KADINLARIN STEM KARİYERLERİNDE ZOR YOLU: NEREDEYİZ? NEDEN BU KADAR AZ? VE NE YAPILMALI?

Year 2022, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 104 - 121, 31.12.2022

Seham Aljaafreh , Yücel Sayılar

Abstract

The purpose of this review paper is to examine barriers encountered by females in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The paper is organized into three main sections. First, the paper explores the current educatıon and workforce representation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics landscape, and then, the paper details the barriers women face during education and work stages and societal barriers as well. Finally, we provide appropriate suggestions and highlight successful practices to overcome such barriers in woman's STEM career paths. The information has been elaborated and classified throughout reviewing the literature, national and global reports and statistics.

Keywords

STEM Career, STEM Education, Career Barriers, Gender Discrimination

References

• 1. Adedokun, O. A., Hetzel, K., Parker, L. C., Loizzo, J., Burgess, W. D., & Paul Robinson, J. (2012). Using Virtual Field Trips to Connect Students with University Scientists: Core Elements and Evaluation of zipTripsTM. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(5), 607–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9350-z
• 2. Alawi, W. S. S., & Al Mubarak, M. M. (2019). Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (Stem): Barriers and Solutions. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 9(6), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.8908
• 3. Aycock, L. M., Hazari, Z., Brewe, E., Clancy, K. B. H., Hodapp, T., & Goertzen, R. M. (2019). Sexual harassment reported by undergraduate female physicists. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 10121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010121
• 4. Azmat, G., & Petrongolo, B. (2014). Gender and the labor market: What have we learned from field and lab experiments? Labour Economics, 30, 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2014.06.005
• 5. Barthelemy, R. S., McCormick, M., & Henderson, C. (2016). Gender discrimination in physics and astronomy: Graduate student experiences of sexism and gender microaggressions. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020119
• 6. Benitez-Herrera, S., Spinelli, P. F., Mano, S., & Paula Germano, A. (2019). Pursuing gender equality in Astronomy in basic education: the case of the project “Girls in the Museum of Astronomy and Related Sciences”. EPJ Web of Conferences, 200, 02010. https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201920002010
• 7. Bettio, F., & Verashchagina, A. (2009). Gender segregation in the labour market: Root causes, implications and policy responses in the EU. European Commission, 1–120. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4028&langId=en
• 8. Blackburn, H. (2017). The Status of Women in STEM in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature 2007–2017. Science and Technology Libraries, 36(3), 235–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2017.1371658
• 9. Blau, F., & Kahn, L. (2017). the Gender Wage Gap: Extent, Trends, and Explanations†. Journal of Economic Literature, LV. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1tm7gsm.15
• 10. Bleier, R., & Engle, I. M. (1987). Science and Gender: A Critique of Biology and Its Theories on Women . American Journal of Physics, 55(2), 188–188. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.15202
• 11. Carlana, M. (2019). Implicit Stereotypes : Evidence From Teachers. The Quarterly Journal Of Economics, 134(3), 1163-1224. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjz008.Advance
• 12. Carli, L. L., Alawa, L., Lee, Y. A., Zhao, B., & Kim, E. (2016). Stereotypes About Gender and Science: Women ≠ Scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315622645
• 13. Carnes, M., Devine, P. G., Baier Manwell, L., Byars-Winston, A., Fine, E., Ford, C. E., … Sheridan, J. (2015). The effect of an intervention to break the gender bias habit for faculty at one institution: A cluster randomized, controlled trial. Academic Medicine, 90(2), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000552
• 14. Cech, E. A., & Blair-Loy, M. (2019). The changing career trajectories of new parents in STEM. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(10), 4182–4187. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810862116
• 15. Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W. M. (2014). Women in academic science: A changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 15(3), 75–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100614541236
• 16. Cha, Y. (2013). Overwork and the persistence of gender segregation in occupations. Gender & Society, 27(2), 158–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243212470510
• 17. Charlesworth, T. E. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2019). Gender in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Issues, Causes, Solutions. Journal of Neuroscience, 39(37), 7228–7243. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0475-18.2019
