Perceptions of the Social Relevance of Science: Exploring the Implications for Gendered Patterns in Expectations of Majoring in STEM Fields

Abstract

Despite efforts to increase participation in science, technology, engineering and math fields (STEM), the role of students' perceptions of the social relevance of science in guiding their expectations to major in STEM remains largely unexplored. Though science education scholars predict that perceptions of social relevance likely matter equally for boys and girls, gender scholars suggest that these perceptions should matter more for girls than boys. Using longitudinal data from a large, urban, low-income, and predominantly minority-serving district, this study examines the potentially gendered role of perceptions of social relevance in ninth graders' expectations to major in STEM. Further, it examines these dynamics with respect to expectations to major in any STEM field as well as expectations to major in specific STEM fields. Findings largely support the perspective of gender scholars; perceptions of the social relevance of science positively and significantly predict female, but not male, students' intentions to major in STEM (vs. non-STEM fields). Subsequent analyses that look at intentions to major in specific STEM fields reveal a similar pattern, such that perceptions of relevance positively predict female students' intentions to major in the biological sciences, the physical sciences, and engineering, while male students' intentions are not similarly impacted. By contrast, positive perceptions of the relevance of science predict a modest increase in interest in computer science for both boys and girls.

Pipeline Dreams: Occupational Plans and Gender Differences in STEM Major Persistence and Completion

“…Our results also suggest that to reduce gender differences in STEM major persistence and completion, we do not need to boost young women’s math tests scores or confidence in their math ability as much as we need to entice more women to plan to enter science-related occupations. Some of this may be accomplished by exposing more girls and young women to occupations in STEM, female role models in STEM, or the social or environmental relevance of STEM occupations (Blanchard Kyte and Reigle-Crumb 2017; Cheryan, Master, and Meltzoff 2015; Gelbgiser and Albert 2018). At the same time, such interventions are unlikely to eliminate gender differences in STEM-related occupational plans.…”

Discovery Orientation, Cognitive Schemas, and Disparities in Science Identity in Early Adolescence

“…Thus, in countries where inequalities in science participation remain pervasive, many researchers have begun to focus on early science experiences in classrooms, in informal settings, and at home, to better understand how science identities are formed (Archer et al 2010; Barton et al 2013; Brickhouse, Lowery, and Schultz 2000; Carlone, Scott, and Lowder 2014; DeWitt, Archer, and Osborne 2013; Tan et al 2013; Wong 2016). Science identities are shaped by social processes that include science interest, perceived science ability/performance/competence, science recognition, and science reflected appraisal (Blanchard Kyte and Riegle-Crumb 2017; Brickhouse et al 2000; Carlone and Johnson 2007; Cribbs et al 2015; Hazari, Sadler, and Sonnert 2013). In addition, youth who see science as important to their lives, their future career prospects, and to society as a whole have higher science identities than youth who do not (Archer et al 2015; Bennett and Hogarth 2009).…”

‘Different isn’t free’: Gender @ work in a digital world

“…The public perception that CSE is detached from social engagement and lacking communal purpose also deters women from entering and persisting in the field (Cheryan et al., 2017; Cech, 2013, 2014; Diekman et al., 2010, 2016). Feminist science and technology studies (FSTS) finds similar connections between altruism, computing, and women (Blanchard Kyte and Riegle-Crumb, 2017; Litchfield and Javernick-Will, 2015; Garibay, 2015; Hacker, 1981; Faulkner, 2000a, 2000b; Cuny and Aspray, 2001; Margolis and Fisher, 2002). Furthermore, FSTS scholarship illuminates how gender troubles in computing are reproduced via cultural schemas, chilly climate, and the historical, interpersonal dimensions of sexism in science (Wylie, 2012; Valian, 1999; Sandler and Hall, 1986; Harding, 1991; Schiebinger, 1999).…”