There’s no shortage in reports, studies, or documentation when it comes to women’s lack of participation in science, technology, engineer, and math (STEM) studies, but one thing that’s not understood is why female workers have a higher rate of employment in some STEM industries than others.
Researchers at the University of Washington (UW) took this issue on, comparing gender disparities across STEM fields. Their conclusion was three-fold, with all factors falling under the umbrella definition that these careers are seen as too “masculine” for women.
“There is widespread knowledge that women are underrepresented in STEM, but people tend to lump STEM fields together,” said lead author Sapna Cheryan, a UW associate professor of psychology. “This is one of the first attempts to really dig down into why women are more underrepresented in some STEM fields than others.”
The root of the issue appears to begin at the university level. Presently, women account for 37% of undergraduate STEM degrees; however, within this group, there are some severe differences when it comes to the STEM degree these women earn. For example, 40% receive a degree in mathematics, while just 18% pursue an education in computer science.
To understand this at a deeper level, the UW team looked at six of the largest science and engineering fields with the most undergraduate degrees: this includes biology, chemistry, and math, which have the greatest representation of females, and computer science, engineering, and physics, which have the largest gender gaps.
The researchers use more than 1,200 papers about women’s underrepresentation in STEM as a foundation for their research. From this data, they identified 10 recurring factors that impact gender differences in students’ interest and participation in STEM studies. From there, the list was sorted through and reduced to three key factors that most likely explain gender patterns when it comes to pursuing studies in the six aforementioned STEM fields. They are:
1) A lack of pre-college experience to that particular career;
2) A gender gap when it comes to belief in one’s abilities; and
3) A culture within these particular areas that discourages women from participating.
While the first two factors have more to do with the individual’s upbringing—that is, opportunities to be exposed to things like engineering, physics, and the computer sciences, along with a sense of self-worth and value, it’s the third factor that drew the team’s curiosity. The best description the team could come up with for culture in these fields is overtly “masculine”, and it was defined by three main aspects:
1) Stereotypes of the fields that are incompatible with how women perceive themselves;
2) Negative stereotypes about women’s abilities; and
3) A lack of role models for young females to look up to.
Altogether, these factors wind up decreasing women’s interest in a field by suggesting they simply do not belong.
The fact that more women wind up in biology, chemistry, and math can also be attributed to how the US high school system is set up. Courses in computer science, engineering, and physics are less likely to be offered in public schools, whereas courses in biology, chemistry, and mathematics are abundant. This leaves students with little-to-no information about what these fields are like, who is best suited for them, and the career opportunities that could be available.
Now, this is not to say that women don’t explore areas of study that they’re not exposed to in high school; after all, fields like nursing and social work are well represented with female employees. But if you couple the lack of exposure with a preconceived notion that they do not belong in a field like, say, electrical engineering, then the gender proportion of that field skews male.
“Students are basing their educational decisions in large part on their perceptions of a field,” Cheryan said. “And not having early experience with what a field is really like makes it more likely that they will rely on their stereotypes about that field and who is good at it.”
The team believes earlier exposure to these fields will only attract more females if it’s conveyed they belong in these fields as much as their male counterparts.
“If we're not providing students with a welcoming culture, these efforts are not likely to succeed,” Cheryan added.
Worth noting is that while the researchers began the study looking at women’s choices, they quickly realized that they also needed to look at men’s choices, too, to fully understand women’s under-representation in STEM fields. For example, the number of women graduating with computer science degrees has steadily declined over the last thirty years. This is due in large part to an influx of men entering the field rather than a drop in women’s participation. Historians attribute the increase in men’s interest in this field with the introduction of the personal computer, and the stereotype of the nerdy male computer genius that came with it.
“When we drilled down into the numbers, we realized that if we just looked at women, that wouldn't tell the whole story,” Cheryan said. “Underrepresentation is shaped just as much by what men are doing as by what women are doing.”
In conclusion, the team states that a more inclusive culture across all STEM fields will be the most effective approach to improving female participation among some of the lesser represented fields. This ranges from actively countering negative stereotypes about women’s abilities to making it clear everyone deserves the chance to succeed.
“Cultural change is never easy, but there are lots of examples of it being done successfully, and it translates into changing who's in a particular field,” Cheryan said.
Via the University of Washington
Advertisement
Learn more about Electronic Products Magazine
