Doctor or Engineer: Gendered Motivational Processes that Shape Within-STEM Educational and Career Choices

• In Event: Bridging Equity Gaps in STEM: Insights from the Upcoming Handbook on Gender and STEM

Abstract

Objectives
As a critical factor predicting STEM pursuit and persistence, motivation is central to promoting gender equity in STEM fields (Wang & Degol, 2017). Much existing research on STEM motivation focuses on differences between women and men in their motivational beliefs for certain STEM courses or fields of study, or for STEM overall, to explain why there are gender differences in choice of STEM versus non-STEM learning and career opportunities (Wang & Degol, 2013). However, the diverse subfields within STEM vary greatly in their characteristics (Cheryan et al., 2017; Xue & Larson, 2015), which likely leads to further differentiation by gender in women’s and men’s motivation to pursue some careers and fields of study versus others within STEM. The goal of this study was to build on limited prior review work about this topic and outline more fully the motivational pathways through which gender is likely to shape within-STEM career and educational choices.

Methodological Approach
We reviewed relevant research on motivational beliefs and gender in STEM fields, focusing on prior research that addressed differences between one STEM sub-field and another. Grounded in several prominent motivational theories, including situated expectancy-value theory, social cognitive theory, and self-determination theory, we focused our review on four types of motivational constructs that have been most often discussed in existing literature as mechanisms underlying gendered persistence in STEM career paths: competence-related beliefs, value and interest, perceptions of cost, and belonging. Most of the research we reviewed centered on students in secondary school, college/university, and graduate programs in the United States.

Results and Discussion
Results of the review showed a general trend observed throughout adolescence and emerging adulthood, such that motivational gaps by gender were larger in subject areas with a higher proportion of men relative to women participating in associated career paths, such as engineering and computer science, compared to fields like biology and medicine where there were relatively more women in careers. Several prominent factors often interacted with gender identity to relate to different motivational beliefs, including: stereotypes and social norms about gender, perceptions of communal values afforded by a career path, access to role models or mentors that shared one’s gender, comparisons of one’s motivational beliefs across subject areas, and workplace/instructional climate perceptions. These factors were associated with women reporting higher value for, more interest in, greater belonging in, and/or lower perceived cost for engaging in STEM career paths or learning opportunities related to biology and chemistry, as compared to those related to computer science, engineering, or physics (see Table 5.1 for further details related to each construct).

Scholarly Significance
This work contributes to the understanding of gender disparities in STEM by highlighting the importance of within-STEM differences in motivational processes. It also provides implications for more precise educational policy/practice that can help promote gender equity in career satisfaction, preparation, and participation across the different areas of STEM.

Authors

• Yichi Zhang, University of Georgia

• Harlee Robinson DiNello, University of Georgia

• Emily Quinn Rosenzweig, Teachers College, Columbia University