• 18. Chiu, M. H., & Duit, R. (2011). Globalization: Science education from an international perspective. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 553–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20427
• 19. Cimpian, J. R., Kim, T. H., & McDermott, Z. T. (2020). Understanding persistent gender gaps in STEM. Science, 368(6497), 1317–1319. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba7377
• 20. Corbett, C., & Hill, C. A. (2015). Solving the Equation: The Variables for Women’s Success in Engineering and Computing. Dabla-Norris, E., & Kochhar, K. (2019). Closing the gender gap. Finance and Development (C. 56). https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x12458911
• 21. Dasgupta, N., & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: STEMing the Tide and Broadening Participation in STEM Careers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214549471
• 22. Dawson, A. E., Bernstein, B. L., & Bekki, J. M. (2015). Providing the Psychosocial Benefits of Mentoring to Women in STEM: Career WISE as an Online Solution . New Directions for Higher Education, 2015(171), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20142
• 23. Devine, P. G., Forscher, P. S., Cox, W. T. L., Kaatz, A., Sheridan, J., & Carnes, M. (2017). A gender bias habit-breaking intervention led to increased hiring of female faculty in STEMM departments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73(July), 211–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.002
• 24. Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking Congruity Between Goals and Roles: A New Look at Why Women Opt Out of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Careers. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1051–1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610377342
• 25. Diekman, A. B., Clark, E. K., Johnston, A. M., Brown, E. R., & Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influences attraction to STEM careers: Evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(5), 902–918. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025199
• 26. Ecklund, E. H., Lincoln, A. E., & Tansey, C. (2012). Gender Segregation in Elite Academic Science. Gender and Society, 26(5), 693–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243212451904
• 27. Emelianova, O., & Milhomem, C. (2019). Women on Boards Progress Report 2019. Msci, (DECEMBER), 30. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www.msci.com/documents/10199/36ef83ab-ed68-c1c1-58fe-86a3eab673b8
• 28. Fennema, E., Peterson, P., Carpenter, T., & Lubinski, C. (1990). Teachers’ attributions and beliefs about g i r l s , boys, a n d m a t h e m a t i c s, 55–69.
• 29. Forscher, P. S., Mitamura, C., Dix, E. L., Cox, W. T. L., & Devine, P. G. (2017). Breaking the prejudice habit: Mechanisms, timecourse, and longevity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 72(September 2016), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.04.009
• 30. Frank, K. (2019). Analytical studies branch research paper series: A gender analysis of the occupational pathways of STEM graduates in Canada. Statistics Canada. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11f0019m/11f0019m2019017-eng.htm
• 31. Funk, C., & Parker, K. (2018). Women and Men in STEM Often at Odds Over Workplace Equity. Pew Research Center, (January), 1–19. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/women-and-men-in-stem-often-at-odds-over-workplace-equity/#fn-24050-6
• 32. Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692–731. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692
• 33. González-Pérez, S., Mateos de Cabo, R., & Sáinz, M. (2020). Girls in STEM: Is It a Female Role-Model Thing? Frontiers in Psychology, 11(September). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02204
• 34. González, M. J. C., Cortina, C., & Rodríguez, J. (2019). The role of gender stereotypes in hiring: A field experiment. European Sociological Review, 35(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcy055
• 35. Good, J. J., Woodzicka, J. A., & Wingfield, L. C. (2010). The effects of gender stereotypic and counter-stereotypic textbook images on science performance. Journal of Social Psychology, 150(2), 132–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903366552
• 36. Greenwald, A. G., Mcghee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test Anthony. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.
• 37. Greenwald, A. G., Rudman, L. A., Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., Farnham, S. D., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.3
• 38. Herrmann, S. D., Adelman, R. M., Bodford, J. E., Graudejus, O., Okun, M. A., & Kwan, V. S. Y. (2016). The Effects of a Female Role Model on Academic Performance and Persistence of Women in STEM Courses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38(5), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2016.1209757
• 39. Hewlett, S. A., Carolyn Buck, L., Servon, L. J., Laura, S., Peggy, S., Sosnovich, E., … C. (2008). The Athena factor: Reversing the brain drain in science, engineering, and technology. Harvard Business Review, (10094), 100. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://rachelappel.com/media/downloads/w_athena_factor.pdf 40. J. Wu, D. U. (2020). Beyond the Leaky Pipeline : Developmental Pathways That Lead College Students to Join or Return to STEM Majors, 6(2), 64–90.
