Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T14:29:35.874Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Do teenagers want to become scientists?

A comparison of gender differences in attitudes toward science, career expectations, and academic skill across 29 countries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2014

By
John Jerrim  and
Ingrid Schoon
Edited by
Ingrid Schoon  and
Jacquelynne S. Eccles
John Jerrim
Affiliation:
University of London
Ingrid Schoon
Affiliation:
University of London
Ingrid Schoon
Affiliation:
Institute of Education, University of London
Jacquelynne S. Eccles
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Get access

Summary

Abstract

In this chapter we investigate how boys’ and girls’ ability and attitudes toward science differ as they approach the end of compulsory schooling. We begin by comparing their performance on an internationally standardized test, before investigating the proportion of boys and girls aspiring to a scientific career. Results are compared across a set of 29 developed countries. Gender differences in science achievement tests completed at age 15 are small, yet boys and girls wish to enter very different careers. In all 29 countries boys are more likely than girls to expect entry into careers involving physical science or mathematics, while girls prefer a career in life sciences and the health professions.

Introduction

Over the past 15 to 20 years, educational attainment has risen dramatically across all developed countries. Whereas in 1995 only one in five children living in OECD countries completed university, this figure has almost doubled to one in three today (OECD, 2008, table A3.2). One particularly noticeable feature in almost every country in the developed world is the rising trend of women now outnumbering men in accessing tertiary education (OECD, 2008). However, men and women are not evenly distributed among the different disciplines. Compared to boys, girls are less likely to study a subject relating to the natural sciences (especially physics), technology, engineering, or math (STEM) (OECD, 2008, table A3.5). This is despite the STEM disciplines offering the greatest economic rewards. For example, Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2003) show that in the United States social science, art, education, and humanities graduates earn roughly 30% less than economists, mathematicians, scientists, and engineers. A similar picture is evident in Europe, where STEM graduates tend to have higher earnings than non-STEM graduates (DIUS, 2009).

Type
Chapter
Information
Gender Differences in Aspirations and Attainment
A Life Course Perspective
 , pp. 203 - 223
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Black, D., Sanders, S., & Taylor, L. (2003). The economic reward for studying economics. Economic Inquiry, 41(3), 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charles, M. (2011). A world of difference: International trends in women’s economic status. Annual Review of Sociology (Vol. 37, pp. 355–371). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, B. (2011). Forward-thinking teens: The effects of college costs on adolescent risky behavior. Economics of Education Review, 30(5), 813–825.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cresswell, J., & Vayssettes, S. (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
Croll, P. (2008). Occupational choice, socio-economic status and educational attainment: A study of the occupational choices and destinations of young people in the British Household Panel Survey. Research Papers in Education, 23, 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department for Innovation, University and Skills (DIUS). (2009). The demand for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) skills. Retrieved from .
Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(4), 585–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eccles, J. S. (2007). Where are all the women? Gender differences in participation in physical science and engineering. In Ceci, S. J. & Williams, W. M. (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 199–210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eccles, J. S. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as motivators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 78–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eccles (Parsons), J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In Spence, J. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 75–146). San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. (2002). Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription, compromise, and self-creation. In D. Brown & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 85–148). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Gupta, N. (1993). Probabilities of job choice and employer selection and male–female occupational differences. American Economic Review, 83(2), 57–61.Google Scholar
Gupta, N. (1994). A specification test of the determinants of male–female occupational differences. Economics Letters, 44(1–2), 197–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutman, L., & Akerman, R. (2008). Determinants of aspirations (Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) Research Report 27). Retrieved from .
Harper, B., & Haq, M. (2001). Ambition, discrimination, and occupational attainment: A study of a British cohort. Oxford Economic Papers, 53(4), 695–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinjans, K. (2009). Do gender differences in preferences from competition matter for occupational expectations?Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(5), 701–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maghsoodloo, S., & Huang, C. (2010). Comparing the overlapping of two independent confidence intervals with a single confidence interval for two normal population parameters. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 140(11), 3295–3305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, A. (2010). Cross-national gender gaps in educational expectations: The influence of national-level gender ideology and educational systems. Comparative Education Review, 54(1), 22–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation state. American Journal of Sociology, 103(1), 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, S. (2004). Methodologist as arbitrator: Five methods for black–white differences in the causal effect of expectations on attainment. Sociological Methods and Research, 33(1), 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, S. (2005). On the edge of commitment: Educational attainment and race in the United States. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
National Academy of Science. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy. Retrieved from .Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2007a). PISA 2006 technical report. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2007b). Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2006. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2008). Education at a glance 2008: OECD indicators. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2010). PISA 2009 results: Learning to learn – Student engagement strategies and practices (Vol. 3). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
Pakes, A., & Sokoloff, K. (1996). Science, technology and economic growth. PNAS, 93(23), 12655–12657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramirez, F. O., & Wotipka, C. M. (2001). Slowly but surely? The global expansion of women’s participation in engineering fields of study, 1972–92. Sociology of Education, 74, 231–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, C., Flouri, E., & Buchanan, A. (2004). Aspirations and expectations. National Parenting and Family Institute. Retrieved from .Google Scholar
Schneider, B., & Stevenson, D. (1999). The ambitious generation. Educational Leadership, 57, 23–25.Google Scholar
Schoon, I. (2006). Risk and resilience: Adaptations in changing times. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoon, I., Ross, A., & Martin, P. (2007). Science related careers: Aspirations and outcomes in two British cohort studies. Equal Opportunities International, 26(2), 129–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sells, L. W. (1980). The mathematics filter and the education of women and minorities. In Fox, L., Brody, L., & Tobin, D. (Eds.), Women and the mathematical mystique: Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Hyman Blumberg Symposium on Research in Early Childhood Education (pp. 66–75). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Sewell, W., Haller, A., & Ohlendorf, G. (1970). The educational and early occupational status attainment process: Replication and revision. American Sociological Review, 35(6), 1014–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×