1. 1
AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE “LEAKY” STEM PIPELINE: THE ROLE OF PARENTS AND
EDUCATORS IN THE REMOVAL OF GIRLS FROM PATHWAYS TO CAREERS IN STEM
By
Kasmira Burki
Advised by
Dr. Liz Johnston
SOC 461, 462
Senior Project
Social Sciences Department
College of Liberal Arts
CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY
Spring, 2016

2. 2
Table of Contents
RESEARCH PROPOSAL……………………………………………………………………..4
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………….6
OUTLINE……………………………………………………………………………………....12
TEXT…………………………………………………………………………………………....17
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………....17
A History of Women in STEM Fields…………………………………………..18
The Current Status of Women in STEM………………………………………..19
Significance of the Underrepresentation of Women in STEM………………….20
Comparative Incomes Among STEM and Non-STEM Women………….21
Single Mothers and the Poverty Line……………………………………21
Women and Scientific Research…………………………………………22
LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………………………………………………24
Parents…………………………………………………………………………..24
Gender Stereotypes and Assessment of Children’s Abilities……………25
Differing Parental Encouragement of STEM Interests in Daughters and
Sons……………………………………………………………………...26
Teachers…………………………………………………………………………28
9 Assessments of Student Ability by Gender ...............................................29
Teacher-Pupil Interactions by Gender………………………………….29
Elementary and Middle School…………………………………………………32
Elementary School Experiences…………………………………………32
Middle School Experiences……………………………………………...33

3. 3
High School……………….………………………………………………….36
The Stability of Career Interests in High School…………………….36
Advanced Placement Math and Science by Gender…………………38
Discussion……………….…………………………………………………..40
The STEM Pipeline as a Birdcage…………………………………..40
Suggestions……………….………………………………………………....42
Roominate: A Bottom-Up Solution………………………………….43
Conclusion……………….………………………………………………….44
WORKS CITED…………………………………………………………………………...48

4. 4
Research Proposal
The purpose of this research project is to offer a multi-faceted explanation for the lack of
women in STEM-related fields, while focusing specifically on barriers to entry that women face
during their high school years in math and science courses. External contributory factors, such as
gender based teacher-pupil interactions, parental encouragement, participation in appropriate
math and science college preparatory courses, and widespread gender stereotypes about abilities
in math and science will be the focus of the research- as these all combine to create a
multidimensional set of barriers which prevent women from persisting in math and science.
In order to provide evidence for the aforementioned barriers to entering STEM fields, I
will use a combination of scholarly articles and secondary statistical data from academic and
government sources. These will be utilized to illustrate the stark differences in the numbers of
females and males employed in STEM fields, as well as to provide context for why these
differences exist. Each piece of research will serve as one dimension in the set of barriers that
ultimately combine to obstruct women in their pursuit of a technical career.
As a means to demonstrate the ubiquitous nature of gender stereotypes and their
application to women’s discouragement from pursuing careers in STEM-related industries, this
research project will re-adapt Marilyn Frye’s birdcage metaphor of oppression. The idea of a
“cage” of barriers will help to illustrate the point that women are met with not just a few, but
many interlocking circumstances that frustrate their efforts to persevere in STEM- and that these
adverse conditions go largely unrecognized unless they are looked at through a macroscopic
lens. For the purposes of this project, barriers to STEM field entry will be examined individually
at the high school level, and then analyzed as a whole to understand how they work in
conjunction.

5. 5
Given Erik Erikson’s and James Marcia’s work on adolescent identity and psychosocial
development, high school is widely believed to be the turning point for important career
decisions. It is for this reason that this paper will focus mainly on the high school experience,
although elementary and middle school hindrances that contribute to the loss of women in STEM
will also be explored as a way to provide a complete picture of what researchers have called the
“STEM educational pipeline”. This pipeline is a focus of research not only for academics in the
math and sciences attempting to promote STEM education for women, but also for the field of
sociology as a whole. Research on women in STEM is relevant to the social sciences in that it
recognizes the disadvantages that women still face in modern educational institutions. With this
comprehensive analysis, I hope to investigate the implementation of a more multilayered
approach to increasing women’s participation in STEM in my future career- one that matches the
multidimensional structure of barriers that women currently face in continuing their education in
math and science.

6. 6
Annotated Bibliography
1. Casserly, P. L., & Rock, D. (1985). Factors related to young women's persistence and
achievement in advanced placement mathematics. Women and mathematics: Balancing
the equation, 225-247.
This article’s purpose was to identify the various school-related components that
influence female’s participation, performance, and dedication in Advanced Placement
mathematics programs. A symbolic interactionist and feminist perspective best describes both
authors’ theoretical intentions, as they acknowledge the gendered inequality in access to
academics and work in STEM. The study utilized participants from eight different high schools
across six different states, administering questionnaires to students in both Honors mathematics
and AP calculus courses. Interviews were also conducted, with responses from several AP
mathematics teachers and one guidance counselor. Path analysis was used to examine results
from the questionnaires and interview records, and found several statistically significant
relationships between variables. The study found that: AP mathematics teachers are influential in
instilling confidence in students, males are more likely to blame mathematical difficulties on
external factors, while females are more likely to believe their struggles are due to their intrinsic
characteristics. Mother’s education and paternal support is correlated with more liberal views of
gender, and that career goals for women are significantly related to encouragement from other
adult role models. These findings illustrate the importance of teacher-pupil interactions in math
classrooms- a factor noted in my thesis as being part of the “birdcage” that keeps capable women
out of STEM fields. This study could benefit from a more detailed analysis of the relationship
between math teachers and female vs. male students. Qualitative research examining frequency
of interactions, encouragement, and mentoring could provide further insight into how AP
mathematics teachers influence student motivation.
(Word count: 250)
2. Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, A. B., & Williams, C. C. (2008). Gender
similarities characterize math performance. Science,321(5888), 494-495.
This research article examined gender differences and similarities in standardized
mathematics performance, examining specifically whether significant differences exist between
boys and girls’ complex problem solving abilities. This analysis was the result of several meta-
analytic findings in 1990 that found significant differences in complex problem solving abilities
between boys and girls in high school (males’ scores were significantly higher than female’s). A
conflict perspective is used intermittently to pose questions that challenge past research. To
investigate whether there still exists a disparity in complex problem solving abilities between
males and females, the authors consulted test scoring data from ten different state departments of
education. Effect sizes for gender differences in all ten states were non-significant- no gender
differences were found between standardized math scores. In order to further clarify whether
complex problem solving differences exist by gender, the authors coded standardized test items
by four levels of difficulty. Analysis of test questions from state performance exams revealed
that questions requiring complex problem solving abilities (difficulty levels 3-4), were almost
nonexistent in the exams. Consequently, NAEP data was consulted, where a significant number
of level three problems were found. Gender differences did exist (males had slightly higher
scores), but effect sizes were too small to explain the issue of low female participation in STEM

7. 7
fields. This is relevant in that it challenges widely held gender stereotypes about boys and girl’s
relative mathematical abilities. Limitations of the study include the lack of availability of data on
complex problem solving scores from standardized tests.
(Word count: 250)
3. Jacobs, J. E., & Bleeker, M. M. (2004). Girls' and boys' developing interests in math and
science: Do parents matter?. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development,
2004(106), 5-21.
This article’s purpose was to analyze the relationship between parent’s promotion of
math and science, and children’s attitudes and achievement in math and science. The effect of
parental socialization was also studied- specifically examined were toys purchased and the types
of activities children were encouraged to participate in. The Eccles-Parsons theoretical model of
parental socialization was used, evidenced by the authors’ hypothesis that parent-child
interactions would have an effect on children’s valuation of math and science. Data used was
sourced from the Childhood and Beyond study, a longitudinal analysis of how children come to
perceive themselves. Questionnaires were distributed each year to parents and their children, in
order to track patterns or differences in the student’s perceptions of math and science. The study
found that traditional gender stereotypes have an effect on how parents stimulate math and
science interest in their sons and daughters. Mothers were more likely to purchase math and
science related toys for their sons, and both mothers and fathers were more likely to be directly
involved in their daughter’s math and science-related activities than their sons. This is relevant to
the topic of barriers for girls entering STEM fields because it illustrates the cumulative
disadvantages that females incur throughout their lives. This study is limited in that it does not
examine whether parent’s differing promotion of math and science is related primarily to their
children’s differing interests. The results from the study could simply be reactions to cues that
children give to their parents.
(Word count: 248)
4. Milgram, D. (2011). How to Recruit Women and Girls to the Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math (STEM) Classroom. Technology and engineering teacher, 71(3),
4-11.
The purpose of this article was to investigate possible recruitment methods for attracting
girls to STEM-related fields. The author uses a symbolic interactionist perspective in order to
illustrate the importance of encouraging positive math and science identities in women and girls.
Statistics were pulled from the U.S. Department of Labor, and from several other research
articles specific to each suggested recruitment tactic. The author, who is the founder of the
Institute for Women in Trades, Technology and Science (IWITTS) (a national nonprofit)
recommends ten different strategies that are likely to grow the numbers of girls in STEM
classrooms. Among these are: appealing to female’s interests when advertising STEM careers
(ex. how STEM fields can be used to help others), holding female-specific STEM career fairs,
instructors directly encouraging girls to pursue STEM careers, and using recruitment materials
that feature female role models in STEM. One of the most significant findings was that it is
highly beneficial for women and girls to repeatedly receive the message that careers in STEM
are compatible with having a personal life. These proposed recruitment tactics serve as practical
solutions for combating the disadvantaging effects of traditional gender stereotypes about STEM