• 41. Kim, N. J. E., Vásquez, V. B., Torres, E., Nicola, R. M. B., & Karr, C. (2016). Breaking the Silence: Sexual Harassment of Mexican Women Farmworkers. Journal of Agromedicine, 21(2), 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2016.1143903
• 42. Kitzinger, J., Haran, J., Chimba, M., & Boyce, T. (2008). Role Models in the Media: An Exploration of the Views and Experiences of Women in Science, Engineering and Technology. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi www.ukrc4setwomen.org
• 43. Kong, S., Carroll, K., Lundberg, D., Omura, P., & Lepe, B. (2020). Reducing gender bias in STEM. MIT Science Policy Review, 1, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.38105/spr.11kp6lqr0a
• 44. Korkut-owen, F., Didem, K., Serap, Ö., Özlem, U., & Yilmaz, O. (2012). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Bölüm Seçme Nedenleri. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 8(3), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.87701
• 45. Kübler, D., Schmid, J., & Stüber, R. (2018). Gender Discrimination in Hiring Across Occupations: A Nationally-Representative Vignette Study. Labour Economics, 55, 215–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2018.10.002
• 46. Lambrecht, A., & Tucker, C. (2019). Algorithmic bias? An empirical study of apparent gender-based discrimination in the display of stem career ads. Management Science, 65(7), 2966–2981. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3093
• 47. Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y., & Froyd, J. E. (2020). Research and trends in STEM education: a systematic review of journal publications. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6
• 48. Litson, K., Blaney, J. M., & Feldon, D. F. (2015). Understanding the Transient Nature of STEM Doctoral Students ’ Research Self-Efficacy Across Time : Considering the Role of Gender , Race , and First-Generation College Status, 12(January). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.617060
• 49. Lund, S., Manyika, J., Segel, L. H., Dua, A., Hancock, B., Rutherford, S., & Macon, and B. (2019). The future of work in Latin The Future of Work in America: People and Places, Today and Tomorrow. McKinsey Global Institute, (July), p.8. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---cabinet/documents/newsitem/wcms_617754.pdf
• 50. Lundberg, S., & Stearns, J. (2019). Women in economics: Stalled progress. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.1.3
• 51. Madgavkar, A., Manyika, J., Krishnan, M., Ellingrud, K., Yee, L., Woetzel, J., … Balakrishnan, S. (2019). The future of women at work: age of automation Transitions in the. McKinsey Global Institute, (June), 38-39. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Featured Insights/Gender Equality/The future of women at work Transitions in the age of automation/MGI-The-future-of-women-at-work-Exec-summary.ashx
• 52. Martin, C. L., & Halverson, C. F. (2016). A Schematic Processing Model of Sex Typing and Stereotyping in Children Author ( s ): Carol Lynn Martin , Charles F . Halverson and Jr . Published by : Wiley on behalf of the Society for Research in Child Development Stable URL : http://www.jstor.org/stab. Society for Research in Child Development, 52(4), 1119–1134.
• 53. McKinsey and Lean. (2020). Women in the workplace, 63. https://doi.org/10.1049/et.2009.0920
• 54. Meena, K. (2016). Blind Recruitment: the New Hiring Buzz for Diversity Inclusion. International Journal of Business and General Management (IJBGM), 5(5), 25–28. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://www.iaset.us/view_archives.php?year=2016&id=32&jtype=2&page=2
• 55. MHRD India. (2018). ALL INDIA SURVEY ON HIGHER EDUCATION 2018-19. Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, “Table 35: Out-Turn/Pass-Out at Under Graduate Level in Major Disciplines/Subjects (Based on Actual Response),”. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://epsiindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/AISHE-2017-18.pdf
• 56. Milkman, K. L., Akinola, M., & Chugh, D. (2012). Temporal Distance and Discrimination: An Audit Study in Academia. Psychological Science, 23(7), 710–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611434539
• 57. Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., Cachon, G., Caruso, E., Castilla, E., Fernandez, R., … Meier, S. (2015). Supplemental Material for What Happens Before? A Field Experiment Exploring How Pay and Representation Differentially Shape Bias on the Pathway Into Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1678–1712. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000022.supp
• 58. Miyake, A., Lauren E. Kost-Smith, Noah D. Finkelstein, S. J. P., & Geoffrey L. Cohen, T. A. (2010). Classroom Study of Values Affirmation. Pharmacia, 288(May), 870–874.
• 59. Morgan, R. D. (2019). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Criminal Psychology, 347(6219). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483392240.n8
• 60. Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(41), 16474–16479. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109
