Background Promoting and improving STEM education is being driven by economic concerns as modern economies have a rising demand for qualified researchers, technicians, and other STEM professionals. In addition, women remain under-represented in STEM-related fields, with significant economic and societal consequences. Abundant research has shown that gendered pathways into and away from STEM are mediated through motivation, but there is paucity of knowledge regarding gendered patterns in high school students’ motivation profiles, especially in transdisciplinary domains like integrated STEM (iSTEM). This study addresses these gaps by examining the interconnection between patterns in motivation profiles towards integrated STEM (iSTEM), gender and STEM test scores. Results Using cluster analysis in a sample of N = 755 eighth grade students, we established four distinct motivation profiles. Subsequently, a multinomial logistic regression was performed to calculate predicted probabilities for cluster membership based on gender and test scores. Cluster distributions indicate significant differences based on gender and test score. Although our analysis shows no difference in average test scores, significant gender differences can be found in and between motivation profiles. For instance, girls are more likely to belong to a less favorable profile cluster than boys. In that cluster, girls have on average a significantly higher test score compared to boys, indicating a differential effect of motivation profiles. Conclusions The concept of motivational co-expression emphasizes a need for instructors to move past the simple high or low motivation labels, and toward an appraisal that recognizes how students adopt a complex interplay of motivation types. Moreover, the gender analyses raise questions about how we can move towards more equitable approaches.

Comparative judgment (CJ) has been recently introduced in the educational field as a means of assessing competences. In this judgement process, assessors are presented with two pieces of student work and are asked to choose which one is better in relation to the competencies being assessed. However, since student work is heterogeneous and highly information loaded, it raises the question as to whether this type of assessment is too complex for assessors to use. Previous research on the topic has operationalized experienced complexity by employing self-report measures, which have been criticized for common problems associated with their use. In our study, we used eye tracking to study 23 high school teachers when they made 10 comparative judgments, and their pupil diameter was used as an indicator of the experienced complexity. This study builds on previous research that integrated Campbell’s theory on task complexity (1988) into CJ. Based on this framework, three hypotheses regarding the role of decision accuracy were formulated and empirically tested. Hypothesis one assumes that the distance between two pieces of student work on the rank-order (rank-order distance) is negatively related to experienced complexity, irrespective of decision accuracy. Hypothesis two assumes that decision accuracy moderates the relationship between rank-order distance and experienced complexity. Hypothesis three builds on hypothesis two by adding a negative relationship between experience and experienced complexity. In all three hypotheses, the average experienced complexity is assumed to vary between assessors, as is the strength of the expected relationships. An information-theoretic approach was used to test the holding of all three hypotheses. All hypotheses were translated into statistical models, and their relative and absolute fit were assessed. Results provided strong evidence for hypothesis three: both the moderating role of decision accuracy on the relationship between rank-order distance and experienced complexity, and the relationship between experience and experienced complexity, were confirmed.