Our understanding about the relationship between education and lifetime earnings often neglects differences by field of study. Utilizing data that match respondents in the Survey of Income and Program Participation to their longitudinal earnings records based on administrative tax information, we investigate the trajectories of annual earnings following the same individuals over 20 years and then estimate the long-term effects of field of study on earnings for U.S. men and women. Our results provide new evidence revealing large lifetime earnings gaps across fields of study. We show important differences in individuals’ earnings trajectories across different stages of the work life by field of study. In addition, the gaps in 40-year (i.e., ages 20 to 59) median lifetime earnings among college graduates by field of study are larger, in many instances, than the median gap between high school graduates and college graduates overall. We also find significant variation among graduate degree holders. Our results uncover important similarities and differences between men and women with regard to the long-term earnings differentials associated with field of study. In general, these findings underscore field of study as a critical dimension of horizontal stratification in educational attainment.

Being nonwhite, Asian Americans are an important case in understanding racial/ethnic inequality. Prior research has focused on native-born workers to reduce unobserved heterogeneity associated with immigrants. Native-born Asian American adults are concentrated, however, in areas with a high cost of living where wages tend to be higher. Regional location is thus said to inflate the wages of Asians. Given that many labor markets are national in scope with regional migration being common, current place of residence is unlikely to be a fully exogenous independent variable. We use two-stage least squares to estimate wage regression models in which the cost of living is endogenous because people with higher wages can afford to live in more expensive areas. The results fail to reject the hypothesis of no racial discrimination. Native-born Asian Americans seem to have overcome the disadvantage of being nonwhite in the labor market at least in regard to wages.

Recent studies by Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou claim that “hyper-selectivity” is the primary causal factor accounting for the high average educational attainment of second-generation Asian Americans. We critically assess hyper-selectivity, which has not been carefully evaluated in prior research. We argue that hyper-selectivity is inadequately conceptualized and is not clearly supported by data on immigration or income mobility. Hyper-selectivity ignores accumulated facts about Asian American family processes relating to cultural factors and educational attainment. Rather than being a class phenomenon, Asian cultural factors have important effects for most second-generation Asian Americans regardless of the socioeconomic status of their parents. Overemphasizing hyper-selectivity inadequately acknowledges the cultural heritage of Asian Americans and ignores the agency of immigrant Asian American families.