• 61. NSF. (1998). Information technology : Its Impact on Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology. national sceince Board NSF, 5, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.6224/JN.58.1.79
• 62. NSF, national sceince B. (2018). Science & engineering indicators: 2018. national sceince Board NSF, 4, 203–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1625(91)90008-4
• 63. OCED. (2018). PISA 2018 : insights and intrepretations. OCED, 31–64.
• 64. OCED. (2019). Why don’t more girls choose to pursue a science career? PISA in Focus, 93, 6. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/why-don-t-more-girls-choose-to-pursue-a-science-career_02bd2b68-en
• 65. Olsson, M., & Martiny, S. E. (2018). Does exposure to counterstereotypical role models influence girls’ and women’s gender stereotypes and career choices? A review of social psychological research. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(DEC). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02264
• 66. Otluoğlu1, K. Ö. Ç., & Akdoğanli, Ç. (2019). Bariyerleri İle Başa Çikmanin Kariyere Adanmişlik Üzerindeki Etkisi : Kadin Çalişanlar Üzerine Bir Araştirma The Effect Of Perceived Career Barriers And Coping With Perceived Career Barriers On Career Engagement : Research On Women Employees. Marmara Üniversitesi Kadın Ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2019), 90–108.
• 67. Paglis, L. L., Green, S. G., & Bauer, T. N. (2006). Does adviser mentoring add value? A longitudinal study of mentoring and doctoral student outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), 451–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-9003-2 Paluck, E. L., Green, S. A., & Green, D. P. (2019). The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioural Public Policy, 3(02), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2018.25
• 68. Parker, L. R., Monteith, M. J., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Van Camp, A. R. (2018). Promoting concern about gender bias with evidence-based confrontation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74(March 2019), 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.009
• 69. Primé, D. R., Bernstein, B. L., Wilkins, K. G., & Bekki, J. M. (2015). Measuring the Advising Alliance for Female Graduate Students in Science and Engineering: An Emerging Structure. Journal of Career Assessment, 23(1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072714523086
• 70. Régner, I., Thinus-Blanc, C., Netter, A., Schmader, T., & Huguet, P. (2019). Committees with implicit biases promote fewer women when they do not believe gender bias exists. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(11), 1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0686-3
• 71. Reuben, E., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2014). How stereotypes impair women’s careers in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(12), 4403–4408. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1314788111
• 72. Riach, P. A., & Rich, J. (2006). An experimental investigation of sexual discrimination in hiring in the english labor market. Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy, 6(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2202/1538-0637.1416
• 73. Saucerman, J., & Vasquez, K. (2014). Psychological barriers to STEM participation for women over the course of development. Adultspan Journal, 13(1), 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0029.2014.00025.x
• 74. Shaw, A. K., & Stanton, D. E. (2012). Leaks in the pipeline: Separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1743), 3736–3741. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.0822
• 75. Sheu, H.-B., & Phrasavath, L. (2019). Social cognitive career theory. Contemporary Theories of Career Development, (January 2002), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315276175-6
• 76. Singh, R., Zhang, Y., Wan, M. (Maggie), & Fouad, N. A. (2018). Why do women engineers leave the engineering profession? The roles of work–family conflict, occupational commitment, and perceived organizational support. Human Resource Management, 57(4), 901–914. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21900
• 77. Smyth, B., & Nosek, F. (2015). On the gender–science stereotypes held by scientists: explicit accord with gender-ratios, implicit accord with scientific identity. Front. Psychol. 6:415. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00415.
• 78. UNESCO. (2019). Women in Science. Fact Sheet No. 55, (55), 4. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://uis.unesco.org
• 79. Valantine, H. A., Collins, F. S., & Verma, I. M. (2015). National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(40), 12240–12242. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1515612112
• 80. Wenneras, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer review. Nature, 387(6631), 341–343. 81. World Economic Forum. (2019). Global Gender Gap Report 2020: Insight Report. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2020.pdf
• 82. Wüst, K., & Leko Šimić, M. (2017). Students’ career preferences: Intercultural study of Croatian and German students. Economics and Sociology, 10(3), 136–152. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2017/10-3/10