8. 8
ability on women. Though the article does design some of its recruitment strategies to appeal to
stereotypically feminine interests (ex. using the color pink on recruitment flyers or materials),
these strategies are supported by research, and provide top-down solutions for the lack of female
participation in STEM fields.
(Word count: 243)
5. Moore, G. W., & Slate, J. R. (2008). Who's taking the Advanced Placement courses and how
are they doing: A statewide two-year study. The High School Journal, 92(1), 56-67.
This study used data from all public high school students in Texas enrolled in AP
courses, and examined whether gender and ethnicity interact with students’ decisions to enroll in
and successfully complete AP courses. A conflict perspective is used to examine these
differences. The study gathered data from the Texas Education Agency's Academic Excellence
Indicator System database. Using statistics from 2004-2006, the authors conducted dependent
samples t-tests to compare performance in AP courses between males and females. For both
years, enrollment in AP courses was higher for females. Males had higher success/achievement
rates than females in their AP courses, though the effect size (Cohen’s) for these results was
small. Findings from the College Board (2007) also revealed that females enroll in the language,
literacy, and history classes in higher percentages than males, and that more male students enroll
in math and science courses. Thus, females are less likely to enroll in STEM preparatory courses,
and they are less likely than males to successfully complete their courses if they do choose to
take AP math and science. This article only analyzes data from school districts in Texas -- a state
that tends to be politically conservative. Traditional gender roles are commonly associated with
political conservatism, and beliefs like these may indicate that Texas families are less likely to
support their daughters’ interest in male-dominated fields. This confounding variable may have
skewed results in favor of the authors’ hypotheses. Therefore, the study is not generalizable to
the greater U.S. population.
(Word count: 249)
6. Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students in
science and mathematics. Review of research in education, 16, 153-222.
This comprehensive article analyzes women’s and minorities’ paths to STEM careers,
and examines patterns in which both groups tend to drop out of the STEM educational pipeline.
Each segment of the formal education system (elementary through high school) is scrutinized in
order to determine when and why women leave academic paths to STEM careers. The author
uses a combination of conflict and attribution theory to explain the differences in male and
female persistence in STEM curriculum. The author condenses major findings on female
motivation in STEM courses and then outlines industry statistics on the employment of women
and minorities in science, math, engineering, and technology fields. The results of the article
indicate that although there are gender differences in mathematics and science achievement at
the high school level (females’ achievement being slightly lower than males’), this finding alone
does not explain the variance in male/female STEM field participation. Rather, the author
attributes lack of participation to differing attitudes towards math and science- with women
having negative perceptions of science and of its importance. This article helps to further explain
and illustrate some of the critical factors associated with women’s high school STEM
preparation, which will be useful when examining the “birdcage” effect of gender stereotypes on

9. 9
women’s academic confidence. Finally, the article is limited in that is mainly a descriptive study.
In order to develop practical solutions to gendered participation in STEM, further research needs
be conducted on how these differences form- only then can customized interventions be
implemented.
(Word count: 250)
7. Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM
career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411-427.
This article explores how interests in science, technology, engineering and mathematics
transform during high school years, and examines how gender interacts with differences in career
goals. A symbolic interactionist perspective is taken by the authors, who argue that creating a
STEM identity is crucial to making STEM-minded career choices. This was a retrospective
cohort study in which college students (both interested and uninterested in STEM careers) were
surveyed. Data sourced from the Persistence Research in Science and Engineering (PRiSE)
project was put through logistic regressions, and further illustrated by Sankey diagrams.
Participants were randomly selected from 34 community colleges and four-year universities.
Results of the study indicated that the greatest predictor of career interest at the end of high
school is career interest when starting high school. Most significantly, figures showed that
STEM career interest increased for males throughout high school, but decreased for females. To
be more specific, 75% of males and only 25% of females remained interested in STEM careers at
the end of high school, even after controlling for mathematics achievement. Finally, though the
article was thorough in its analysis of career interest development, it would be more encouraging
if the authors had acknowledged that high schoolers who lose interest in STEM fields are not lost
causes. With proper encouragement and intervention techniques, it should remain possible for
females who entered high school with an interest in STEM to regain that interest before the end
of the four years.
(Word count: 242)
8. Shapiro, J. R., & Williams, A. M. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’
and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66(3-4), 175-183.
This article identifies the relationship between stereotype threat (negative stereotypes
about math ability in females) and women’s achievement and interest in STEM-related
coursework. The authors use the Multi-Threat Framework perspective in order to contextualize
the development of math and science attitudes among females. This article was a review of the
current literature on stereotype threat and other factors affecting female STEM participation- no
original studies were conducted. Evidence was sourced from several studies, including: Danaher
and Crandall’s study on gender stereotype threat and high school Calculus exam scores, Cadinu’s
study on women’s negative math-related thoughts during test-taking, Davies’s study on gender
stereotyped commercials eliciting stereotype threat, and Schmader’s study on the intrusive nature
of stereotype threat when trying to solve complex math and science problems. Results from these
studies illustrate stereotype threat’s immense influence on females’ academic and career goals,
as well as their performance on math and science exams. It is important to include research on
the influence of stereotype threat because systematic beliefs about cognitive abilities in STEM
are externally enforced, and externally constructed. These beliefs are repeatedly reinforced,
affecting even high-achieving girls who are interested in STEM careers. This research could

10. 10
likely be enhanced by exploring the positive stereotypes that are attached to males’ abilities in
math and science, and attempting to create experimental situations in which these stereotypes are
conferred to females. Performance on STEM-related cognitive tasks could then be evaluated not
only for the absence of negative stereotypes, but for the presence of positive ones.
(Word count: 250)
9. Tan, E., Calabrese Barton, A., Kang, H., & O'Neill, T. (2013). Desiring a career in
STEM-related fields: How middle school girls articulate and negotiate identities- in-
practice in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(10), 1143-1179.
This article studied middle school girls with career goals in STEM, and how their
initiative in various math and science- related activities helped them to recognize their STEM
abilities. The participants were also observed in their school settings to determine how their
environment either supported or hindered their goals. The authors used a critical ethnographic
case study approach, with a sample size of 16 middle school girls who all clearly stated that they
had career goals in STEM fields. Conflict theory was applied to address the disadvantaged
socioeconomic and racial backgrounds of the students. The results of the research indicate that
the girls differed in terms of how they shaped their science-related identities. The girls who had
behaviors most consistent with their goals were the most successful in terms of academic
achievement. However, the most significant finding from the research was that science teachers
and other adult role models in students’ lives play a critical role in influencing girls to pursue
their interest in STEM careers. This article is also helpful in its analysis of how gender, race, and
socioeconomic status interact to create obstacles for STEM-minded girls who hope to pursue
their academic interests in high school- the crucial benchmark for remaining within the STEM
pipeline. Finally, the article was limited in its number of interviews with the science teachers,
and with the parents of the STEM-focused students. A more complete picture of the girl’s
domain should have been given so that more detailed conclusions could have been drawn.
(Word count: 250)
10. Tiedemann, J. (2000). Parents' gender stereotypes and teachers' beliefs as predictors of
children's concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school. Journal of
Educational psychology, 92(1), 144.
This article analyzes whether gender stereotypes create a biasing effect on parents’
perceptions of their children’s mathematical ability, and if those biases influence children’s
perceptions of their own ability. The symbolic interactionist theoretical perspective is most
explicitly employed, although feminist and conflict theory lenses are also used to provide context
for perceptions of mathematical ability. The authors conducted an empirical study, using a
sample of 589 students and their parents from 28 different German elementary school classes.
Student questionnaires (Likert scales) were used to assess children’s attitudes and beliefs about
their own mathematical abilities, as well as their explanations for success and failure. Parents’
and teachers’ surveys included questions which asked them to assess their children’s
mathematical ability, indicators for gender biases, and scales for predicting their children’s future
success in math. Results from the surveys indicated that gender stereotypes held by mother and
father interact with their child’s gender, and that these stereotypes predict parental beliefs about
children’s math abilities. Additionally, parent’s assessments of their children’s ability affect
children’s perceptions of themselves. This source has several implications- the barriers that

11. 11
women face in entering STEM fields accumulate throughout their formal education, from
elementary school on. If parent’s perceptions of their children’s abilities can have an effect on
their children’s beliefs about mathematical talent, then math achievement may not be enough to
keep girls within the STEM pipeline. Finally, the study was limited by a white, middle class
sample, which may lessen its generalizability to the larger population.
(Word count: 248)

