Stereotype+threat-+the+gender+gap,+between+men+and+women,+in+mathmatics+and+implications+for+careers+in+STEM+fields

Samuel Hallett Student Number: 8874841 Tutor: Michelle Cornford



//ARTEFACT DESCRIPTION//

//This cultural artefact shows comparison reactions of a male, to a male (left side) and girl (right side) writing a mathematical equation. On the left side the boy makes a mistake in a mathematical formula and the reaction was ‘wow, you suck at math’. However, on the right side when a girl writes out exactly the same formula and makes the exactly the same mistake, the reaction is different. Instead of a pronoun (you, she, her etc) to address who wrote the mathematical formula he (person reacting) uses ‘girl’ which refers to a group of people.//

//NAME THE PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE CENTRAL TO YOUR ANALYSIS//

//The cultural artefact shows the stereotypes experienced by girls in the area of mathematics. Generalizations are made by the man reacting to the girl and he views that her mistake was a representation of her gender’s mathematical ability. Whereas, because mathematics is seen as masculine, when the boy made a mistake, there was no generalization made and based the error on individual ability (Smith & Hung, 2008). These stereotypes often reduce participation and interest of girls within math (Muzzatti & Agnoli, 2007). This results in limited career opportunities as maths is important for a variety of tertiary study and STEM careers (Queensland Government, 2013).//

//LITERATURE REVIEW//

//There is currently a shortage of woman working in science, technology, educational and mathematic (STEM) fields. The Australian bureau of statistics (2012) found that in 2012, only 1% of females aged 15-64 years enrolled for engineering and related technologies compared to the 21% of males. A report by Handelsman et al (2005) showed that while some women may be successful in entering this field of research they are often in the lower qualified areas. For example only about 3.17% of full professor mechanical engineers are women (Handelsman et al, 2005). Dever et al (2008, p i) found that females were also less likely to be part of a research group during their PhD, disadvantaging// //them in network skills. A study by Rothman et al (2013) from Monash Universi////ty, found that there was a very large gap in the proportion of enrolments between men and women in engineering and related technologies (refer to figure 20).//

Source: (//Rothman et al, 2013)//

Some career pathways are often favoured by certain genders resulting in exclusion and oppression of individuals who do not fit within the associated social construct. While there are laws that protect from judgement of an employee’s value based on gender, these beliefs continue to be active throughout society. Smith (2004) terms the situation in which a person is under pressure by a stereotype while performing a task as a ‘stereotype threat.’ Schmader et al (2008) observed that stereotype threat is a factor that can affect performance on cognitive and social tasks, and performance on sensorimotor tasks. Because of this, people who experience stereotype threat may not achieve very high levels of employment. According to the World health organisation (2008) socioeconomic status is a determinant of health outcomes. Furthermore, low education levels have been associated with poor health, more stress and lower confidence (World Health Organisation, 2008). So as a result of their employment disadvantage, they may have lower health outcomes and less confidence in themselves to apply for high positions, compared to males. Therefore, gender stereotype threat can affect education levels which impacts on socioeconomic status and health outcomes.

Because stereotype threat can affect academic performance, it is one element that is, contributing to the male dominance within math related careers such as engineering. Literature shows that the masculinity associated with maths is the base element that results in the high number of males participating in engineering. Muzzatti & Agnoli (2007) found that this stereotype of male dominance in maths is believed by girls as young as ten years old. Furthermore, Smith & Hung (2008) stated that because girls have very few role models in this field they believe that it is male dominated from a very young age. This threat produces a high intention to put little value into or drop-out of mathematics, giving them limited career options (Muzzatti & Agnoli, 2007). These results are in line with the ‘Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices’; showing that individual differences combined with gender roles are the main contributors to career choices (Eccles, J., 2011). This limits career opportunities as Brown (2005) indicated there is a growing demand for civil engineer graduates. Additionally, when women do manage to enter this field they are usually not very successful (Handelsman et al, 2005). A forum by the Australian Academy of Science identified that this was due to the lack of motivation for women to apply for leadership positions (Dunstone & Williamson, 2012). Wylie (2007) from, Barnard Center for research on women, termed these hidden gender stereotypes as ‘micro-inequities.’ These are beliefs on the cultural level of an organisation that accumulate, and create large gender gaps in engineering and related professions (Wylie, 2007). As shown, there is a presence of inequities between men and women in math related careers, which are due to implicit beliefs and culture of organisations.

