ArticleInternational journal of technology and design education2022
Analysis of barriers, supports and gender gap in the choice of STEM studies in secondary education.
Article in International journal of technology and design education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Elite career expectations of adolescents: Popularity, gender differences, and social divides.Journal of adolescence · 2024Article
- Exploring the stability of the gender gap in faculty perceptions of gender climate at a rural regional university.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Society is more digitised than ever and there is an urgent need to train people in these sectors, where women are still under-represented. A quantitative descriptive, correlational and explanatory descriptive design was used to identify barriers, supports and gender gaps in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics in Secondary Education by analysing the interest and perception of 1562 students and 432 teachers. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square and Lambda test and Crame's V or Phi test were performed together with a qualitative analysis. The results show that fewer female students want to pursue STEM studies, with girls preferring health and education professions and boys preferring engineering and computer science. Indeed, their motivation is different since we found correlations between being a girl and choosing STEM for helping people and society, while earning money is important for boys. Girls believe more necessary than boys to have qualities to study STEM and less often perceive themselves as intelligent and courageous. Our study revealed that families and teachers encourage more boys than girls towards STEM activities. Teachers believe that girls are influence by preconceived ideas, lack of STEM knowledge and lower self-esteem. Regarding gender equality, almost half state that no objectives are included in the curricula, 43.85% do not include it in subjects and only 30% received training. Consequently, female vocations need to be promoted by teaching how STEM solves real-life problems, fostering creativity, increasing self-confidence, promoting STEM activities and making female role models visible. Teachers should receive more gender training and promote gender-sensitive STEM education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.