Trends in gender segregation in the choice of science and engineering majors
Introduction
Women now surpass men in college completion (Buchmann and DiPrete, 2006, DiPrete and Buchmann, 2013) and attain bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees at rates that exceed those of men (Snyder and Dillow, 2010). Yet horizontal gender segregation in fields of study, which had decreased somewhat in the 1970s and 1980s, has been stagnant for the past 20 years (Alon and Gelbgiser, 2011, Charles and Bradley, 2002). In particular, the literature has emphasized the slow gender integration in the pursuit of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors (Turner and Bowen, 1999, Xie and Shauman, 2003). Given concerns about an undersupply of STEM graduates and a continuing gap in wages between male and female college graduates, the female shortfall in the pursuit of STEM majors is an important social policy issue (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2012, Xie and Killewald, 2012).
Recent evidence could support an impression that the gender gap in the attainment of STEM bachelor’s degrees is narrowing. Although only 25% of STEM bachelor’s degrees were awarded to women in 1977, women received 40% of STEM bachelor’s degrees as of 2000 and, as Fig. 1 shows, they continue to receive STEM bachelor’s degrees in increasing numbers.
Aggregate data about the share of STEM degrees by gender, however, conceal several related trends. First, more women than men enroll in higher education and receive bachelor’s degrees, and the female lead has increased since women achieved parity in the number of bachelor’s degrees in 1982. Yet, women continue to prefer non-STEM degrees to STEM degrees; the increased share of STEM degrees awarded to women coexists with a continuing disproportionate female preference for non-STEM majors.1 Second, the number of male students receiving STEM degrees has oscillated since 1980; the number of male STEM degrees decreased noticeably in the late 1980s before rising again in the 2000s.2 The male trend suggests that there are external factors bearing on the attractiveness of STEM majors. Third, the biological sciences became more popular in the early 1990s for both males and females.3 During the past two decades, women who choose STEM majors disproportionately pursue biological science degrees. The combined consequence of these trends is that the share of biological science degrees awarded to women has increased from 40% to 60% over the last 30 years. At the same time, however, the shares of physical science and engineering degrees awarded to women have fallen in the last decade. The gender disparity is sharpest in engineering, where the share of degrees awarded to women has never reached 25%. In other words, any female advantage in STEM degrees is confined to the biological sciences; the male advantage persists in the physical sciences and engineering (at least in aggregate) (Fig. 1).4
Numerous theories have been proposed for the high and continuing levels of gender segregation, but research has not systematically examined the extent to which these theories for the gender gap are consistent with actual trends. The question that motivates our study is how the gender gap in STEM fields of study has remained relatively stable in the face of both the changing gender distribution in higher education enrollment and trends in gender-specific factors that bear directly on the attractiveness of STEM fields of study, including especially test scores, life goals, expectations about work–family compatibility, and desires for extrinsic or intrinsic satisfaction. To address this question, we revisit arguments from prior research to see how they hold up to different analytical strategies with better and more recent data. Turner and Bowen (1999) analyzed the College and Beyond data (which are drawn from 12 elite colleges and universities), and attributed between one-third and one-half of the gender gap in STEM majors in 1989 to a gender discrepancy in SAT test scores, with even larger effects in preceding years. Using nationally representative data, a more inclusive set of test score measures, as well as a more robust set of math performance measures, we find, in contrast, that gender differences in math performance explain only a small fraction of the gap and play even less of a role in accounting for gender-specific trends in the pursuit of STEM majors. Second, using survey questions about twelfth graders’ life goals, we find that gender differences in life goals contribute little to understanding the disparity in fields of study (Hakim, 2002, Shu and Marini, 1998). We then present a set of counterfactual analyses to demonstrate the continuing and substantial role of preferences (net of test scores) in predicting the major choices of women and men and how these changing preferences are greatly increasing the number of women in STEM fields but in the direction of biological sciences, not physical sciences or engineering. Finally, we develop a relatively unexplored and potentially promising explanation for the continuing gender gap in STEM majors, namely, that women and men in 4-year colleges differ in the way they link college majors to post-bachelor training, occupations, and their broader educational goals while in school. We find support for our hypothesis by examining gender differences in career aspirations, in course-taking patterns, and in the distribution of majors among the set of students who apply to law school or medical school. These results suggest that there are important consequences for choices of major in the constraints associated with majors such as engineering that limit curricular flexibility during the undergraduate years.
