Science Behind Choice
The interwoven nature of today's societies are becoming far more complex than ever before. Accompanying this phenomenon is the evolution of innovation, led in particular by the scientific, technological, and mathematical fields. Demands for a greater understanding of the natural and human-made world increases daily, thus requiring a larger population to engage and contribute unto working towards our long-term future.
SCIENCE BEHIND CHOICE
In the workforce, there is a vast disproportion of women in S.T.E.M. in comparison to men's. In North America, women have a right to pursue careers in such an industry, but they generally choose not to. How might this be explained? Is there a possibility that females are just not interested in a STEM career?
“Understanding why women and men graduate with different majors is critical for understanding later occupational opportunities and other choices that can influence the gender wage gap,” the researchers from National Bureau of Economic Research write. In fact, the brain of the male sex differs to that of a female, particularly in what concerns grey and white matter. Some believe that, in turn, this is the cause of disproportion in post-secondary education interests between genders. While neither sex is genetically more intelligent, there are a few significant differences to take into account. On average, girls hold similar cognitive strengths and weaknesses; they perform better than their male counterparts on tests that rely on verbal skills, particularly writing, as well as some tests involving memory and perceptual speed (Hedges & Nowell, 1995; Kimura, 2002; Halpern, Aronson, et al., 2007). The same concept holds true for boys; however, their strengths are generally situated within tasks using spatial orientation and visualization skills. The largest gender gap skill has been found to be in the area of 'spatial skills and specifically on measures of mental rotation', where boys consistently outscore girls. (Linn & Petersen, 1985; Voyer et
al., 1995) Spatial skills are considered important by some in order to attain success in the STEM field, but can be developed with training. (Baenninger & Newcombe, 1989; Vasta et al., 1996) These results have been suggested by the research conducted, but they do not hold true for every female and every male, simply general statements involving neuropsychology that may help further our understanding of the gender disproportion within the STEM field.
Research that contradicts the suggestions made by cognitive brain differences - demonstrating that there are other factors at play.
PREJUDISM & SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS
Contrary to popular belief stating that the abandonment of careers typically associated with high levels of academia by females are caused in nature by biological inequalities between the sexes (as suggested by Lawrence Summers, president of Harvard in 2005) there are, in fact, factors of prejudice, bias and oppression to consider. While large improvements to the industry have been made in relation to percentage of women enrolled in said programs, there still exists a significant gender disproportion, which is in part caused by the general perception of women in STEM. Of all physics professors in the United States, only 14 percent are women. Astrophysicist Meg Urry argues women are abandoning STEM professions due to the “slow drumbeat of being under-appreciated, feeling uncomfortable and encountering roadblocks along the path to success. The constant isolation, recurring statement that said woman is 'not good enough' is constant validation which leads her to believe that she is not excelling in this specific career. Grades and academic ability contradict this claim, as women and men do not have large variation in test scores (see graph below). Although boys’ scores remain consistently above the average grades of girls’, there are other factors to consider. Research illustrates a girl’s confidence in regards to belief of academic success within STEM subjects is found to plummet post-middle school, affecting scores in high school and choices of post-secondary education. Based on the graph, 29 percent of all male freshman planned to major in a STEM program, in comparison to 15 percent of all female freshmen in 2006 (National Science Foundation, 2009b). The omission of those planning to major in biological sciences further highlight the gender disparity. Over 20 percent of male freshman had plans to major engineering, computer science, or the physical sciences, against only about 5 percent of female freshmen (ibid.).
One of the many factors which make career fields appealing to some is their belief in ability to succeed in that occupation. (Eccles [Parsons] et al., 1983; Correll, 2004; Eccles, 2006) Girls and women are found to hold themselves to a higher standard in subjects such as math and science, possibly believing themselves to be mediocre, where as boys maintaining identical grades might consider themselves to excel. (Shelley Correll) In consequence, girls are suggested to be less likely to believe themselves capable of success in a STEM field. Hartung et al. (2005) conducted a review in which they found that children, particularly young girls, develop mental limitations based on gender roles where they cannot pursue particular occupations, due to their belief in society’s perception of the career deemed ‘inappropriate’ for their gender.
In addition, ability to succeed in the STEM field is not predeterminate based on one’s mathematical ability. Research by Weinberger (2005) revealed that the industry was not populated by the highest-scoring math students of their generation, regardless of gender. The number of college-educated white men who entered the engineering, mathematical, computer science, and physical workforce who scored higher than 650 on their SAT math examination was less than one third. So, where are the STEM workers? In fact, more than one third of them scored below 550, which is the math score of the average humanities major. A connection exists between mathematical ability and post-secondary education within the STEM field, however past achievement and recognition in the mathematical subject area is not determinate for success in a future STEM career.