12. 12
Outline
I. Introduction
1. Brief introduction to the topic
2. Explain why increasing women’s participation in STEM positively affects
American economic development
A. History of Women in STEM fields
1. Discuss statistics from U.S. Department of Commerce’s report on women’s
representation in STEM fields in the past decade (Beede, et al., 2011)
2. Use Schiebinger’s review of gender and its relation to STEM to connect the
experiences of prominent female scientists with the larger scientific community
B. The Current Status of Women in STEM
1. Introduce the current status of women in STEM by illustrating gender differences
in undergraduate enrollment in STEM majors. (NSF, 2002-2012)
2. Use National Science Foundation’s 2013 data on the comparative numbers of
women and men employed in science, engineering, math and technology fields.
3. The “Deficit Model” explains female faculty turnover in STEM academia
C. Significance of the Underrepresentation of Women in STEM
1. Comparative Incomes Among STEM and Non-STEM Women
a. Use research from the White House’s Office of Science and Technology: data
shows that women in STEM fields make 33 percent more than women in
non- STEM fields

13. 13
b. Summarize Bureau of Labor Statistics 2014 review of average wages for
STEM fields. Emphasize that STEM occupations typically offer wages which
come close to twice the U.S. average.
2. Single Mothers and the Poverty Line
3. Women in Scientific Research
a. Use National Institute of Health’s 2010 study on the lack of female mammals
utilized in biomedical and other scientific research. Explain the implications of
gender bias in clinical trials on the comprehensive understanding of female
biology.
b. How this is related to the bigger picture: the lack of women in STEM is an issue
which is tied to many aspects of American society
II. Literature Review
• This section is an adaptation of Marilyn Frye’s birdcage metaphor: each section
represents an external barrier to women’s participation in STEM
A. Parents
1. Gender Stereotypes and Assessment of Children’s Abilities
a. Using Tiedemann, illustrate the difference between parents’ evaluations of
their daughters’ mathematics ability and their daughter’s actual mathematics
performance
b. Provide evidence from Eccles et al. that stereotype beliefs of parents
(especially mothers) significantly contributes to gender differences in
mathematics attitudes and performance

14. 14
c. Parents as “expectancy socializers” (Frome et al.): Results of the study
indicated that children's beliefs about their own mathematical abilities were
more directly related to their parents' perceptions of their ability, than to their
actual performance in math classes
2. Differing Parental Encouragement of STEM Interests in Daughters and Sons
a. Use Jacobs et al. to explain the role of parents in developing children’s interest
in math and science
b. Link the importance of valuing math and science to later career preparation
for occupations that involve math and science
B. Teachers
1. Assessments of Student Ability by Gender
a. Emphasize that teacher’s perceptions of mathematical ability were higher for
male students than for female students, although no statistically significant
differences in math grades between boys and girls were found (Tiedemann,
2000)
b. Use Oakes to illustrate how teachers’ perceptions of students’ abilities can
hinder their assignment into advanced math groups. High-ability boys are
more likely to be recommended for advanced math classes than high-ability
girls.
2. Teacher-Pupil Interactions by Gender
a. Use Duffy, Warren and Walsh to show that teachers interact differently with
male and female students. Explain the INTERSECT observational coding
system and its use in measuring classroom interactions.

15. 15
b. Cite Sikes (1971) and Becker (1981) to explain that in middle school and high
school mathematics classes, males receive more beneficial teacher-student
interactions that enhance learning.
c. Use Jones and Wheatley to provide evidence for gendered experiences in
physical science and chemistry classes. Some examples include more call outs
(without hand raising) by boys than girls, more praise given to male students
by teachers, and criticism of male students for lack of effort, with criticism of
female students for the quality of their work.
C. Elementary and Middle School
1. Elementary School Experiences
a. Cite Oakes’s results from studying elementary school teachers: Almost half
believed that boys were better than girls at math, and none of the teachers
believed that girls were better
2. Middle School Experiences
a. Use Tan et al.’s case study on middle school girls who had a strong interest in
pursuing a STEM career. Explore the factors related to their success in math and
science, as well as the stability of their career aspirations.
b. Developing math and science “identities”
c. How do girls become interested in STEM-related careers?
D. High School
1. Advanced Placement Math and Science by Gender

16. 16
a. Typical AP courses taken by female and male students (Moore & Slate, 2008).
Females tend to take language, literature, and history AP courses, while males
are more likely to take AP math and science courses.
b. Achievement in AP courses by gender: results from the study revealed that
males had higher achievement rates in AP courses than females
c. Factors related to female persistence in AP mathematics: National Institute of
Education study
d. Connection to the “leaky STEM pipeline”
2. The Stability of Career Interests in High School
a. The relative stability of STEM career interests for male and female high school
students (Sadler et al., 2012)
III. Discussion
A. The STEM Pipeline as a Birdcage
IV. Suggestions
A. Roominate: A Bottom-Up Solution
V. Conclusion

17. 17
Introduction
The set of barriers that ultimately obstructs women in their pursuit of a career in STEM is
multifaceted, and speaks to the ubiquitous issue of gender inequality in the U.S.. However, the
heavily discussed topic of the scarcity of women in STEM is much more than a women’s issue.
In response to a 2013 STEM diversity symposium on Capitol Hill, an article from the U.S. News
and World Report revealed the national and global significance of America’s consistent failure to
recruit and keep women in the STEM pipeline. A chief conclusion from the symposium was that
America’s global competitiveness is tightly linked to higher enrollment in STEM fields- and that
this increase in enrollment needs to come from women and minorities. Accordingly, a
comprehensive article by the American Sociological Association on women in STEM confirms
that economic development has been shown to be positively affected by increased enrollment in
science and engineering fields of study.
However, barriers that prevent women’s entry into STEM exist before elementary school,
and are present throughout their education and transition into the workforce. This is a waste of
resources that the U.S. cannot afford. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development, out of 23 countries surveyed, the U.S. now ranks 21st in terms of mathematics
skills. Additionally, the U.S. came in at 17th out of 19 countries in problem-solving ability. In
the words of Texas Democratic representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, the country would do well
to use the other half of its “brain power” in order to remain relevant in a world that demands the
skills of those proficient in STEM.
These statistics are not intended to de-emphasize the importance of individually
examining women’s issues, but rather to highlight the role that women play in the bigger picture
of the competitiveness of the American workforce. The U.S. Department of Commerce reports

18. 18
that throughout the past decade, women have consistently held less than 25 percent of STEM
industry jobs. This confirms that there is a historical precedent for women’s dismal
representation in STEM fields.
History of Women in STEM Fields
It is not simply the quantity of women employed in STEM fields that holds significance.
The quality of the experiences of women who work in STEM is equally important, and is
discussed in Schiebinger’s 1987 review of gender and its relation to STEM. In her analysis,
Schiebinger connects the experiences of prominent female scientists with the larger scientific
community, and recounts the history of the structural barriers these females have encountered in
STEM fields. Scientific academies of the 17th century excluded women; even those as prominent
as the French mathematician and physicist Sophie Germain (elasticity theory), and Nobel Prize
winner Marie Curie (theory of radioactivity). This exclusion persisted for years, barring women
from participating in the exploration of formal science. Schiebinger notes that the oldest
scientific academy, The Royal Society of London, only opened its doors to women in 1945; 285
years after its inception. Similarly, The Academie des Sciences of Paris prohibited women from
its opening in 1666, until 1978. The perseverance that these women and others in STEM fields
had in the face of structural adversity is admirable with respect to their scientific achievements.
It is important to recognize that although explicit structural barriers have been outlawed,
subtle obstacles still exist that prevent women in STEM today from succeeding. Schiebinger
provides evidence that barriers still remain for women, and often manifest themselves as
observed differences between the experiences of male and female scientists. For example, female
scientists and engineers receive lower salaries on average than their male counterparts, with less
than half of these pay differences being explained by differences in professional experience. In

19. 19
terms of STEM academia, women are more likely than men to be represented in non-tenure track
positions, and men receive promotions for higher level teaching positions at higher rates than
women (Schiebinger, 1987, p. 319). Finally, Schiebinger highlights unequal opportunity in
scientific research, citing the fact that regular publishing by women is not correlated with gaining
higher professional rankings (Schiebinger, p. 322).
The Current Status of Women in STEM
The current status of women in STEM mirrors the historical roots of the issue. Gender
differences in undergraduate enrollment in STEM majors illustrate disparities between males and
females in bachelor’s degree attainment (NSF, 2002-2012). According to the National Science
Foundation’s 2012 data, males earned 81% of engineering undergraduate degrees, while females
only earned 19%. Similarly, males earned the majority of undergraduate computer science
degrees in 2012 (82%).
This data helps to explain the National Science Foundation’s 2013 data on the
comparative numbers of women and men employed in STEM fields. The statistics collected
reinforce and highlight the reality that gender parity in STEM has not yet been reached, and that
the majority of STEM jobs are still overwhelmingly male-dominated. According to the NSF,
male engineers made up a shocking 85% of the engineering workforce in 2013; leaving female
engineers to comprise only 15% of industry jobs. In highly lucrative industries such as computer
and information science (2015 median industry pay was $110,000 a year), 76% of all employed
in 2013 were men (Bureau of Labor Statistics). For careers in the physical sciences (chemistry,
earth science, and physics), males were again the majority; employed in 69% of all jobs.
It might be assumed that positions in STEM academia are more accessible to women than
jobs in STEM-related firms. Unfortunately, research on women in STEM academia suggests that

