“Physics isn't for females”: why does gender inequality exist in STEM fields, and how can we counter it?
Fabiola Gianotti, Particle Physicist
Source: Wikimedia Commons
As part of our collaboration with UCL’s Women in STEM society, Sathushi Theivendran and Anita Paliah explore causes of the gender imbalance in STEM fields, and suggest ways of addressing this problem.
The percentage of women in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) workforce continues to be appallingly low, with a 1:3 ratio of females to males. Progress is being made in attracting women towards STEM itself, but now the focus of gender equality programmes needs to shift. Delve deeper into the figures of women in STEM, and the bias towards biological fields is evident. Is there a draw for biological over physical and technological fields for women, and from where does this desire first emerge? Is the victory of more and more women entering STEM fields turned sour by gender ratio imbalances?
The divide first appears at the point of A Level choice, at the age of 15 or 16. Among students taking scientific A Levels, just above 50% are women: surely a sign that we are heading in the right direction. However, the gender divide within these subjects is striking, with females accounting for 63% of biology A Level entries and males accounting for 77% of physics entries. Maths and computing are also heavily male-dominated, despite girls repeatedly outperforming boys at GCSE level in all STEM fields. Biology and physics may also be viewed by students as less compatible subjects, and so ultimately girls choosing science at A Level may feel obliged to decide between them.
Maria Goeppert-Mayer, Theoretical Physicist
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Are schools damaging confidence?
A study carried out by the Institute for Fiscal Studies offered high achieving Year 11 girls from different UK regions financial incentives for choosing physics or maths at A Level. Only a small number of these students took the offer and reported that they saw the money as a reward for choosing a more demanding subject. The view of physics and maths as more difficult subjects is therefore common, and it seems as though girls this age are likely to shy away from the challenge offered by these subjects despite their clear ability levels.
A major reason for the refusal to take physics was found to be a lack of confidence due to male peers. Confidence issues were attributed by many to “male-dominance” and boys' behaviour in classrooms. Many studies have also found that teachers tend to perceive male students to be more “naturally able” at science, which must surely contribute to this issue. 67% of the girls agreed strongly that “STEM jobs are male-dominated”, and this is significantly related to their ultimate avoidance of physics, despite 92% of the females agreeing that STEM jobs would lead to them earning a good living.
In 2011, a study by the Institute of Physics found that pupils in an all-girls school are around 2.5 times more likely to take an A Level in physics than girls attending co-ed schools. These studies bring to light a very clear message: classroom environment plays a strong role in the ultimate field women end up in. Having attended all-girls schools for seven years from pre-pubescence to adulthood, we certainly believe our experiences with STEM subject selection varies from peers who attended mixed schools. Our personal A Level choices were never based on ratios or our peers, but on enjoyment levels. However, the fact that even in all-girls schools there are fewer pupils in physics classes compared to their male counterparts demonstrates that there must be a multitude of other factors at play, including unavoidable gender stereotypes and a lack of female role models.
Jocelyn Bell Burnell, Astrophysicist
Source: Wikimedia Commons
What if girls just aren't interested?
A frustratingly common idea is that girls are just not interested in physics. Based on consistent studies, girls, particularly of this age group, seem to be more adept at social skills than boys. Therefore, they may believe that biological fields such as healthcare provide more opportunities for social interaction than physics. Boys are consistently more interested than girls in video games and technology. Are we trying to force girls into a field they are not interested in, when the objective is purely to fill a diversity quota? The answer lies in gender stereotypes perpetuated from childhood.
Leading experimental physicist Dame Athene Donald has stated that an incredible number of environmental factors can play a role in eventual interests, from novels and television shows to children's toys. “Female” toys such as dolls encourage passive play, whilst toys thought to be for boys such as Lego promote imagination and creativity. An interview of 18 female scientists showed a striking similarity in toy preferences as children: they speak of playing freely with dolls and toy trains, without the notion of specific toys being for specific genders. The importance of the environment in interests, therefore, cannot be dismissed, and there is no precedent to state that girl's brains are designed to have particular interests.
