation. For women of color in particular, who face both racial and gender wage gaps, educational debt will compound existing wealth disparities and limit opportunities for economic mobility. The cruel irony is that women’s greater educational investment—driven in part by awareness that they will face labor market discrimination and need credentials to compete—leaves them more financially burdened than their male counterparts while still earning less over their lifetimes.

The fifth implication addresses the concerning pattern in women’s higher education participation, particularly their disproportionate enrollment in for-profit and lower-prestige institutions. Research published in the Russell Sage Foundation Journal documents that while gender gaps in undergraduate enrollment at public and private nonprofit institutions have remained relatively stable, a dramatic female-favorable gap has emerged at private for-profit institutions. By 2021, more than twice as many women as men were enrolled in for-profit undergraduate programs, and graduate enrollment at for-profit schools has grown more rapidly for women since approximately 2004.

This concentration in for-profit education is particularly troubling given extensive documentation that these institutions often provide lower-quality education, saddle students with excessive debt, and produce weaker labor market outcomes than public and nonprofit alternatives. Women’s overrepresentation at for-profit schools suggests they are bearing disproportionate costs of the expansion of higher education access while realizing fewer benefits. Additionally, research indicates that women continue to be more likely than men to engage in lower-prestige graduate programs despite their increasing numerical advantage in higher education overall.

The next decade will see the consequences of this stratification become increasingly apparent as millions of women graduate from lower-prestige and for-profit institutions with substantial debt but limited career prospects. While women dominate higher education numerically, the quality and return on investment of their educational experiences varies dramatically, with disadvantaged women particularly vulnerable to predatory institutional practices. This internal stratification within women’s higher education experience means that aggregate statistics about women’s educational dominance mask significant variation in actual economic and social outcomes, with many women finding their credentials devalued in labor markets that discriminate both by gender and by institutional prestige.

CONCLUSION

The widening gender gap in higher education represents one of the most significant social transformations of our era, with implications that will reshape American society over the next decade and beyond. For men, declining college participation threatens economic security, family formation, mental health, social mobility, and sense of purpose, creating a generation increasingly disconnected from pathways to stable adulthood. For women, educational dominance has not translated into proportionate gains in leadership, wages, or economic power, while creating new challenges around relationship formation, debt burden, and caregiving conflicts. The trends documented here are not inevitable—they reflect policy choices, institutional structures, cultural norms, and economic systems that can be reformed. However, absent concerted intervention, the next ten years will see these gaps widen further, producing a society increasingly divided along lines of gender and education with consequences for economic productivity, social cohesion, family stability, and human flourishing that will reverberate for generations to come.

SOURCES CONSULTED

American Institute for Boys and Men. (2025). “Degrees of Difference: Male College Enrollment and Completion.” https://aibm.org/research/male-college-enrollment-and-completion/

Bestcolleges. (2022). “Women Continue to Outnumber Men in College Completion.” https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/analysis/2021/11/19/women-complete-college-more-than-men/

Center for American Progress. (2018). “The Women’s Leadership Gap.” https://www.americanprogress.org/article/womens-leadership-gap-2/

Deseret News. (2025). “Seeking solutions to declining male college enrollment numbers.” https://www.deseret.com/utah/2025/01/15/male-college-enrollment-declines-education-utah-higher-social/

DiPrete, T. A., & Buchmann, C. (2025). “The Deepening Gender Divide in Credentials, 2000–2020: Continuity, Change, and Implications.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. https://www.rsfjournal.org/content/11/1/154

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. (2025). “Demand for College Labor in the 21st Century.” https://www.clevelandfed.org/publications/economic-commentary/2025/ec-202504-college-labor-demand-21st-century

Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. (2025). “What happened to the college wage premium?” https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2025/what-happened-to-the-college-wage-premium

Federal Reserve Bank of New York. (2025). “The College Economy: Educational Differences in Labor Market Outcomes.” https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2025/05/the-college-economy-educational-differences-in-labor-market-outcomes/

Frontiers in Education. (2024). “Females in higher education and leadership: insights from a multi-method approach.” https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1485395/full

Frontiers in Education. (2025). “Family formation and post-secondary educational attainment among community college and 4-year college students: a longitudinal study.” https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1435730/full

IMD Business School. (2025). “How Women in Leadership Are Advancing Pay Equity?” https://www.imd.org/blog/leadership/pay-equity/

INSEAD Knowledge. (2023). “The Biggest Barriers Women Face on the Path to Senior Leadership.” https://knowledge.insead.edu/career/biggest-barriers-women-face-path-senior-leadership