20. 20
this is not the case. In a 2007 study of STEM faculty turnover by gender, the author Yonghong
Xu argued that women leave positions in research and doctoral universities due to the adversity
they face in obtaining research funding, receiving promotions and equal pay, and garnering
professional support from supervisors. Xu uses a theoretical framework known as the deficit
model, which suggests that there are explicit as well as subtle barriers that exist for women
within organizations. These barriers eventually express themselves as symptoms such as pay
gaps between equally ranking male and female faculty, lower publishing numbers by female
faculty, and lower numbers of females in senior-level positions at universities.
The study used several regression models in order to measure differences as a function of
gender for employment turnover. Regression analyses conducted on the sample found that
variables such as total number of research publications, research support, opportunities for
promotion, and opportunities to articulate ideas were all statistically significant in their
correlation to female faculty turnover (Xu, 2007, p. 615). However, none of these variables were
significantly correlated with male faculty turnover. This indicates first that male faculty rarely, if
ever, confront barriers of this nature in STEM academia; and second, that male faculty most
likely leave research positions for reasons other than unequal treatment in the workplace.
Finally, in order to clarify the significant role of organizational barriers in female faculty
members’ turnover intentions, the author also measured the effect of marital status and number
of children on turnover decisions. In each analyses, neither marital status nor number of children
had a significant effect on turnover decisions for males or females; indicating that family
planning was largely unimportant in turnover decisions for the given sample.
Significance of the Underrepresentation of Women in STEM

21. 21
The underrepresentation of women in STEM is not only damaging to the nation’s
productivity and competitiveness; it has real consequences for women in the U.S.. So how does
the lack of women in STEM fields disadvantage the gender as a whole?
Comparative incomes among STEM and non-STEM women. According to the White
House Office of Science and Technology, women in employed in STEM fields make an average
of 33% more annually than women employed in non-STEM fields. In addition, the wage gap
between men and women in STEM fields is smaller than the wage gap between men and women
in non-STEM fields, which is encouraging for overall gender parity progress (Office of Science
and Technology Policy, “Women in STEM”). With higher incomes, women are able to save
more, invest more, and better prepare themselves for retirement.
STEM jobs also pay higher average salaries when compared to an average of all other
occupational industries in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014 average
wages for research and development positions in STEM were $90,000, and managerial positions
in STEM jobs had annual average wages of $133,000. As a whole, all STEM-related occupations
together reached an average annual wage of $80,000; a number which was about 1.7 times the
national wage average for 2014 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Annual average wages in STEM
occupational groups”).
Single mothers and the poverty line. Importantly, higher annual incomes also allow
single mothers to better provide for their children, and for themselves. This is relevant to women
as a whole, as single mothers are more likely than both married couples and single fathers to live
in poverty. According to the The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2014 data on families in poverty, 30% of
single mothers supporting a family lived below the poverty line, while only 16% of single fathers
supporting a family lived below the poverty line (U.S. Census Bureau, “Families in Poverty by

22. 22
Type of Family”). It is possible that these percentages are the result of differences in annual
income among men and women.
Women in scientific research. Sparse female representation in STEM fields creates
issues for women in more than just the economic realm. When fewer women are represented in
scientific academia, research for women’s health issues becomes a second priority. As a result,
the scientific community’s knowledge of female biology is lacking in comparison to male
biology; and women across the U.S. may suffer from the consequences of this absence of
attention. Unintended side effects of medication, misdiagnosis by doctors who overlook disease
symptoms unique to women, and a lack of funding to research illnesses which disproportionately
affect the female population (such as osteoporosis), are all realities of when women are not
equally represented in STEM fields.
In 2011, the National Institute of Health released a study which measured the presence of
sex bias in biomedical research and neuroscience. The authors of the study explain why women
and female animals intended for use in scientific research are often not as equally represented as
their male counterparts, and highlight the consequences of their absence. The authors cite a 2001
study, which revealed that a segment of the scientific community tends to neglect female
participants due to the worry that their hormonal patterns will complicate results from medical
studies. Additionally, the study pointed out the common misconception that results from medical
trials with male participants are generalizable to females (Wizemann and Pardue, 2001). The
idea that males are an appropriate substitute for females in medical trials is harmful to the health
of the female population, and is mistaken. In reality, males and females have been shown to react
differently to certain medications, and generally exhibit different symptoms in response to heart
and autoimmune diseases (Soldin and Mattison, 2009). Though there are present regulations

23. 23
which ensure human female representation in medical studies, there are no requirements for non-
human female animals in similar studies. Additionally, analysis of results by sex has been
lacking even in studies which include the appropriate numbers of female participants.
The authors of the 2011 study uncovered several important findings in relation to
women’s health, and suggest that change in the medical community is warranted. According to
their analysis, women are diagnosed with anxiety 2.25 times more often than men (Bekker et. al,
2007), but animal studies on anxiety and anxiety-relieving medications predominantly use male
rats (Palanza, 2001). In studies of pain from 1996-2005, 79% of trials only involved male
participants (Mogil and Chanda, 2005). This is particularly concerning when accompanied by the
knowledge that females are 1.5 times more likely to experience clinically defined pain than
males (Fillingim et. al, 2009). Finally, women are more likely to have unfavorable reactions to
drug treatments than men (Gandhi et. al, 2004).
When women are absent in STEM fields, issues related to women do not come to the
forefront of the medical field. Misconceptions about female biology go unchallenged, female-
specific reactions to treatments go unheard, and diseases which disproportionately affect females
go unresearched. Though this is just one consequence of the lack of women in STEM, it speaks
to the far-reaching importance of the STEM pipeline; and how the removal of women from
academic paths to STEM fields can create generations of women who are unable to advocate for
arguably one of the most important aspects of their life; their health.
With this practical foundation for explaining institutional inequality, gender stereotyping
in education will be further examined for its role in removing school-age women from the STEM
pipeline, and the consequences it has for women in the U.S.. The barriers that females face from
elementary to high school math and science will be analyzed using the lens of Marilyn Frye’s

24. 24
birdcage metaphor, through which institutional and social barriers are considered to be
multidimensional obstacles. Evidence for the existence of external barriers, such as gender based
teacher-pupil interactions, disparate parental encouragement, and widespread gender stereotypes
about abilities in math and science will be illustrated as the metaphoric “wires” in the cage that
keep women out of STEM.
Literature Review
External Barriers to Women’s Participation in STEM
Marilyn Frye, a prominent philosopher and feminist theorist, published a collection of
essays in 1983 on gender inequality. In one of her most notable writings, Oppression she
presents a metaphor for the external barriers which women and other marginalized groups face
and fight against throughout the course of their lives. In Frye’s words, these barriers are like the
wires of a birdcage- when you look only at one wire, it is difficult to see how the bird in the cage
cannot continue past its obstacle. But if you examine the birdcage holistically, and notice the
way that each wire works with the other wires to keep the bird in its place, it becomes clear as to
why it is difficult for the bird to improve its position.
Marilyn Frye’s birdcage theory illustrates the nature of external barriers. Gender
stereotypes about women’s competence and aptitude for science and mathematics- traditionally
considered male fields of study- represent just one wire in the cage that keeps the majority of
females out of STEM (science, engineering, math, and technology) fields. However, as each of
the other barriers are discussed at length, it will become evident that there are multiple forces
working against women who desire a career in STEM, and that each is significant.
Parents

25. 25
In a 2000 study of parental perceptions of children’s mathematical abilities, Joachim
Tiedemann wrote of the effect of gender stereotypes on children’s perceptions of their own
aptitude. Using a sample of 589 students and their parents from 28 different German elementary
school classes, Tiedemann found not only that gender predicted parent’s beliefs about their
children’s abilities, but that parent’s beliefs also predicted children’s perceptions of their own
abilities. Importantly, Tiedemann also cited a 1985 study by Holloway and Hess, who found that
parental beliefs about children’s abilities are based more upon gender than on objective measures
of academic performance. If parent’s perceptions of children’s abilities can affect their children’s
beliefs about mathematical talent, then even high math achievement may not be enough to keep
interested girls within the STEM pipeline.
Gender Stereotypes and Assessment of Children’s Abilities
These findings are significant to the discussion of external obstacles because they
represent one of the initial barriers that females face in believing that they are capable of
succeeding in mathematics. And unfortunately, the relationship between children’s competence
beliefs and parent’s assessments of their children’s abilities only becomes more strongly
correlated over time. In sum, parents who hold traditional gender stereotypes about mathematics
abilities (ie. boys have more aptitude for math than girls) consistently indicate that their
daughters have lower mathematical ability than their sons, even when their children show no
objective differences in actual math achievement.
Parental beliefs about children’s abilities are connected to the larger issue of women and
the “leaky” STEM pipeline. Research has consistently demonstrated that beliefs about ability are
correlated with behavioral choices, some of the most significant being choices about the types of
classes one will take, and choices made about future career paths (Parsons, Adler & Kaczala,

