You are here:

Gendered choices of STEM subjects for matriculation are not driven by prior differences in mathematical achievement
ARTICLE

, School of Economics and Business Administration, Israel ; , Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Australia

Economics of Education Review Volume 64, Number 1, ISSN 0272-7757 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

Women's under-representation in high-paying jobs in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) mirrors their earlier choices of matriculation electives: male students favour physics, information technology and advanced mathematics; female students favour life sciences. ‘Pipeline’ theories attribute these patterns to a male advantage in mathematics, but our longitudinal analysis, using administrative data on a full cohort of students in Victoria, Australia, shows that these patterns remain intact after conditioning on prior achievement. Female students require stronger prior signals of mathematical ability to choose male-dominated subjects, and when choosing these subjects earn higher average scores than males, suggesting a possible loss of efficiency. Previous research has shown that socio-economic disadvantage adversely affects boys more than girls, and indeed we find less of a male advantage in physics and advanced mathematics among socially disadvantaged students. We find that students with a language background other than English choose STEM fields with greater frequency than other students, reflecting their comparative advantage, while exhibiting more markedly gendered subject choices, indicating a role for cultural factors. Finally, we find significantly less gender streaming in STEM subjects among female students in all-girl schools than in co-educational schools, but no such difference for male students.

Citation

Justman, M. & Méndez, S.J. (2018). Gendered choices of STEM subjects for matriculation are not driven by prior differences in mathematical achievement. Economics of Education Review, 64(1), 282-297. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved January 19, 2020 from .

This record was imported from Economics of Education Review on March 1, 2019. Economics of Education Review is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.02.002

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References