Institute for Family Studies. “The Family-to-Prison-or-College Pipeline: Married Fathers and Young Men’s Transition to Adulthood.” https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-family-to-prison-or-college-pipeline-married-fathers-and-young-mens-transition-to-adulthood

Julesburgadvocate. (2024). “Male college students are ‘in crisis’ as their enrollments drop.” https://www.julesburgadvocate.com/2024/03/19/male-college-students-are-in-crisis-as-their-enrollments-drop/

McKinsey & Company. (2025). “How to create meaningful careers for women.” https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/how-women-can-steer-toward-growing-industries-and-companies

National Bureau of Economic Research. “The Declining Labor Market Prospects of Less-Educated Men.” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7745920/

National Bureau of Economic Research. “Wayward Sons: The Emerging Gender Gap in Labor Markets and Education.” https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/publications/wayward%20sons%202013.pdf

New America. “College Pays Off. But by How Much Depends on Race, Gender, and Type of Degree.” https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/edcentral/college-pays-off/

NewsNation. (2024). “Men are skipping college: 4 reasons why you should pay attention.” https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/education/men-skipping-college-impact-economy-health/

NPR. (2024). “Women outnumber men in colleges. But later income remains stalled.” https://www.npr.org/2024/06/13/g-s1-4038/women-outnumber-men-colleges-earnings

Pew Research Center. (2021). “Why the gap between men and women finishing college is growing.” https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/11/08/whats-behind-the-growing-gap-between-men-and-women-in-college-completion/

Pew Research Center. (2024). “U.S. women are outpacing men in college completion, including in every major racial and ethnic group.” https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/11/18/us-women-are-outpacing-men-in-college-completion-including-in-every-major-racial-and-ethnic-group/

Pew Research Center. (2024). “Job market, economic trends for young adults by gender and education.” https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/05/23/labor-market-and-economic-trends-for-young-adults/

Population Reference Bureau. “The Gender Gap in College Enrollment and Graduation.” https://www.prb.org/resources/the-gender-gap-in-college-enrollment-and-graduation/

Public Policy Institute of California. (2025). “College Gender Gap Starts Early and Extends across Races.” https://www.ppic.org/blog/college-gender-gap-starts-early-and-extends-across-races/

Reeves, R. V. (2024). “How colleges turned pink.” Of Boys and Men (Substack). https://ofboysandmen.substack.com/p/how-colleges-turned-pink

Right Management. (2025). “Women In Leadership Roles: Assessments Bridge The Gender Gap.” https://www.right.com/insights/women-in-leadership-roles-assessments-bridge-the-gender-gap

ScienceDirect. (2024). “The gender gap in executive promotions.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119924001421

The Chronicle of Higher Education. (2025). “The Male Enrollment Crisis.” https://www.chronicle.com/featured/student-success/student-centric-institution/male-enrollment-crisis

The Hill. (2025). “Women are outpacing men in higher education but the boardroom tells a different story.” https://thehill.com/lobbying/5501061-gender-gap-leadership-boardroom/

Top Tier Admissions. (2025). “The Gender Gap in College Admissions.” https://toptieradmissions.com/the-gender-gap-in-college-admissions/

University Business. (2023). “Men are falling behind in higher ed and the trend may not be letting up.” https://universitybusiness.com/men-are-falling-behind-in-higher-ed-and-it-may-not-be-letting-up/

U.S. Equitable Growth. (2023). “A college degree is not the solution to U.S. wage inequality.” https://equitablegrowth.org/a-college-degree-is-not-the-solution-to-u-s-wage-inequality/

Washington Equity in Attainment. “Higher returns on education can’t explain growing wage inequality.” https://www.epi.org/blog/higher-returns-on-education-cant-explain-growing-wage-inequality/

Women’s National News Global. (2025). “Study shows working-class men aren’t getting married.” https://wng.org/roundups/study-shows-working-class-men-arent-getting-married-1749503094

World Economic Forum. “Why is there a college gender gap between men and women?” https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/11/what-s-behind-the-growing-gap-between-men-and-women-in-college-completion/

National Institute of Health: PMC. “Breaking the Glass Ceiling: Structural, Cultural, and Organizational Barriers Preventing Women from Achieving Senior and Executive Positions.” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3544145/

National Institute of Health: PMC. “Higher education and high-wage gender inequality.” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10712336/

National Institute of Health: PMC. “Variation in the Relationship Between Education and Marriage: Marriage Market Mismatch?” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3340888/

Filed under: Uncategorized |