26. 26
1982; Bandura, 1981; Weiner, 1994). In a 1998 study, Frome and Eccles delve deeper into the
relationship between parents and their children’s competence beliefs. Their study is partially
based upon the theory that parents are “expectancy socializers” for their children, meaning that
children’s perceptions of their abilities are determined more strongly by their parents than by
reality itself (Frome & Eccles, 1998, p. 437).
A significant finding of the study was that of the sampled parents, mothers held more
stereotypical views about gender and math ability than did fathers. Frome and Eccles include
several examples of this: mothers with daughters believed that their children had to apply more
effort to do well in math than did mothers with sons, and mothers consistently attributed their
daughter’s success in math to effort, and their son’s success to natural ability. Children’s self-
evaluations were found to rely more upon their mother’s beliefs about their abilities rather than
their own grades in mathematics. Interestingly, the fifth- and sixth grade girls sampled had
higher average math grades than the fifth- and sixth grade boys, yet the boys still had higher
levels of self-confidence in their math abilities than did the girls.
This represents a critical issue in the development of female confidence in mathematics
ability, which is a significant predictor of later enrollment in STEM fields of study.
Unfortunately, this is not the only obstacle that girls face in the STEM pipeline that is connected
to differences in parental treatment. The parental encouragement of STEM interests in girls and
boys differs, is connected to their valuation of math and science, and influences the careers that
girls and boys choose later in life.
Differing Parental Encouragement of STEM Interests in Daughters and Sons
In a 2004 study of the promotion of math and science interests in males and females,
Jacobs and Bleeker examined three ways in which parents shape their children’s values. Through

27. 27
providing opportunities, involving themselves in activities with their children, and acting as role
models for activities they view as important, parents influence their children’s values for those
activities. The provision of opportunities to practice math and science was measured by the
amount of math or science related games purchased for daughters versus the amount purchased
for sons.
Jacobs and Bleeker found that mothers were more likely to purchase math and science
toys for their sons, and that these differences existed in all ages sampled (1st - 6th grade). This
finding suggests that boys may be given more opportunities to improve their math and science
skills than girls, and that the use of games may help them to perceive math and science as being
fun. Another significant finding of the study was that both mothers and fathers had more
involvement in their daughter’s math and science activities than their sons. Although increased
involvement seems beneficial to girls’ development of math and science interests, it may actually
suggest a perception that girls require more assistance in those subject areas.
The relationship between math and science learning opportunities and STEM
participation are clear when noting the study’s finding that the purchase of math and science
games, and the promotion of math and science-related activities predicted child involvement in
math two years later. Interest in math six years later was also correlated with math and science
promotion by parents. These findings may help to explain the gap in undergraduate enrollment in
STEM areas of study, as well as the stark contrast between numbers of women and men
employed in STEM occupations. If girls lack interest in science and math early on because of a
scarcity of creative opportunities to engage with these subjects, it is not surprising that they
choose not to pursue science and math-related careers. This represents another leak in the STEM
pipeline that needs to be fixed if the numbers of women in STEM are to be improved.

28. 28
Impact of Educational Factors
As previously discussed, parents who are biased by traditional gender stereotypes about
boys and girls’ math and science abilities can negatively influence their daughters’ perceptions
of their own abilities. Additionally, there is a reliable amount of research which suggests that
females experience differential treatment not just at home, but in their math and science classes
as well. The realization that young women lack support from their parents, math, and science
teachers throughout their lives echoes the words of Marilyn Frye in her essay Oppression, “It is
only when you step back, stop looking at the wires one by one, microscopically, and take a
macroscopic view of the whole cage, that you can see why the bird does not go anywhere; and
then you will see it in a moment” (Frye, 1983). Women attempting to pursue careers in STEM,
or even women who are simply trying to obtain an equal math and science education are
constrained by multiple barriers which hinder their academic achievement.
Teachers
Just as parents make judgments about their children’s academic abilities, teachers assess
their students’ aptitude for particular subjects, and adjust their perceptions accordingly. Although
it is reasonable to teach students at their level, incorrect perceptions of ability that are not based
on objective measures are damaging, and change the student’s learning experiences.
Tiedemann’s 2000 study on parent and teacher gender stereotypes warns that teachers’
perceptions of academic ability are biased by gender, and that their interactions with students are
guided by these biases.
In Tiedemann’s study, a sample of third- and fourth grade math teachers consistently
rated their male students as having higher mathematical ability, although previous and current
grades in math classes did not significantly differ between male and female students. In the

29. 29
study’s results, path analyses revealed that teachers’ ability perceptions for students significantly
influenced students’ perceptions of their own abilities. Furthermore, teacher perceptions
(whether correct or incorrect) influenced mothers’ perceptions of their child’s abilities. This
represents a feedback pathway which disadvantages female students who are performing equally
as well, or better than their male peers in mathematics.
Assessments of Student Ability by Gender
Teachers’ ability perceptions of their students are not simply disappointing in their
inaccuracy- these perceptions have real consequences for female students whose abilities are
underestimated. In a 1990 study at UCLA on female students in science and mathematics, the
author Jeannie Oakes examined teacher-imposed barriers on girls in elementary through high
school. Hallinan and Sorenson found in 1987 that teachers were more likely to recommend high-
ability boys to advanced math groups than high-ability girls. This represents the relevance of
teacher recommendations: they are important in determining enhanced learning opportunities for
students, and in advancing their progress through the STEM pipeline.
Teacher-Pupil Interactions by Gender
Differing teacher-student interactions in math and science classrooms represent another
barrier that female students face which diminishes their STEM experience. A 1981 study by
Joanne Becker examined teacher-student interactions, focusing specifically on mathematics
classes. The variables studied included direct questions (questions directed at a specific student),
open questions (questions asked to the whole class for a volunteer), call outs (student calls out an
answer), and several other interactions. When examining interactions by gender, males were
asked 55% of direct questions by their teachers, while females were only asked 45%. These
statistics were the same for open-ended questions, with males answering more than females.

30. 30
Males also called out answers more in class, contributing to 67% of class call outs while females
called out only 33% of the time. There was a stark contrast between the general encouragement
of students by gender, and was measured by counting encouraging and discouraging comments
given to males and females. Males received a generous 70% of all positive encouragements from
teachers, while females received almost 90% of all discouraging comments.
Becker’s study included qualitative observations alongside its quantitative measurements,
which provided further insight into the experiences of girls in math classes. Some examples of
interactions observed between teachers and both male and female students were given, to
illustrate the difference between male encouragement and female discouragement. One teacher
approached a male student in response to his work on a problem with, “Good reasoning. You
have your steps in the right order”. Another teacher responded to a male student in response to
his work saying, “You don’t need your dad to do it. You can do it!” (Becker, 1981, p. 47) In
contrast, when a male teacher was addressing the class about a problem using a 3D figure, he
informed his students that, “Boys had a chance to do perspective in shop class, so they are better
at this”, referring to the geometry problem on the board (Becker, 1981, p. 47). Sadker and Sadker
later published a study in 1986 which reflected Becker’s conclusions. The authors found that
males’ call outs are generally accepted by teachers, while girls who call out are reprimanded and
instructed to raise their hands. This may rob female students of an active role in classroom
discussions, and may also subordinate them to their male peers when they are disciplined for
actions that male counterparts are not.
Unfortunately, teacher-student interactions differ by gender in science classrooms as
well. In a 1990 study, Jones and Wheatley analyzed interactions in 30 physical science and 30
chemistry classes to determine whether significant gender differences existed for interactions.