Section snippets
Trends in gender segregation in fields of study
The literature on gender and higher education has documented a substantial decline in gender segregation in fields of study through the 1970s, followed by a period in the 1980s in which the declines subsided (Barone, 2011, Bradley, 2000, England and Li, 2006, Jacobs, 1989b, Jacobs, 1995, Jacobs, 1996, Turner and Bowen, 1999). Much of the decrease in gender segregation was attributed to progress during the 1960s and 1970s toward gender parity in the fields of education and business. The reasons
Explanations for gender segregation in fields of study
Much of the earlier decrease in gender segregation (shown in Fig. 2) has been attributed to improved opportunities for women in the labor market and consequent changes in the attractiveness of particular majors. The growing opportunities for women in the labor market would suggest comparable progress in gender integration in fields of study. Thus, even in engineering, which is the most segregated STEM field, women made steady progress until recently: the number of engineering and computer
Data and methods
To evaluate the contributions that mathematics performance and life goals have made to the persisting gender gap in STEM fields over the past 40 years, we use data from four NCES (National Center for Education Statistics) longitudinal surveys conducted since 1972. Collectively, the studies permit us to analyze and compare the educational pathways of high school students who graduated in the spring of 1972, 1982, 1992, and 2004. The oldest, the National Longitudinal Study of the High School Class
Decomposition of the gender gap in STEM majors
A widely discussed determinant of college field of study is math ability. While gender differences in average math test scores have always been small and have converged in recent decades (Hyde et al., 2008, National Center for Education Statistics, 2010), males at all relevant times have received a disproportionate share of the very best math scores. Yet if the relative scarcity of women with high math achievement were the primary cause of the gender gap in the STEM fields, we would expect the
Competition among majors and the gender gap
Taken together, the preceding analyses establish that preferences (what we earlier referred to as “preferences, all things considered”) are important – both in the form of preference for biological sciences compared with physical sciences and engineering, and preferences for STEM majors compared to non-STEM majors. One obvious possibility – though difficult to assess empirically – is that the female preference for non-STEM majors or non-physical science majors within the STEM group arises not
Discussion
Although women have closed much of the gender gap in the pursuit of STEM majors in the last 30 years, their progress has been uneven outside of the biological sciences. Despite some moderate success in chemistry and mathematics, the share of women obtaining math and physical science degrees is not markedly higher than it was 30 years ago. Moreover, women have made virtually no progress in engineering fields since the mid 1990s, and they earn fewer degrees in engineering than they do in the
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge helpful comments by Jill Bowdon, Claudia Buchmann, Joscha Legewie, and Anne McDaniel. This project was supported by Award Number R01EB010584 from the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not reflect the official views of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering or the National Institutes of Health.
References (76)
- et al.
The female advantage in college academic achievements and horizontal sex segregation
Social Science Research
(2011) - et al.
Gender differences in the structure of interests
Journal of Vocational Behavior
(1993) Occupational sex segregation and the earnings of occupations: what causes the link among college-educated workers?
Social Science Research
(2006)Are there sex differences in the utilization of educational capital among college-educated workers?
Social Science Research
(2009)- et al.
Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: a 30-year examination
Intelligence
(2010) - et al.
Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses
(2011) Women and men go to university: mathematical background and gender differences in choice of field in higher education
Sex Roles
(2003)Some things never change: gender segregation in higher education across eight nations and three decades
Sociology of Education
(2011)- et al.
Gender and values
American Sociological Review
(1995) The gender income gap and the role of education
Sociology of Education
(2007)
High-ability women and men in undergraduate mathematics and chemistry courses
American Educational Research Journal
The Changing Face of Medicine: Women Doctors and the Evolution of Health Care in America
The incorporation of women into higher education: paradoxical outcomes?
Sociology of Education
Sex differences in occupational values
Sex Roles
The growing female advantage in college completion: the role of family background and academic achievement
American Sociological Review
Direct and indirect effects in a logit model
Stata Journal
STEM Report
Sex differences in math-intensive fields
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Women’s underrepresentation in science: sociocultural and biological considerations
Psychological Bulletin
A world of difference: international trends in women’s economic status
Annual Review of Sociology
Equal but separate? A cross-national study of sex segregation in higher education
American Sociological Review
Indulging our gendered selves? Sex segregation by field of study in 44 countries
American Journal of Sociology
Models for describing the underlying structure of sex segregation
American Journal of Sociology
Impact of trends in primary, secondary, and postsecondary education on applications to medical school. I: gender considerations
Academic Medicine
Gender and the career choice process: the role of biased self-assessments
American Journal of Sociology
Constraints into preferences: gender, status, and emerging career aspirations
American Sociological Review
The end of the gender revolution? Gender role attitudes from 1977 to 2008
American Journal of Sociology
Fields of study, college selectivity, and student inequalities in higher education
Social Forces
The Rise of Women: The Growing Gender Gap in Education and What it Means for American Schools
Where are all the women? Gender differences in participation in physical science and engineering
Sex roles, socialization, and occupational behavior
The gender gap in secondary school mathematics at high achievement levels: evidence from the American mathematics competitions
Journal of Economic Perspectives
Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: a meta-analysis
Psychological Bulletin
Gender inequality in labor markets: the role of motherhood and segregation
Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society
The gender revolution: uneven and stalled
Gender and Society
Desegregation stalled: the changing gender composition of college majors, 1971–2002
Gender and Society
An extension of the Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition technique to logit and probit models
Journal of Economic and Social Measurement
Education and occupational sex segregation: the decision to major in engineering
Sociological Quarterly
Cited by (157)
The disjunction between evolutionary psychology and sex-discrimination law and policy
2023, Evolution and Human BehaviorGender and/or Religiosity? – Intersectional approach to the challenges of religious women in STEM fields
2023, International Journal of Educational DevelopmentParental and sibling influence on study field choice: Gender-stereotypical or field preference transmission
2022, Journal of Asian Economics