Many organisations have identified this gender gap in the STEM fields and have created strategies to try and improve the situation. Research has proven that one explanation for this gender gap between men and women are due to cultural influences or stereotype threats (Schmader, Johns, & Forbes, 2008). As a result, organisations have focused on changing not just their policies but the culture. Two key areas of discrimination were identified by the Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS) termed horizontal and vertical segregation (Bell, 2010). Horizontal segregation focuses on: perceptions on ability, societal views of gender equality, job security and employability (Bell, 2010, p 439-440). Vertical segregation involves: organisational culture, promotions, policies and practice, lack of female role models, lack of support and understanding for external responsibilities, and sex discrimination (Bell, 2010, p439-440). Some universities have understood these causes for this gender gap and created strategies to overcome them. For example, Monash University (2010) has created the ‘Social inclusion: Gender Equity strategy 2011-2015’ which addresses that despite the equal access for woman in engineering, there still needs to be an organization culture change. This strategy focuses on culture, awareness, accountability and enablers as key areas for change. Through a holistic approach Monash University (2010) successfully addresses the horizontal and vertical segregation areas identified by FASTS. In summary, organisations are working towards reducing the gender gap in STEM fields through changing culture and behaviours.

CULTURAL AND SOCIAL ANALYSIS

Feminist theory combats stereotypes made on individuals based on gender. It argues that some characteristics based on sexuality, may actually be socially constructed and not a biological trait (Bowden & Mummary, 2009, page 3-4). As Simone de Beauvoir famously stated ‘One is not born a woman, but one becomes one’ (De Beauvoir, 1949/2009). This raises questions on whether the dominance of a particular gender at mathematics is a biological advantage or social advantage. Overall, the research has, shown there is very little biological difference regarding ability at mathematics. Rather the difference is a basis of what the individual is encouraged to do throughout their life.

Feminism can be seen as 3 waves throughout history, with each wave concentrating on new awareness and change to social issues (Rampton, 2008). The first wave of feminism took place in the late 19th and early 20th, open up opportunities for women to have their say in politics. The second wave began in the 1960s and continued into the 90's. This added the Equal Rights Amendment to the constitution, which prevented the discrimination or judgement of a person in court on the basis of their sex. Another achievement was the separating of the terms ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ to biological and a social construct respectively. Than the third wave of feminism aimed at instead of trying to be equal or infiltrating male leaderships, they aimed to raise awareness of the potential of woman while celebrating diversity (Kendal, 2012). Although, throughout history there have been lots of advocacy for gender equality, there continues to be a gender gap between men and women in STEM fields.

Social constructs are able to become ‘natural’ through historicity, habituation and institutionalisation (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). If a girl was encouraged to do maths and felt they fit in with their peers, they might be more motivated to do it. This can be observed by analysing cross-cultural variations in beliefs and constructs. For example the male maths advantage is mainly condensed to western countries; however, in countries where girls are encouraged to do maths, a large girls’ advantage occurs (Steffens, & Jelenec, 2011). Through historicity, male dominance in mathematics has carried into modern society and there is a lot more pressure when a women to succeed in this area. This than becomes natural throughout society through habituation and women is no longer encouraged to try at mathematics, and their failure or drop-out becomes normative. Than through institutionalisation, for example mathematics becomes regarded as masculine which can marginalise women.

Therefore, public health experts should move away from legislation and laws when dealing with this problem. Inequities in maths between men and women have been shown to be a result of cultural constructs and not actual ability. In turn, beliefs and behaviours need to be changed through education, and raising awareness.