31. 31
The first variable analyzed was the number of “call outs”(answers given to the teacher without
hand-raising or being called on) made by male and female students. Statistically significant
differences were found between genders, with males averaging 0.23 call outs per person, and
females averaging 0.10 call outs per person. Jones and Wheatley’s study also found statistically
significant differences between the amount of praise male and female students receive from
teachers in science classes. Out of the 60 different classrooms being observed, males averaged
0.14 interactions with teacher praise, while females only averaged 0.08. Similar results have
been observed in studies measuring the same variable, with males receiving more praise from
teachers consistently (Becker, 1981; Delefes & Jackson, 1972; Stanworth, 1983).
In 1994, multiple differences in the number and type of interactions with male and female
students were again found within the classroom. In exploring these differences, Bellamy found
that in terms of numbers, junior-high male science teachers spend two thirds of their class time
interacting with male students, and only one third of the time interacting with female students. In
the transition to high school, female teachers were found to afford more approval,
encouragement and criticism to male students, giving them more attention overall than their
female students (Omvig, 1989). Further comprehensive studies on classroom interactions have
been performed today using an observational coding system known as INTERSECT, which is a
reliable measurement tool for gender-based interactions in the classroom. Using the
INTERSECT system, several studies again found that male students receive more attention
overall from their teachers- both compliments and criticism are given to high school boys more
frequently than to girls (D’Ambrosio & Hammer, 1996; Sadker et al., 1984). These subtle
interactions are not just damaging to female students’ learning experiences- they discourage girls

32. 32
from developing competent STEM identities, and from believing that they are as equally
mathematically capable as their male peers.
Formal Education and the STEM Pipeline
At each stage in the U.S. education system, female students experience differential
treatment in their math and science classes, which eventually leads to their “leaking” out of the
STEM pipeline. Remaining within the pipeline until high school graduation is a crucial factor in
choosing to continue on with a STEM major in college, and eventually a STEM career. Though
it is often thought that career-defining choices are made in high school, girls may indirectly make
choices starting in elementary school; which eliminate them from the STEM pipeline. The loss
of girls at early ages from the pipeline is a contributory factor to the current lack of women in
STEM fields. Thus, a discussion of the female experience in elementary and middle school math
and science is necessary.
The Elementary School Experience
A 1990 educational research study on women in science and mathematics examined the
experiences of female students throughout their formal schooling years. Appropriately, Oakes’s
research begins with a discussion of the scientific pipeline and its critical role in producing
potential candidates for STEM industry. Oakes cites a 1983 landmark study by Berryman, which
found that the supply of STEM candidates becomes visible in elementary school, and reaches
full capacity in ninth grade. By high school, there is a negative net flow of students into the
STEM pipeline, as more students are leaving than entering. Most significantly, Berryman found
that the crucial phase for entering the STEM pipeline is before high school, when the filtering
process begins.

33. 33
Berryman identifies three key factors which are correlated with persistence in the
scientific pipeline. Opportunity, achievement, and choice (or interest) are interrelated positive
factors which influence STEM preparedness and access. Oakes begins her analysis with these
factors outlined by Berryman, and explains how talented female students are lost in elementary
school: the first step in the STEM pipeline. Though gender differences in math and science
achievement are not found in elementary school, differences in opportunity and interest do exist.
Hallinan and Sorenson found in 1987 that elementary school teachers transfer high-
ability boys to advanced math groups at higher rates than than they do high-ability girls. This
represents a contrast in the opportunities afforded to boys and girls to improve their math and
science talent, and to engage with more challenging material. Unfortunately, interest in STEM
curriculum also differs among boys and girls in elementary school. A 1988 study by Mullis and
Jenkins found that girls in elementary school have less positive views of science, and of science
careers in general than do boys. The elementary school girls studied also described fewer science
experiences than did boys, which may serve as a possible explanation for their lower levels of
interest. In sum, research conducted on elementary-level math and science experiences for girls
provides context for their experiences throughout the rest of their formal schooling. It is
necessary to account for the disadvantages that female students face in their early experiences
with STEM because they help to explain why the STEM pipeline loses female students at each
educational transition. The math and science experiences of middle school girls are equally
dismal, and will be discussed next to provide further explanation for the leaky STEM pipeline.
The Middle School Experience
In 2013, an ethnographic case study was done on the development of science identities by
middle school girls. In their research, the authors examined the actions of girls who had indicated

34. 34
an interest in a STEM career, and explored the methods each girl used to maintain her position in
the STEM pipeline. This research perspective is unique in the context of external barriers: the
girls interviewed certainly face challenges, but positive factors are instead explored in order to
understand how girls work around obstacles and cultivate supportive environments to achieve
their STEM goals.
Developing science identities. A critical focus of the case study was the examination of
each of the subjects’ STEM self-identities. Several important criteria were found to promote a
positive STEM self-identity among the 16 girls sampled. Self-identification as a “good” science
student (Tan et al., 2013, p. 1152) was one of these criteria, and was correlated with confirmation
of science ability by teachers and classmates. Another positive factor identified was participation
in extracurricular science activities, such as after-school clubs, the performance of science
experiments at home, or science-related volunteer work. Participation in supplemental science
activities was cited as a factor that which successfully maintained girls’ interest in science
throughout middle school. Additionally, involvement in science activities outside of school made
girls more likely to view themselves as being competent in science; a positive factor for STEM
identity formation. Lastly, several of the female students whose interest in science persisted
throughout middle school were found to view science as an important academic subject to be
competent in, and also strongly believed in the importance of receiving good grades in their
science classes.
Following their analysis, Tan et al. discuss the importance of teacher and classmate
recognition of talent in the 16 STEM-minded girls interviewed. Their research reveals that of the
girls sampled, those who received teacher and peer recognition of their talents in science were
also the students whose interest in science persisted throughout middle school. The researchers

35. 35
tracked the girls over a three year period in order to accurately measure fluctuations in interest or
a loss thereof. This information is relevant when examining the loss of girls from the STEM
pipeline during middle school. This period of formal schooling has been identified as a juncture
at which girls lose interest in science; effectively forfeiting their place in the STEM trajectory
before reaching high school. Importantly, the authors of this study cite research conducted in
2008 which found that of 116 current scientists and science graduate students, 65% of them had
an interest in science before middle school, and 30% had an interest in middle and high school
(Maltese & Tai, 2008). Similarly, a 2007 longitudinal study of Swedish students found that
career goals tend to be established before age 13, marking the significance of developing and
maintaining interest in science during middle school (Lindahl, 2007).
How do girls become interested in STEM-related careers? Quite surprisingly, none of
the 16 girls included in the case study reported any formal school experiences in science as
reason for their career aspirations in STEM. Instead, the majority of the girls credited successful
scientific problem-solving outside of school as reason for their STEM career identities. These
opportunities to carry out investigative science engage and motivate girls, as well as provide
them with examples of what future work in STEM might look like. For example, some of the
girls participated in Green Club, a science club which focused on research, collection and
analysis of data, and experiments. Lastly, one of the most important influences on career-related
decisions was role models within each girls’ family. Family members employed in STEM fields
served as resources for career-related questions, and also as motivation to remain involved in
STEM-related activities. Having a mother or other female relative employed in STEM presented
the specific benefit of challenging gender stereotypes, and provided evidence that women could
succeed in science-related careers.

36. 36
In terms of the STEM pipeline, middle school is clearly a crucial step which filters
female students out, even if they have STEM aptitude. The loss of interest in science as an
academic subject, and as the basis for a future career can be intimately tied to the how much
competence recognition girls receive from their teachers and peers; and in some ways determines
their assessment of their own competence. Fortunately, the development of positive STEM
identities can guard against pipeline leaking, and allows female students to see themselves not
just as talented science students, but as active participants in science outside of the classroom.
The confidence gained from positive science experiences in middle school follows STEM-
minded girls into high school, and builds the resilience necessary to remain within the STEM
pipeline.
The High School Experience
High school represents the culmination of female students’ adverse math and science
experiences. For the years leading up to ninth grade, the effects of gender based teacher-pupil
interactions, disparate parental encouragement, and harmful gender stereotypes about abilities in
math and science accumulate, and result in staggering differences between the numbers of
females and males desiring a career in STEM. At the stage in the formal education system where
students make concrete preparations for, and solidify their decisions about a college major, the
numbers of females interested in STEM have sharply declined; and fail to recover before the end
of high school. To make matters worse, girls are still lost from the STEM pipeline at the high
school level; students who persisted from elementary school on and had the requisites to
continue their STEM education leave the pipeline and do not return.
The stability of career interests in high school. In a 2012 study on the relative stability
of STEM career interests among males and females, the authors sampled 6,000 students across

37. 37
the U.S. to determine how career goals change in high school. The results of the study indicated
that at the beginning of high school, 39.5% of males and 15.7% of females were interested in
pursuing a STEM career. By the end of high school, 39.7% of males still had career interests in
STEM, while just 12.7% of females had retained their interest (Sadler et al., 2012, p. 419). The
disparity between male and female retention in the STEM pipeline is even more concerning
when examining the net flow of students into the pipeline by gender. Of all males sampled in the
study, 12% lost interest in a STEM career during high school. At first, this information seems to
contradict the notion that a gender disparity exists. However, 12% of all male students sampled
reported gaining an interest in STEM during high school (not before); meaning that an adequate
number of male students were able to replace those lost from the STEM pipeline (Sadler et al., p.
419). Cumulatively, this results in an unchanged percentage of male candidates entering college
as STEM majors, which serves to replenish the male STEM workforce each year. In fact, males
in the study were 2.9 times more likely than females to desire a career in STEM by the end of
high school (Sadler et al., p. 419), and constituted 75% of all graduating students interested in
science or engineering careers.
Unfortunately, female STEM candidates do not fare as well as their male peers in terms
of numbers. According to the study’s results, 9% of females lose interest in a STEM career
during high school, while only 6% of females gain new interest. This results in a 3% net loss of
STEM-minded female candidates, removing even more girls in the final junction before college
(Sadler et al., p. 419).
One argument made by those who question the underlying reasons for gender disparities
in STEM suggest that perhaps, females are being outperformed by males in mathematics and
other subjects necessary to qualify for STEM majors. However, even after the researchers

