Stereotype and Choice: Understanding STEM Track Decisions of Korean Female High School Students

• In Event: Challenging Norms and Navigating Choices: Critical Perspectives on Student Experience, Gender, and Educational Decisions in East Asia

Proposal

While creative innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are rapidly changing the world, women make up only 29.3% of scientific researchers globally. It is especially crucial to focus on South Korea, which has one of the lowest female representations (20.4%) in STEM despite a high ratio of R&D expenditures to GDP.
Girls outperform boys in mathematics and science in the early stages globally. However, starting from secondary school, they often lose interest and self-efficacy in STEM. This is partly due to the biased perception that boys excel in these subjects and that STEM careers are masculine. In Korea, despite no significant gender differences in math and science achievement among 15-year-old students, many girls believe science is irrelevant to their careers. High-school girls show much lower STEM career motivations than middle-school girls and high-school boys.
Examining the STEM choices of Korean female high school students is crucial, as their academic track decisions in the first year significantly shape future careers. Existing research primarily focuses on higher education and the workforce and predominately uses quantitative rather than qualitative approaches. This study addresses the gap by exploring the decision-making process of Korean female high school students regarding STEM track choices through in-depth interviews with 16 participants. Specifically, two research questions are addressed:

RQ1. How do Korean female high school students perceive STEM subjects, and what are the underlying factors shaping their perceptions?
RQ2. How do reactions to these perceptions influence the academic track (STEM vs. non-STEM) choices of Korean female high school students?

This study draws on Eccles’s expectancy-value model (Eccles, 2007; 2011), suggests that individuals’ choices, performance, and persistence in achievement-related tasks are primarily influenced by their expectations of success and the value they place on tasks, shaped by various personal, cultural, and social factors. Additionally, it applies UNESCO’s four-level model (2017), which categorizes the factors affecting female participation in STEM into individual, family, institutional, and societal levels. Furthermore, given the prevailing discourse that many female students deliberately avoid choosing physics as an elective, the study uses a more precise categorization—dividing choices into STEM (physics), STEM (non-physics), and non-STEM—rather than a simplistic STEM vs. non-STEM classification.

Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 Korean female high school students. Participants included sophomores who had already chosen their academic track (STEM vs. non-STEM) and freshmen recruited via snowball sampling. The interview recordings were transcribed using CLOVA note and analyzed in QSR NVivo R1 using provisional, process, and In Vivo coding.

Regarding RQ1, girls both from STEM and non-STEM tracks shared similar perceptions that STEM subjects, particularly mathematics and physics, necessitate inherent talent, and boys possess the talent naturally while girls do not. Four factors shaped these perceptions: the lack of female role models (school and societal influence), top-performing male students (peer influence), teachers’ endorsement of gender stereotypes (school influence), and girls’ and boys’ different ways of solving math problems (peer influence). For the first factor, girls mentioned that the scarcity of female STEM teachers and the extreme gender imbalance in the STEM workforce led them to believe that boys are innately superior in science and mathematics, causing self-doubt about their potential as future female STEM professionals. For the second factor, girls observed that boys were often the top performers in science and math, particularly those admitted to specialized science high schools, reinforcing the perception that STEM talent is male-dominated. The third factor arises from hearing teachers repeatedly state that males’ brain structures and cognitive patterns are better suited for STEM fields, which contributed to girls’ belief in this stereotype. Additionally, some teachers, especially in private academies, advised girls not to exert excessive effort in subjects like physics and math, suggesting it would be challenging to compete with boys’ natural talent. Lastly, the fourth factor came from girls observing that boys excelled in areas such as geometry, demonstrating faster problem-solving skills and more concise written processes, which reinforced the belief in boys’ inherent advantage in STEM.

Regarding RQ2, female students’ reactions to their STEM perceptions can be categorized into three types: positive, indifferent, and negative. Students with a positive reaction were motivated to challenge existing gender stereotypes and explore the unique opportunities presented by the underrepresentation of females in STEM fields. Participants in this group chose both physics and non-physics subjects as electives within the STEM track. The second group, which was indifferent to these perceptions, believed that competence, rather than gender, determines superiority in a field. Their diverse choices (STEM - physics, STEM - non-physics, and non-STEM) were influenced by factors such as academic performance, personal interests, parental occupations (STEM or non-STEM), and parental encouragement toward STEM for its potential benefits. The final group, with a negative reaction, reported a loss of enthusiasm and felt they had to exert more effort compared to males. As a result, they opted for non-STEM track where innate talent is perceived as less important. Interestingly, some still chose non-physics subjects within the STEM track due to perceived financial prospects and broader university and employment opportunities, influenced by parental expectations and personal perceptions.

By implementing a more precise categorization when examining female students’ choices, this approach provided a more comprehensive analysis of how perceptions of STEM influence female students’ STEM choices. It possibly contributed to explaining the extreme gender imbalance in engineering fields in Korea, where choosing physics as an elective is required for engineering majors. Furthermore, this study shed light on the importance of considering factors beyond the school environment, such as private educational institutions where students spend a significant amount of time outside of school. Lastly, in contrast to prior studies emphasizing parental influences that discourage girls from pursuing STEM, this study revealed a divergent pattern in Korea, where parents push their daughters to choose STEM, driven by the widely held perception in Korean society that STEM fields provide more advantages in university admissions and employment prospects.

Author

• Yijun Won, UW-Madison