ANALYSIS OF THE ARTEFACT AND YOUR OWN LEARNING REFLECTION

Throughout this WIKI the key message has been that legislation and laws made by government cannot monitor all of cultural discrimination, as shown in the cultural artefact. It also shows that stereotypes and assumptions can be made on groups of people without thinking about the facts. Furthermore, the cultural artefact shows that influences on gender stereotypes come from society and culture in addition to organisational structure. Also it is shows how stereotypes tend to never take the individual into account. Specifically, to this situation, if a girl wanted to succeed in maths but always told that she will never be successful despite her having the same ability as all the males. This is shown through the boy (on the left) and the girl (on the right) making exactly the same mistakes.

I found the feminist social theory as the most interesting to research. The way this theory challenges of what is seen as normal; because, I used to think that males just dominant in mathematics because they were born with more logical brains. Now I see that a lot of intellectual and physical abilities of an individual can be traced back to the social environment that they were raised in. I have learned that before giving a label to a group of people the causes and determinants need to be analysed in depth, which is necessary within the field of epidemiology.


 * Reference List **

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012). Education and Work: Participation. Retrieved from []

Bell, S. (2010). Women in Science: Lessons from Australia. //International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology//, 2(3), 437-452.

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). //The Social Construction of Reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge//. United States: Anchor Books

Bowden, P., & Mummary, J. (2009). //Understanding Feminisim//. Durham, GBR:Acumen

Brown, J. L. (2005). Wanted: Civil Engineers. //Civil Engineering//, 75(7), 46-49.

De Beauvoir, S. (2009). //The second sex// (Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevalier, Trans.). France. (1949)

Dever, M., Boreham, P., Haynes, M., Kubler, M., Laffan, W., Behrens, K., & Westerm, M. (2008). Gender Differences in Early Post-PhD employment in Australian Universities: The influence of the PhD Experience on Women’s Academic Careers. Retrieved from []

Dunstone, M., & Williamson, B. (2012) Gender Equity: Current Issues, Best Practices and New Ideas. Retrieved from []

Eccles, J. (2011). "Gendered educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices." //International Journal of Behavioural Development//, //35//(3), 195-201. doi: 10.1177/0165025411398185

Handelsman, J., Cantor, N., Carnes, M., Denton, D., Fine, E., Grosz, B., Hinshaw, V., Marrett, C., Rosser, S., Shalala, D., & Sheridan, J. (2005). More women in science. //Science, 309//(5738), 1190-1191. Retrieved from []

Kendal, E .(2012). There’s No One Perfect Girl: Third Wave Feminism and The Powerpuff Girls. Retrieved from

[]

Monash University. (2010). Social inclusion: Gender Equity strategy 2011-2015. Retrieved from []

Muzzatti, B., & Agnoli, F. (2007). Gender and mathematics: attitudes and stereotype threat susceptibility in Italian children. //Developmental Psychology//, //43//(3), 747-759. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.747

Queensland Government. (2013). Towards a 10-year plan for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education and skills in Queensland. Retrieved from []

Rampton, M. (2008). The Three Waves of Feminism. //The Magazine of Pacific University//, //41//(2). Retrieved from []

Rothman, S., Shah, C., Underwood, C., McMillan, J., Brown, J., & McKenzie, P. (2013). National Report on Social Equity in VET 2013. Retrieved from []

Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. //Psychological Review, 115//(2), 336-356. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336

Smith, C. S., & Hung, L. C. (2008). Stereotype threat: effects on education. //Social Psychology of Education//, //11//(3), 243-257. doi: 10.1007/s11218-008-9053-3

Smith, J. L. (2004). Understanding the Process of Stereotype Threat: A Review of Mediational Variables and New Performance Goal Directions. //Educational Psychology Review//, //16// (3), 177-206. doi: 10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034020.20317.89

Steffens, M. C., & Jelenec, P. (2011). Separating Implicit Gender Stereotypes regarding Math and Language: Implicit Ability Stereotypes are Self-serving for Boys and Men, but not for Girls and Women. //Sex Roles//, //64//(5), 324-335. Retrieved from []

World Health Organization. (2013). Health Impact Assessment (HIA): Determinants of Health. Retrieved from []

Wylie, A. (2007). Women, Work, and the Academy: Strategies for Responding to 'Post-Civil Rights Era' Gender Discrimination. Retrieved from [].

**Reflections**
http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/share/view/64711082 http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/share/view/64711100