IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/manchs/v90y2022i5p473-499.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender differences in science, technology, engineering and maths uptake and attainment in post‐16 education

Author

Listed:
  • Emily McDool
  • Damon Morris

Abstract

The underrepresentation of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) occupations is a world‐wide phenomenon. The UK is simultaneously encountering a shortage of STEM skills. While gender imbalances in STEM study in higher education and A‐level study are widely documented, gender imbalances are apparent in vocational post‐16 education, though the existence and causes of these imbalances have received little attention. This paper uses administrative data to explore the extent of gender imbalances in STEM qualifications attempted and achieved in vocational post‐16 education routes. Gender differentials in the uptake of vocational STEM qualifications are much starker than they are in A‐levels and the roles of ability, socio‐economic status and school characteristics in explaining gender differentials differ with the education route taken, though their power in explaining these gaps is limited.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily McDool & Damon Morris, 2022. "Gender differences in science, technology, engineering and maths uptake and attainment in post‐16 education," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(5), pages 473-499, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:manchs:v:90:y:2022:i:5:p:473-499
    DOI: 10.1111/manc.12403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/manc.12403
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/manc.12403?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Justman, Moshe & Méndez, Susan J., 2018. "Gendered choices of STEM subjects for matriculation are not driven by prior differences in mathematical achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 282-297.
    2. Scott E. Carrell & Marianne E. Page & James E. West, 2010. "Sex and Science: How Professor Gender Perpetuates the Gender Gap," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(3), pages 1101-1144.
    3. Glenn Ellison & Ashley Swanson, 2010. "The Gender Gap in Secondary School Mathematics at High Achievement Levels: Evidence from the American Mathematics Competitions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 109-128, Spring.
    4. Roland G. Fryer & Steven D. Levitt, 2010. "An Empirical Analysis of the Gender Gap in Mathematics," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 210-240, April.
    5. Sophie Hedges & Stefan Speckesser, 2017. "Peer Effects and Social Influence in Post-16 Educational Choice," CVER Research Papers 008, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    6. Matthew Wiswall & Basit Zafar, 2015. "Determinants of College Major Choice: Identification using an Information Experiment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(2), pages 791-824.
    7. Friedman-Sokuler, Naomi & Justman, Moshe, 2016. "Gender streaming and prior achievement in high school science and mathematics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 230-253.
    8. Ost, Ben, 2010. "The role of peers and grades in determining major persistence in the sciences," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 923-934, December.
    9. Rask, Kevin & Tiefenthaler, Jill, 2008. "The role of grade sensitivity in explaining the gender imbalance in undergraduate economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 676-687, December.
    10. Natalia Nollenberger & Núria Rodríguez-Planas & Almudena Sevilla, 2016. "The Math Gender Gap: The Role of Culture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 257-261, May.
    11. Aderonke Osikominu & Volker Grossmann & Marius Osterfeld, 2020. "Sociocultural background and choice of STEM majors at university," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(2), pages 347-369.
    12. Stefan Speckesser & Sophie Hedges, 2017. "Peer Effects and Social Influence in Post-16 Educational Choice," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 483, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shulamit Kahn & Donna Ginther, 2017. "Women and STEM," NBER Working Papers 23525, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Biewen, Martin & Schwerter, Jakob, 2019. "Does More Math in High School Increase the Share of Female STEM Workers? Evidence from a Curriculum Reform," IZA Discussion Papers 12236, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. McNally, Sandra, 2020. "Gender Differences in Tertiary Education: What Explains STEM Participation?," IZA Policy Papers 165, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Friedman-Sokuler, Naomi & Justman, Moshe, 2020. "Gender, culture and STEM: Counter-intuitive patterns in Arab society," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    5. Fernando Saltiel, 2019. "What's Math Got to Do With It? Multidimensional Ability and the Gender Gap in STEM," 2019 Meeting Papers 1201, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Justman, Moshe & Méndez, Susan J., 2018. "Gendered choices of STEM subjects for matriculation are not driven by prior differences in mathematical achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 282-297.
    7. Hemelt, Steven W. & Lenard, Matthew A., 2020. "Math acceleration in elementary school: Access and effects on student outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    8. Rodríguez-Planas, Núria & Nollenberger, Natalia, 2018. "Let the girls learn! It is not only about math … it's about gender social norms," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 230-253.
    9. Delaney, Judith M. & Devereux, Paul J., 2021. "High School Rank in Math and English and the Gender Gap in STEM," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    10. Michela Carlana, 2019. "Implicit Stereotypes: Evidence from Teachers’ Gender Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1163-1224.
    11. Delaney, Judith M. & Devereux, Paul J., 2019. "Understanding gender differences in STEM: Evidence from college applications✰," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 219-238.
    12. Marcos Agurto & Sandra Buzinsky & Siddharth Hari & Valeria Quevedo & Sudipta Sarangi & Susana Vegas, 2020. "Academic Aptitude Signals and STEM field participation: A Regression Discontinuity Approach," Working Papers 2020-08, Lima School of Economics.
    13. Friedman-Sokuler, Naomi & Senik, Claudia, 2020. "From Pink-Collar to Lab Coat: Cultural Persistence and Diffusion of Socialist Gender Norms," IZA Discussion Papers 13385, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Maria Laura Di Tommaso & Dalit Contini & Dalila De Rosa & Francesca Ferrara & Daniela Piazzalunga & Ornella Robutti, 2021. "Tackling the gender gap in mathematics with active learning methodologies," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 657, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    15. Lippmann, Quentin & Senik, Claudia, 2018. "Math, girls and socialism," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 874-888.
    16. Gevrek, Z. Eylem & Gevrek, Deniz & Neumeier, Christian, 2020. "Explaining the gender gaps in mathematics achievement and attitudes: The role of societal gender equality," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    17. Eble, Alex & Hu, Feng, 2020. "Child beliefs, societal beliefs, and teacher-student identity match," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    18. Simone Balestra & Aurélien Sallin & Stefan C. Wolter, 2023. "High-Ability Influencers? The Heterogeneous Effects of Gifted Classmates," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(2), pages 633-665.
    19. Speer, Jamin D., 2023. "Bye bye Ms. American Sci: Women and the leaky STEM pipeline," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    20. Lavy, Victor & Sand, Edith, 2018. "On the origins of gender gaps in human capital: Short- and long-term consequences of teachers' biases," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 263-279.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:manchs:v:90:y:2022:i:5:p:473-499. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/semanuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.