​
For example, Eileen Pollack, a Yale graduate, hosted a tea where women were invited to discuss their personal experiences studying in a male-dominated field. This particular topic became of interest to her since "the boys in my introductory physics class, who had taken far more rigorous math and science classes in high school, yawned as our professor sped through the material, while I grew panicked at how little I understood. The only woman in the room, I debated whether to raise my hand and expose myself to ridicule, thereby losing track of the lecture and falling further behind." Numerous women and men made an appearance, sharing personal anecdotes with prejudice and others deeming them incapable of certain tasks, simply due to their gender.
It was found that teachers were often the ones to discourage participation, not holding the girls to the same standards as their male counterparts. One women stated that her physics teacher proclaimed that boys would be graded on the “boy curve,” while the only girl taking that class would be graded alternatively on the “girl curve”; when asked why, the teacher explained that he couldn’t reasonably expect a girl to compete in physics on equal terms with boys (Pollack, New York Times). However, those who were not able to relate to these experiences were those who had attended or were currently enrolled in single-sex schools or were from foreign countries, suggesting that the issue originates from our culture's societal expectations. In America, men cannot differentiate a woman's sexual identity with their 'scientific' identity. This theory is reaffirmed with media exposure, through television programmes and films. The representation of females in video games is extremely limited; on the occasion that they are present they are found to be hypersexualized, portrayed in a demeaning manner or as a sidekick, thus non-verbally causing women to feel unwelcome in said environment.
At the Solvay Conference on Physics in 1927, the only woman in attendance was Marie Curie (bottom row, third from left).
Credit: Mondadori Portfolio, via Getty Images from article published by the New York Times
"I graduated summa cum laude, with honours in the major, but I didn’t go into physics as a career. At the end of four years, I was exhausted by all the lonely hours I spent catching up to my classmates, hiding my insecurities, struggling to do my problem sets while the boys worked in teams to finish theirs. I was tired of dressing one way to be taken seriously as a scientist while dressing another to feel feminine."
EILEEN POLLACK
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Not only is it important to understand that the disproportion starts increasing as soon as students transition into high school, but it is vital to comprehend how this later affects career choice. It has been found that many of the few women who choose to study a STEM subject do not opt for a career in the same industry, often discouraged by their environment of peers, mentors, and lack of a support system. "The socialisation of women away from STEM is a behaviour pattern that deprives the world of greatness" (Kat Bloomfield). There are a significant number of men who, working in the STEM field themselves, do not believe in the gender bias presented in evidence through research. For women, little to no amounts of same-sex peers and prejudism about the relationship between gender and STEM ability don’t help. “If everyone expects you to do worse and people don’t look like you, it’s discouraging,” says Shulamit Kahn, a professor in the
​
Questrom School of Business at Boston University who studies gender gaps in the STEM workforce. (Kuo, Science Magazine) The nonexistence of faith and confidence of an adult figure, mentor, teacher or professor in a women wishing to pursue STEM has long-term effects on their future career development, as illustrated with the diagram to the right.
WHAT CAN MEN DO ABOUT THE INEQUALITY?
There are numerous, concrete ways in which men can take on the role of effective allies in order to empower women and promote gender equity. Dr. Bastian Greshake Tzovaras offers some of these through extracts from the work “Championing the Success of Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths, and Medicine.”
Why am I, a man in STEM, writing about this? Because to me these statistics also show another thing: men, who are dominating these fields, have an obligation to support women in STEM and help level the playing field. But how can men help to facilitate change and support women in STEM? All the things I try to implement are the result of listening to women – who sacrificed their spare time to educate me – and taking their advice. Thus, maybe the single best, most actionable thing is this: step back, shut up, give women space, and listen to them.
What can this look like on a more concrete level? Ask yourself about your own environments: is it men, including me, who are taking up all the airtime at meetings? Chances are that this is the case, as women are interrupted more often than men and speak significantly less at professional meetings. So take a break and let others speak. To whom are you paying attention? Is it the always same male crowd? For social media some tools let you check the gender breakdown of the people you read. Make sure to identify those voices you’ve ignored so far and listen to them. Along the same lines, ask to whom you are giving an audience. Make sure also to boost the messages of women instead of only focusing on your (male) buddies. Generally, the male overrepresentation in STEM means you’re likely to default to male perspectives. Make sure to steer actively against this.
Source: www.womeninstem.net
SCIENCE IS LOGICALLY BEAUTIFUL, AND THERE IS NO REASON WHY A HUMAN WOULD NOT BE DRAWN TO IT, BE IT A FEMALE OR MALE.
Amanpreet Kaur,
Graduate Student and Teaching Assistant, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Clemson University
