Is Entering STEM Socially Contagious? Contextual Factors in Women's Educational Decisions

• Autorzy: Alicja Zawistowska
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Despite the nonexistence of institutional obstacles, majors in science and mathematics continuously attract women to a greater extent than those in technology and engineering. Based on a series of in-depth interviews conducted with students of various STEM majors in an university and a polytechnic in the same city in Poland, this paper attempts to explore the reasons for this divergence. Analysis of the detailed biographical narrations reveals that the women's choice of male-dominated majors coincides with the presence of a significant role model (SRM) in the close social network. An SRM is an individual who is more experienced in a given domain and who has personal, lasting, and emotional contact with the decision-maker. The presence of an SRM was observed most often among female students of polytechnic, and was hardly observable among their university counterparts. The SRM provided various forms of support and information, and debunked discouraging stereotypes of male dominated majors. Furthermore, a long-lasting relationship with the SRM led to the development of a strong preference for polytechnics over universities. Those findings fit well with the explanations provided by the theory of social contagion. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Gender; Decision making; Higher education

PL

Płeć; Podejmowanie decyzji; Szkolnictwo wyższe

• Czasopismo: Polish Sociological Review
• Rocznik: 2017
• Numer: nr 1 (197)
• Strony: 51--66

Twórcy

autor

Alicja Zawistowska

• University of Białystok

Bibliografia

• Aschbacher, P., Li, E., and Roth, E. 2010. Is Science me? High School Students' Identities, Participation and Aspirations in Science, Engineering, and Medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47: 564-582.
• Betz, D. E., and Sekaquaptewa, D. 2012. My Fair Physicist? Feminine Math and Science Role Models Demotivate Young Girls. Social Psychological and Personality Science 00(0): 1-9
• Blickenstaff, J. C. 2005. Women and Science Careers: Leaky Pipeline or Gender Filter? Gender and Education 17(4): 369-386.
• Bourdieu, P., and Passeron, J-C. 1990. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. Sage Publication.
• Burt, R. S. 1987. Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence. American Journal of Sociology 92: 1287-1335.
• Burt, R. S. 2004. Structural Holes and Good Ideas. American Journal of Sociology 110(2): 349-99.
• Burt, R. S. 2005. Brokerage and Closure. An Introduction to Social Capital. Comparative Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Buschor, B. C., Berweger, S., Frei, A. K., and Kappler, C. 2013. Majoring in STEM-What Accounts for Women's Career Decision Making? A Mixed Methods Study. The Journal of Educational Research 107: 167-176.
• Buschor, B. C. 2014. I Want to be a Scientist/a Teacher: Students' Perceptions of Career Decision-making in Gender-typed, Non-traditional Areas of Work. Gender and Education 26(7): 743-758.
• Cech, E., Rubineau, B., Silbey, S., and Seron, C. 2011. Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering. American Sociological Review 76: 641-666.
• Charles, M. and Bradley, K. 2009. Indulging Our Gendered Selves? Sex Segregation by Field of Study in 44 Countries. American Journal of Sociology 114: 924-976.
• Cheryan, S., Siy, J., Vichayapai, M., Drury, B. and Kim, S. 2011. Do Female and Male Role Models Who Embody STEM Stereotypes Hinder Women's Anticipated Success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science 2: 656-664.
• Cheryan, S. 2011. Understanding the Paradox in Math-Related Fields: Why Do Some Gender Gaps Remain While Others Do Not? Sex Roles 66: 184-190.
• Christakis, N., and Fowler, J. 2007. The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years. New England Journal of Medicine 357: 370-379.
• Christakis, N., and Fowler, J. 2008. The Collective Dynamics of Smoking in a Large Social Network. New England Journal of Medicine 358: 2249-2258.
• Correll, S. J. 2001. Gender and the Career Choice Process: The Role of Biased Self-Assessments. American Journal of Sociology 106: 1691-1730.
• Dasgupta, N. 2011. Ingroup Experts and Peers as Social Vaccines Who Inoculate the Self-Concept: The Stereotype Inoculation Model. Psychological Inquiry 22: 231-246.
• Ecklund, E. H., Lincoln, A. E., & Tansey, C. 2012. Gender segregation in elite academic science. Gender & Society 26(5): 693-717.
• Główny Urząd Statystyczny. 1947. Rocznik statystyczny 1947 [Central Statistical Office Yearbook 1947]. Warsaw.
• Główny Urząd Statystyczny. 1956. Rocznik Statystyczny 1956 [Central Statistical Office Yearbook 1956]. Warsaw.
• Główny Urząd Statystyczny. 2014. Szkoły wyższe i ich finanse 2013 [Central Statistical Office. Higher Education Institution and their Finances]. Warsaw.
• Goyette, K., and Mullen, A. 2006. Who Studies the Arts and Sciences? Social Background and the Choice and Consequences of Undergraduate Field of Study. The Journal of Higher Education 77:497-538.
• Grudniewska, M., and Kondratek, B. 2012. Zróżnicowane funkcjonowanie zadań w egzaminach zewnętrznych w zależności od płci na przykładzie części matematyczno-przyrodniczej egzaminu gimnazjalnego. XVIII Conference of Educational Diagnostics, Wrocław: 188-198.
• Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., Levine, S. C., and Beilock, S. L. 2012. The Role of Parents and Teachers in the Development of Gender-Related Math Attitudes. Sex Roles 66: 153-166.
• Kobiety na Politechnikach. 2015. [Women On Technical Universities 2015]. Report of Perspecitives in Eduacation. March 2015.
• Kohn, M. L., and Slomczynski, K. M. 2006. Social Structure and Self-Direction: a Comparative Analysis of the United States and Poland. Warszawa: IFIS Publishers.
• Litzler, E., Samuelson, C., and Lorah, J. 2014. Breaking it Down: Engineering Student STEM Confidence at the Intersection of Race/Ethnicity and Gender. Research in Higher Education 55: 810-832.
• Lockwood, P., and Kunda, Y. 1997. Superstars and Me: Predicting the Impact of Role Models on the Self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73: 91-103.
• Markus, H., and Nurius, P. 1986. Possible Selves, American Psychologist 4: 954-969.
• OECD. 2014a. Are Boys and Girls Equally Prepared for Life? PISA, OECD Publishing.
• OECD. 2014b. PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do-Student Performance in Mathematics, Reading and Science. PISA, OECD Publishing.
• Riegle-Crumb, C., King, B., Grodsky, E., Muller, C. 2012. The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? Prior Achievement Fails to Explain Gender Inequality in Entry Into STEM College Majors Over Time. American Educational Research Journal 49: 1048-1073.
• Shapiro, J., and Williams, A. 2011. The Role of Stereotype Threats in Undermining Girls's and Women's Performance and Interest in STEM Fields. Sex Roles 66: 175-183.
• Sikora, J., and Pokropek, A. 2012. Gender Segregation of Adolescent Science Career Plans in 50 Countries. Science Education 96: 234-264.
• Smeding, A. 2012. Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): An Investigation of their Implicit Gender Stereotypes and Stereotypes' Connectedness to Math Performance. Sex Roles 67(11-12): 617-629.
• Smith, E. 2011. Women into Science and Engineering? Gendered Participation in Higher Education STEM Subjects. British Educational Research Journal 37: 993-1014.
• Stout, J., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., and McManus, M. 2011. STEMing the tide: Using Ingroup Experts to Inoculate Women's Self-Concept in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100: 255-270.