38. 38
controlled for math achievement, gender was still found to be a statistically significant variable
affecting STEM interest throughout high school (Sadler et al., p. 422). Knowing this, it is
necessary to determine why STEM interest declines in females at rates unequal to males in high
school. An exploration of the experiences of females in high school math and science classes
provides some insight into why interest declines, and will be explained next.
Experiences in high school math and science. The study concludes its analysis of the
gender disparity in STEM interest by highlighting female experiences in high school math and
science. Females still face differential treatment in high school science classes, which may create
an unwelcome atmosphere for them to remain in the STEM pipeline (Allan & Madden, 2003).
Additionally, it is possible that teaching techniques in science classes may benefit male students
more than females (Middlecamp & Subramanian, 1999; Sandler, Silverberg, & Hall, 1996;
Salter, 2003). Relevant to the discussion of maintaining girls’ interest in STEM throughout high
school, the way science classes are taught may not appeal to women in terms of their interests,
passions, and life experiences (though this is not to say that science as a subject is intrinsically
lacking in interest to any gender) (Barton, 1998). Finally, girls may still be provided with less
opportunities to participate in science and math-related activities, or feel unwelcome when
attempting to join science clubs and organizations.
Advanced Placement math and science by gender. Differences also exist in terms of
AP math and science enrollment and performance among females and males. In a study of all
public high schools in Texas from 2004-2006, data was collected on the types of AP courses
males and females take, and how well each gender performs in these classes. According to 2007
statistics from the College Board, males enroll in AP math and science courses in larger numbers
than do females. Though higher percentages of females enroll in AP language, literature, and

39. 39
history, these classes do not contribute to preparation for STEM curriculum in college, and may
disqualify girls from STEM majors which have math and science prerequisites. The study also
measured performance in Advanced Placement courses, and found that males were cumulatively
more successful; performing at or above determined standards 42-43% of the time, while females
performed at or above standards 39-41% of the time (Moore & Slate, 2008, p. 62).
It is important to mention that simply increasing female enrollment in STEM classes is
not sufficient on its own to propel girls through the STEM pipeline to the college level. High
performance in advanced STEM courses is also necessary to combat gender disparity within
STEM industries, and females’ lower performance in AP math and science classes does take
away the competitiveness of their college applications in relation to their male peers.
Helping females persist in AP mathematics. There are several practices that can be
used to support and encourage females to thrive in their advanced math classes, many of which
include external support from AP teachers and school’s math departments. In a 1980 study of
positive factors for persistence, eight high schools with sufficiently large AP math programs
were sampled. Most notably, the study found that AP teachers were consistently the only school-
related supporters of female students’ STEM career goals, and also some of the only providers of
encouragement to STEM-minded girls.
Part of the success of certain schools in having AP departments with high-achieving
females was correlated with the educational backgrounds of their AP mathematics instructors. In
successful departments, AP math teachers held degrees in pure math, rather than in education,
and also maintained secondary jobs in STEM industry as researchers or professionals. The
study’s qualitative data regarded teachers’ participation in “real world” (Casserly & Rock, 1980,
p. 18) as creating a visual link between classroom mathematics and practical applications of

40. 40
math. Finally, the encouragement of female students by their math teachers was found to be
positively correlated with math achievement and the decision to continue taking math classes.
It is evident that girls who receive encouragement, equal opportunity, and support from
their AP math and science instructors perform better on measures of achievement, and are more
likely to persist in the STEM pipeline towards a STEM college major. With proper intervention
and the selection of AP teachers who are involved in applied mathematics outside of school,
females have a higher chance of succeeding in STEM curriculum; thereby becoming competitive
STEM applicants. In this way, talented girls who have persisted in the STEM pipeline
throughout all 12 years of their formal education are not lost at the critical transition from high
school to college.
Discussion
When a closer look is taken at each step in the STEM pipeline, it becomes apparent that
external barriers are a significant function of the loss of young women from elementary to high
school, rather than a lack of general math and science aptitude by the entire female population.
From differential treatment in their math and science classes, to inaccurate gender stereotypes
about ability held by teachers, parents and society as a whole, STEM-minded women face
constant discouragement throughout their experience in the STEM pipeline.
The STEM Pipeline as a Birdcage
The informal obstacles which prevent female students from persisting throughout the
STEM pipeline are reminiscent of Marilyn Frye’s 1983 illustration of oppression. Like birds in a
metaphoric cage, women who attempt to succeed in STEM are met with a fence of wires; some
of which are in place even before they are born. These obstacles hinder their progress at each
stage in their lives, but are invisible to those in society who have not, and will not ever have

41. 41
those obstacles put before them. Young men are birds in this metaphor too; however they have
no cage, no entrapment of any kind that prevents them from moving forward. In fact, as much of
the research on this topic has suggested, males are assisted in their progress throughout the
STEM pipeline; like birds who are given an extra push before flight.
These barriers are systematic and institutionalized, as evidenced by the research that has
been collected on females’ math and science experiences in elementary, middle and high school,
as well as the experiences of women in the current STEM job market. From a young age, girls
must combat society’s widely held stereotypes about their lack of math and science ability,
ignore assessments of their STEM aptitude by teachers and parents (which as research has
demonstrated, are often incorrect and reliant upon gender stereotypes rather than academic
achievement), all while maintaining a healthy level of confidence in their math and science
skills. It is pertinent that girls maintain high self-assessments of their STEM ability throughout
the pipeline, as this has been shown to improve performance on math achievement tests and
reduce test anxiety. Unfortunately not all girls are capable of persisting past these obstacles, and
are lost from the pipeline at early stages.
In the classroom, which is meant to be a space for equal education and opportunity, girls
are again at a disadvantage. Teachers afford more praise and general classroom attention to male
students, and have more beneficial interactions with them that enhance learning. In contrast,
female students are the unfortunate recipients of criticism for the quality of their work, while
male students are most often criticized for a lack of effort. Additionally, throughout their formal
education, boys with STEM ability are consistently assigned to advanced math groups at higher
rates than equally able girls; which again results in a leak of able girls from the pipeline. The
recommendation of students to advanced math groups by teachers is a crucial step in propelling

42. 42
those students through the STEM pipeline, as they are able to complete college math
requirements in less time and list advanced classes on their college applications.
Quite surprisingly, we expect girls to perform equally as well as boys in their math and
science classes, despite there being a substantial amount of research which highlights the barriers
than only girls must navigate in the STEM pipeline. Although formal barriers to access math and
science opportunities no longer exist for women like they did in 17th century scientific
academies (and in some countries until the mid-1900’s), informal barriers to STEM achievement
are unequivocally present for females today, and pervade every aspect of the formal education
system.
Suggestions
Given the knowledge of the complex and interlocking barriers that women face when
pursuing a STEM career, prospects for future careers in STEM may seem dismal. There have
been top-down methods which have attempted to improve upon the number of females in the
STEM pipeline; however the implementation of these techniques has occurred after women and
girls have already internalized negative stereotypes about their abilities, and experienced
disadvantages in that their male counterparts haven’t. For example, President Barack Obama did
commit resources to increasing access to STEM fields; but a large portion of the effort was
focused on informing institutions about their Title IX responsibilities, rather than using creative
solutions to engage girls in STEM at every age (TheWhiteHouse.gov, “President Obama’s
Record on Empowering Women and Girls”).
Fortunately, there are alternate solutions which address problems at each step in the
pipeline, and work to disrupt the outward flow of women from science, technology, engineering,
and math-related fields. Strategies that attack gender-based inequalities at the very beginning of

43. 43
the STEM pipeline provide more than just a bandage on a systematic problem, and work to give
girls the same social and intellectual opportunities to engage in STEM from early childhood
on. Ideally, these opportunities should be accessible to girls before the formal schooling process
begins so that they can be given the same head start as their male peers.
There is substantial research on the role of gendered toys, and how the socialization
process often determines which gender will be more interested in and familiar with science,
technology, engineering, and math. From Tinker toys, to building blocks and legos, boys have
been marketed STEM-friendly toys for years. This has not been the case for young girls in the
United States. Though Barbie dolls, Polly Pockets, and Easy Bake Ovens have merit; none
promote the spatial and cognitive skills that come to be useful in solving problems of
engineering, math, science, and technology. A helpful solution would be a toy which addressed a
female market and appealed to young girls, but still integrated concepts related to STEM; a toy
which required planning, spatial knowledge, and basic engineering to create a structure. This is
where Roominate comes in.
Roominate: A Bottom-Up Solution
While completing their master’s degrees in engineering at Stanford University, Alice
Brooks and Bettina Chen met and formed a friendship which would eventually turn into a
partnership in the invention of Roominate, a building toy designed for girls. As Alice and Bettina
shared with each other how they had become interested in engineering, they came to the
realization that their interests in STEM had been sparked by their childhood toys. With this in
mind, the two women designed Roominate; a toy intended to train girls in practical problem-
solving, cognitive-spatial orientation, electrical circuitry, creativity and confidence
(Roominatetoy.com, “About Roominate”). On the front page of its website, Roominate also cites