The radical opinion of entrepreneur Francine Hardaway is that women shouldn't code. Not because women are less intelligent, but because women's brains are not built for it — rather they are built for people-based skills. Indeed, a single study based on a small sample size found that males appear to have a larger inferior parietal lobule than females. This area has been associated with mathematical processing, and is significantly larger in certain brilliant physicists and mathematicians including Einstein. So what is wrong with the claim that boys should do physics because they are better, and girls are equally as talented in other fields?
Drawing drastic conclusions from a study like this is significantly damaging. Telling girls that they aren't supposed to be good at physics is a self-fulfilling prophecy. We know that females can succeed in physics. Just look at Donna Strickland, the 2018 Nobel Prize winner. Look at Jocelyn Bell Burnell, astrophysicist credited with one of the ‘most significant’ scientific achievements of the 20th century. The fact is, we know that women have achieved incredible things in physics, engineering, and technology. This type of thinking based on vague biological theories must be avoided at all costs, as it could lead to tremendous talent in these fields going down the drain.
Chien-Shiung Wu, Nuclear Physicist
How can we address the gender inequality in stem?
The importance of environmental factors in girls avoiding physics is impossible to ignore, and begs the question, what can be done to improve equality in future generations?
A 2017 study has demonstrated that whilst five-year-old girls are likely to consider females just as intelligent as males, from the age of six onwards, they perceive boys to be more capable. This study alone highlights the importance of the environment at an early age, and an active effort must be made by both parents and teachers to ensure the equal treatment of both genders. Both confidence and creativity must be encouraged in young girls, and a conscious effort must be made to shield girls from stereotypical gender roles.
Interest and confidence can be achieved through the inclusion of successful female role models in the curriculum to inspire girls to pursue any area they desire. Promoting the recruitment of more female STEM teachers, particularly in traditionally male-oriented subjects, provides a more relatable and realistic view of what can be achieved by female students. Teachers are integral to manifesting a more inclusive culture and encouraging girls to join these fields. This can be done by ensuring that workplace inequality is addressed in lessons, including diverse groups in teaching examples, and making a conscious effort to ensure minority students feel capable and valued.
In addition, well-known tech companies could run presentations to young school children of both genders to give direct access to information about achievements by both genders, taking care to show an even representation of male and female roles. At an older age, companies could run educational workshops that will be accessible to girls if they undertake a typically “masculine” A Level option. Increased work experience possibilities by these companies specifically designed for girls will also assist in increasing diversity, such as the “women in business” scheme run by PwC.
Donna Strickland, Optical Physicist
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Another solution, although seemingly more radical, could be to increase the number of compulsory subjects studied at ages 14-18 to include physics and mathematics, the subjects required to enter fields like engineering that girls may never have even considered. The reasoning behind this would be to prevent girls from ruling out this field before having the chance to develop an increased level of confidence and understanding of career paths open to them. At least one of physics or mathematics is compulsory until the age of 18 in Latvia, Bulgaria and Cyprus, and these countries are far more successful at creating an equal STEM workforce than the UK, with around 30% of engineers being female in these countries compared to around 10% in the UK. This appears to be a trend in countries where physics must be studied until a later age. However, there are many challenges with this approach, due to how different this would be from the current system, and the need to justify why these particular subjects are compulsory but others are not.
If some of these measures are carefully placed and others are continued, it will hopefully lead to more girls entering into maths and physics-orientated careers, resulting in a more welcoming and less isolating environment for future generations of females. This is of benefit to the industry, as the increased female insight will offer new perspectives and lead to increased ideas and innovation. It would even be economical for more resources and research to be focused on reaching a more equal gender composite across all STEM subjects.
However, it is important to note that biology is still a valid subject choice for both females and males if that is truly where their passion lies. We should be working towards an environment where both genders feel equally confident and able to undertake any STEM subject, where fewer societal factors are threatening to box each gender into a specific field.