1. WORKING PAPER: PLEASE DO NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT AUTHOR'S CONSENT.
- Author
-
van der Vleuten, Maaike, Steinmetz, Stephanie, and van de Werfhorst, Herman
- Subjects
STEM education ,WORKING papers ,MALE domination (Social structure) ,SOCIAL context ,SECONDARY education - Abstract
Although more women enter formerly maledominated fields, they remain underrepresented in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). This paper examines how adolescent's social environment, defined as friends in class and other (nonfriend) classmates, influence genderspecific STEM choices. We study if boys and girls are influenced differently by the math achievement of the environment and by the gender normative ideas of their environment. We used three waves (N = 726) from the CILS project, which surveyed adolescents in secondary education in the Netherlands at age 15 (2011/2012) and after secondary education at age 1718 (2014 & 2015). Using multinominallogistic regression analyses, results show that the likelihood of choosing STEM fields over nonSTEM fields increases when friends in class are better in mathematics, but decreases when friends in class have a higher comparative advantage in mathematics (are better in mathematics compared to languages). A higher math achievement of nonfriend classmates decreases the likelihood of choosing biology over nonSTEM fields, but their higher comparative advantage in mathematics increases the likelihood of choosing biology. We conclude that both the average math achievement and the comparative advantage in mathematics of students' environment matter for STEM choices, but that the environment's achievement does not explain gender differences in STEM fields. Moreover, friends and nonfriend classmates are different aspects of students' social environment as they influence students' STEM choices differently. Lastly, a more traditional gender normative environment impedes girls from entering STEM fields, suggesting that gender stereotypes of STEM fields as masculine are influential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2016