44. 44
that structure-based toys encourage both cognitive growth and spatial ability; an assertion which
is supported by current research. In 2014, a comprehensive review on building blocks and their
relationship to spatial ability and mathematics performance confirmed that structure-based toys
do encourage spatial ability. “Spatial ability” used here is an umbrella term for skills such as
visualization, estimation, measurement, detection of patterns, and understanding of symmetry.
Interestingly, Legos were specifically cited in the study as being useful in counting skills and
estimating distance.
Although Roominate is just one company with one particular vision for increasing girls
interest in and aptitude for STEM, its efforts represent a changing tide in how we choose to
approach the low representation of women in STEM fields. Roominate provides hope for a new
market of toys geared to increase girls’ interest in STEM, improve spatial abilities, and dispel
negative stereotypes surrounding girls and math. If both parents and formal educators made the
effort to introduce toys like Roominate into the home and classroom, girls who already display
an interest in STEM could pursue their passions, and girls with little to no exposure to STEM
would have an opportunity to do the same.
Conclusion
When movement through the STEM pipeline is examined according to the experiences of
women and girls, it becomes clear that the barriers females face in pursuing a future in STEM
often arise from stereotypes which alter parents’ and educators’ perceptions of what girls and
boys are capable of. The most harmful of these stereotypes, (and one that according to research is
widely held), asserts that girls simply do not have as much aptitude for math and science as boys
do. This belief may initially seem innocuous; how can opinions, some of which are never even
vocalized, hinder the success of girls in math and science? The answer is that even when girls are

45. 45
not explicitly told that they don’t have the ability to succeed in areas of math and science, that
message is still subtly communicated to them through the actions of those who have some level
of influence on their developing self-concept. As previously explained, teachers call on girls less
often than boys in class, overlook high-achieving girls for advanced math and science classes
more readily than boys, offer less positive encouragement to girls in class and more critical
discouragement, and often believe that their female students have less ability in math and science
than their male students; even when no statistically significant gender differences are found in a
class’s achievement scores or grades. These behaviors and beliefs of educators are just some of
the methods by which girls receive the message that they are simply not cut out for math and
science.
Unfortunately, girls often receive these messages from their parents as well. As
previously mentioned, parents who hold gendered stereotypes about math ability are less likely
to encourage STEM interests in their daughters than in their sons, they buy less STEM-related
toys and games on average for their daughters, and when interviewed, they consistently answer
that their daughter’s success in math and science is the result of effort, while their son’s success
is due to natural ability. Most significantly, research has shown that children’s evaluations of
their own abilities rely more heavily on their mother’s perceptions of their ability, than on their
actual grades in their math and science classes. This finding is just one of the connections
between gender stereotypes about STEM aptitude, and the success of girls in math and science.
The bigger picture that can be gleaned from the issue of gender stereotypes in STEM is
illustrated most succinctly by Marilyn Frye’s birdcage metaphor; that each barrier females face
in their progression through the STEM pipeline is like a wire in a cage which prevents their
movement to a career in STEM. When girls face discouragement from their parents at home, a

46. 46
lack of support and academic attention from their teachers at school, and a childhood devoid of
any introduction to STEM-related toys like building blocks or LEGOS, they are sure to be
pushed a few steps behind their male peers in their advancement through the STEM pipeline.
And even when girls are armed with confidence, and have been introduced to STEM concepts
from a young age, the formal education system still strips them of the belief that they can
succeed; from elementary school until the end of high school. It is not a mystery why girls are
lost from the STEM pipeline at every grade in the formal education system.
A girl that doesn’t believe she has the competence to succeed in math and science will
not join a free after-school coding program, or participate in workshops for designed to recruit
girls for futures in engineering; because she already believes that she won’t succeed in them. She
will not choose a college major in STEM just because it’s advertised, or because her school hires
a female speaker to encourage girls like her to step out of their comfort zone. Interventions like
these come too late in the STEM pipeline to substantially influence the numbers of women and
men employed in STEM. Girls have to be raised from birth to believe that they are capable, just
as boys are, and must not receive contradictory messages from their teachers and parents as they
make their way through the STEM pipeline. Change like this comes from the elimination of
society’s outdated stereotypes about girls and their lack of ability in math and science.
In sum, it becomes significant that beliefs about women’s competence and aptitude for
science and mathematics are generally negative, and it becomes obvious that the stereotypes born
from these beliefs do have real consequences for the future of females in STEM. Changes in
society to increase the numbers of women employed in STEM fields must be implemented at
birth; by providing girls with the same opportunities and confidence to pursue a STEM career as
boys, so that both genders are starting from the same place. Currently, boys have a head start in

47. 47
the STEM pipeline, which disadvantages girls from the beginning. In a track and field race,
runners have staggered starting lines due to the geometric shape of the track. Runners who must
circle the track at a wider angles have starting blocks placed ahead of other runners on the
straightaway. Runners with a longer way around the track aren’t simply told to stand in line with
all of their other competitors, and then expected to catch up even though they will encounter
barriers during the race which will make it impossible for them to win. And although the concept
of catching girls up to boys in the STEM pipeline requires a more complex set of changes, the
theory behind providing a head start remains the same.

48. 48
Works Cited
Beard, K. (2013, November 13). Behind America’s Decline in Math, Science and Technology.
U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com
Becker, J. R. (1981). Differential treatment of females and males in mathematics classes. Journal
for research in Mathematics Education, 40-53.
Beede, D., Julian, T., Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011). Women in
STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and
Statistics Administration.
Beery, A. K., & Zucker, I. (2011). Sex bias in neuroscience and biomedical research.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(3), 565-572.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). Annual average wages in science, technology, engineering
and math (Data file). Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-3/an-
overview-of-employment.htm
Casserly, P. L., & Rock, D. (1985). Factors related to young women's persistence and
achievement in advanced placement mathematics. Women and mathematics: Balancing
the equation, 225-247.
Duffy, J., Warren, K., & Walsh, M. (2001). Classroom interactions: Gender of teacher, gender of
student, and classroom subject. Sex roles, 45(9-10), 579-593.
Eccles, J. S., & Jacobs, J. E. (1986). Social forces shape math attitudes and performance. Signs,
11(2), 367-380.
Frome, P. M., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Parents' influence on children's achievement-related
perceptions. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(2), 435.
Frye, M. (2000). The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory. Retrieved from
http://www.filosofficas.unam.mx
Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, A. B., & Williams, C. C. (2008). Gender
similarities characterize math performance. Science,321(5888), 494-495.
Jacobs, J. E., & Bleeker, M. M. (2004). Girls' and boys' developing interests in math and
science: Do parents matter?. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development,
2004(106), 5-21.
Jones, M. G., & Wheatley, J. (1990). Gender differences in teacher‐student interactions in
science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,27(9), 861-874.
Milgram, D. (2011). How to Recruit Women and Girls to the Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math (STEM) Classroom. Technology and engineering teacher, 71(3),
4-11.

49. 49
Moore, G. W., & Slate, J. R. (2008). Who's taking the Advanced Placement courses and how
are they doing: A statewide two-year study. The High School Journal, 92(1), 56-67.
National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2013).
Scientists and Engineers Statistical Data.
Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students in
science and mathematics. Review of research in education, 16, 153-222.
Ramirez, F. O., & Wotipka, C. M. (2001). Slowly but surely? The global expansion of women's
participation in science and engineering fields of study, 1972-92. Sociology of Education,
231-251.
Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM
career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411-427.
Sass, T. R. (2013). Understanding the STEM pipeline. National Center for Analysis of
Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
Schiebinger, L. (1987). The history and philosophy of women in science: a review essay. Signs,
12(2), 305-332.
Shapiro, J. R., & Williams, A. M. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’
and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66(3-4), 175-183.
Tan, E., Calabrese Barton, A., Kang, H., & O'Neill, T. (2013). Desiring a career in
STEM-related fields: How middle school girls articulate and negotiate identities- in-
practice in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(10), 1143-1179.
Tiedemann, J. (2000). Parents' gender stereotypes and teachers' beliefs as predictors of
children's concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school. Journal of
Educational psychology, 92(1), 144.
United States Census Bureau. (2014). Families in Poverty by Type of Family. Retrieved from
http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/p60/252/pov_table4.pdf
Verdine, B. N., Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., Newcombe, N. S., Filipowicz, A. T., &
Chang, A. (2014). Deconstructing building blocks: Preschoolers' spatial assembly
performance relates to early mathematical skills. Child development, 85(3), 1062-1076.
Xu, Y. J. (2008). Gender disparity in STEM disciplines: A study of faculty attrition and turnover
intentions. Research in Higher Education, 49(7), 607-624.

50. 50