STEM领域学术效能的性别差异

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Sociological Perspectives Pub Date : 2021-07-08 DOI:10.1177/07311214211028617
Jennifer Ashlock, M. Stojnic, Zeynep Tufekci
{"title":"STEM领域学术效能的性别差异","authors":"Jennifer Ashlock, M. Stojnic, Zeynep Tufekci","doi":"10.1177/07311214211028617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cultural processes can reduce self-selection into math and science fields, but it remains unclear how confidence in computer science develops, where women are currently the least represented in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). Few studies evaluate both computer skills and self-assessments of skill. In this paper, we evaluate gender differences in efficacy across three STEM fields using a data set of middle schoolers, a particularly consequential period for academic pathways. Even though girls and boys do not significantly differ in terms of math grades and have similar levels of computer skill, the gender gap in computer efficacy is twice as large as the gap for math. We offer support for disaggregation of STEM fields, so the unique meaning making around computing can be addressed.","PeriodicalId":47781,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Perspectives","volume":"65 1","pages":"555 - 579"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07311214211028617","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender Differences in Academic Efficacy across STEM Fields\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Ashlock, M. Stojnic, Zeynep Tufekci\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07311214211028617\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cultural processes can reduce self-selection into math and science fields, but it remains unclear how confidence in computer science develops, where women are currently the least represented in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). Few studies evaluate both computer skills and self-assessments of skill. In this paper, we evaluate gender differences in efficacy across three STEM fields using a data set of middle schoolers, a particularly consequential period for academic pathways. Even though girls and boys do not significantly differ in terms of math grades and have similar levels of computer skill, the gender gap in computer efficacy is twice as large as the gap for math. We offer support for disaggregation of STEM fields, so the unique meaning making around computing can be addressed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47781,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Perspectives\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"555 - 579\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07311214211028617\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Perspectives\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07311214211028617\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07311214211028617","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

文化进程可以减少对数学和科学领域的自我选择,但目前尚不清楚对计算机科学的信心如何发展,女性目前在STEM(科学、技术、工程和数学)领域的代表性最低。很少有研究同时评估计算机技能和自我评估技能。在本文中,我们使用中学生的数据集评估了三个STEM领域中有效性的性别差异,中学生是学术路径特别重要的时期。尽管女孩和男孩在数学成绩上没有显著差异,计算机技能水平也相似,但在计算机效率上的性别差距是数学差距的两倍。我们提供了对STEM领域分解的支持,这样就可以解决围绕计算产生的独特意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Gender Differences in Academic Efficacy across STEM Fields
Cultural processes can reduce self-selection into math and science fields, but it remains unclear how confidence in computer science develops, where women are currently the least represented in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). Few studies evaluate both computer skills and self-assessments of skill. In this paper, we evaluate gender differences in efficacy across three STEM fields using a data set of middle schoolers, a particularly consequential period for academic pathways. Even though girls and boys do not significantly differ in terms of math grades and have similar levels of computer skill, the gender gap in computer efficacy is twice as large as the gap for math. We offer support for disaggregation of STEM fields, so the unique meaning making around computing can be addressed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.20%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Established in 1957 and heralded as "always intriguing" by one critic, Sociological Perspectives is well edited and intensely peer-reviewed. Each issue of Sociological Perspectives offers 170 pages of pertinent and up-to-the-minute articles within the field of sociology. Articles typically address the ever-expanding body of knowledge about social processes and are related to economic, political, anthropological and historical issues.
期刊最新文献
Time as a Resource for Constructing Long-term Visions among Two Generations of Feminist Activism in Peru and Ecuador “What Else Explains This Trauma but Porn?” Women Partners of Porn Addicts as Claims-Makers The Structure of Social Capital and Cultural Participation: A Cross-sectional Study Hidden to Whom? Aspects of Visibility among People Who Died While Affected by Homelessness and Implications for Outreach “He Was Able to Rely on Me”: Negotiating the Sibling Intragenerational Bargain among Latino First-generation College Student Families
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1