Consequences of Teaching Girls About Structural Causes of Gender Differences in STEM

• In Event: Motivational Messages to Broaden Participation in STEM: Important Features of Messages and Messengers

Abstract

Gender gaps in STEM interest remain a large educational problem, feeding into gender stereotypes that boys are more interested than girls in STEM. These stereotypes lead girls to infer they will not be interested, hindering their STEM interest and participation (Master, in press). Stereotypes reinforce beliefs that gender differences are due to internal and inherent gender differences, minimizing recognition of environmental influences. What kinds of messages can help educators disrupt this process? We examined consequences of teaching girls about external, rather than internal, causes of gender gaps (see Table 1). Our objective was to examine whether giving 11-12-year-old girls structural (as one specific type of external) explanations for gender differences affected stereotypical beliefs and interest in a novel STEM activity.

Theoretical Framework
Our framework brings together attribution theory (Graham & Taylor, 2016) and the STEMO developmental model of how stereotypes influence students’ STEM motivation (Master & Meltzoff, 2020).
Methods and Materials
Participants were 220 girls (71% White, 19% multiracial, 6% Asian, 4% Other; Mage=12.02, SD=0.59). Participants completed the activity online with a researcher using Zoom. The researcher shared a video in which participants learned about a novel STEM game called “the finding game.” Participants were randomly assigned to the structural or individual condition (see Table 2). While both conditions described boys as more interested than girls, the structural condition highlighted external reasons for this difference. Dependent measures included endorsement of a gender-interest stereotype favoring boys (difference score for “How much do most boys like the finding game?” minus “How much do most girls like the finding game?” 1-6 scale); whether participants could develop future interest in the game; current interest (2 items, =0.84, e.g., “Are you interested or not interested in playing the finding game?” 1-6 scale); and behavioral choice of number of games to take home (0-3). All participants were debriefed.

Results
Participants in the structural condition were less likely to endorse stereotypes about the finding game that favored boys, p<0.001, d=0.66 (see Figure 1). They were more likely to believe that they could develop their interest, p<0.05, d=0.28. There were no condition differences in interest, p=0.56, d=0.08, or behavioral choice, p=.83, d=0.03. However, stereotypes favoring boys were negatively correlated with interest, r(214)=-0.24, p<0.001, and belief in future interest development was positively correlated with interest, r(218)=0.30, p<0.001, and behavioral choice, r(218)=0.15, p=0.024.

Significance
As part of the 2022 AERA theme, education researchers are called to cultivate equitable educational systems, including removing psychological barriers that perpetuate gender gaps in STEM. These findings suggest that teaching girls about structural factors is a promising way to change their perceptions of gender differences, although more work is needed to help connect these perceptions to their own STEM motivation. The results have implications for interventions to help educators counteract negative effects of gender stereotypes and reduce gender gaps in STEM.

Authors

• Allison Master, University of Houston

• Sapna Cheryan, University of Washington - Seattle

• Elizabeth Stier, University of Washington

• Andrew N Meltzoff, University of Washington