The persistent STEM gender gap: tackling a ‘wicked’ human problem

Simran Luthra

Maths and science subjects have long enjoyed an elevated status among Indian parents. Doing well in these subjects is synonymous with academic excellence and family pride. Even greater pride ensues if children pursue careers in medicine or engineering. This is often at the cost of giving adequate credit to the humanities and social sciences. However, the importance of what is collectively called STEM (Science Technology Engineering Mathematics) is that they do move the needle for humanity in terms of problem-solving real-world problems and innovations that improve human lives.

Despite the importance of STEM, in general and in Indian society in particular, considerable data points to the lack of female participation in STEM in higher education and at the workplace (see References). But first, why does female participation in STEM matter?

Why is STEM important for women?

Higher participation in STEM is important for girls and women at two levels. First, STEM can help girls and women transition from low-skill and low-paying jobs to higher-paying jobs in terms of careers (studies suggest that women who study science are more likely to get employed and earn up to 28% higher than those who study non-STEM subjects). As per the Digital India Report by McKinsey, around 65 million jobs will be created in India by 2025, and around 40 to 160 million women may need to transition between occupations. In addition, 12 million women are likely to face job losses owing to automation. Hence, STEM education can play a key role in women’s social and economic empowerment. However, there is also a larger purpose of advocating for more girls and women in STEM in education and the workforce.

Scientists are ultimately human beings and gender identity plays a crucial role in the kind of problems that scientists choose to solve. It is not surprising then that historically, scientific research and innovations have addressed the perspectives and needs of men. One of the most important examples of this is medical research, which has often excluded women and focused on men. There is, therefore, a huge gap in the understanding of female-specific health issues. Similarly, several technologies have been tested on male users and resulted in precluding the female experience of those same technologies such as safety equipment or workplace ergonomics.

Leadership in the world has been historically dominated by men, including thought leadership. Questions such as, “What would a world with increased female leadership look like?” or, “What would a world with more female participation in STEM look like?” open up the imagination to newer possibilities and solutions to existing problems or problems never before addressed. Greater involvement of women in STEM could potentially lead to advancements that cater to the needs and problems of girls and women, several of which have been long neglected. Further, more women in STEM research and workplaces would lead to greater inclusiveness and diversity, which in turn can lead to broader perspectives and improved decision-making for various global challenges.

What does female representation in STEM in India look like?

Before we discuss the gender gap in STEM, it is important to acknowledge the gender gap in education overall. Across the world, women have stood at a disadvantage historically when it comes to education due to systemic barriers such as cultural norms, lack of access to schools, gender biases, and economic constraints, which often prioritized male education over female learning opportunities. Women were not even permitted to attend university till the early 20^th century in countries such as the UK. The body of work done by men is therefore much larger than what women have been able to produce. It is hence a game of catch-up for women on various fronts. However, within this already unequal system, women are further underrepresented in STEM in various ways. Following are some of the patterns identified by a few recent studies focusing on India:

• Girls study STEM subjects enthusiastically at the primary school level, but this interest dwindles as they reach adolescence[i].
• One report revealed that a mere 13.5% of STEM faculty members across 98 institutes were female[ii].
• Women make up only 14% of Indian researchers, compared to the global average of 28%[iii].
• Within STEM disciplines also there exists a pattern with engineering having the lowest percentage of women, followed by physics, computer science, and chemistry. Mathematics and the earth sciences were next. Biology, however, had the highest rate of female representation primarily because it is a ‘softer’ science[iv] and aligns with societal expectations of women being caregivers.
• Engineering overall has poor female participation with a mere 6.68% in mechanical engineering and 23% in civil engineering at the undergraduate level.
• Female representation is also significantly low in courses such as Bachelors of Technology (B.Tech) and Masters of Technology (M.Tech)[v].

The situation is not completely bleak, however; gender parity in higher education has seen an increase with the number of female graduates rising from 38.4% in 2014-15 to 42.6% in 2021-22[vi]. Data from the World Bank reveals that India can, in fact, boast of a higher number of female graduates in STEM than other developed countries such as Germany and Australia. However, a large proportion of this population of graduates is also choosing not to join the workforce which renders a huge chunk of human capital underutilized. Further, the larger goals and benefits of having women in STEM remain unrealized.

Why are women lagging in STEM?

While the STEM gender gap is symptomatic of the larger gender inequities prevalent in society, it is valuable to deconstruct the various factors that have been identified as leading to this gap. A combination of social and structural factors is responsible for such a scenario.

Hence, at a systemic level, in a patriarchal ecosystem, gendered socialization ensures that men are encouraged to pursue STEM subjects while women are not. Therefore, while girls display interest and acumen for science subjects at the primary school level, particularly between the ages of 8 and 10, confidence in their competence for STEM sees a drop by the time they reach adolescence. Various factors play a role in this, including societal stereotypes around boys being better at science and maths than girls are reinforced in various ways.

Parents and teachers are some of the most powerful agents of socialization and often pass on these stereotypes and beliefs in unconscious ways. Hence, the kind of toys parents make available, the sort of activities or experiences they choose for their children, and the kind of advice they give contribute to gendered socialization for boys and girls. Teachers, too, play a significant role in confirming or challenging such societal stereotypes and biases. A prevalent belief is that while girls are more hardworking and bookish, boys have a more natural inclination for science, ask more questions, have better conceptual understanding, and possess a greater ability to come up with original ideas (Subramanian, 2007). Such beliefs influence the pedagogy and language teachers use while teaching, often leading to differential opportunities given to boys and girls. This, in turn, impacts the self-image students have with regard to STEM subjects. Several studies show how girls tend to view subjects such as maths and physics as negatively related to the female gender and that boys too tend to view maths as negatively related to the female gender but maths and physics as being positively related to the male gender (Markova & Herzog, 2015). Such attitudes ultimately ensure that girls are socialized into choosing non-STEM subjects at crucial points such as subject selection during high school and higher education, and the belief that ‘science is for men, not women’ thus continues to get perpetuated with fewer women taking up STEM.

However, besides gender, other important axes such as caste and class also impact the STEM gender gap. Studies by Sahoo and Klasen (2021[vii]) highlight how despite similar performance levels in maths and science in grade 10 board exams, the gender gap persisted in the choices made by boys and girls. The authors also found that students from socially disadvantaged groups such as Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) had lower rates of choosing science than the general category even when their socio-economic status was not a factor. Hence, it is vital to acknowledge not just gender but the intersection of gender with other social categories such as caste, class, and even location when seeking to understand the gender gap in STEM in India.

For girls who do pursue STEM, the journey is far from easy. Jayasree Subramanian (2007) has explained how gender is invisibilized in science research institutes through the discourses of ‘merit’ and ‘competency’. She argues that although science institutes seem to be completely objective in their stance of giving importance purely to an individual’s abilities and talent irrespective of their social background, the fallacy is that they disregard other social realities such as biases inherent in the attitudes of teachers and mentors and the fact that access to quality education itself is not as easy for most in India owing to factors such as caste, class, and location. She also clarifies that in India the gender issue is often reduced to the pressure of marriage and family responsibility, and less attention is paid to the culture and practices within institutes that make it difficult for girls and women to do as well as their male counterparts.

Thus, when women choose STEM and enter higher education, they face various obstacles and challenges. Subramanian (2007) provides various examples of how gender plays out in higher education science institutes in India. For instance, one of the female participants reported having been discouraged by her male professor from applying to the best foreign universities to avoid rejection. She was further discouraged by being told that she would not perform well even if she did get selected. Several PhD scholars pursuing science reportedly face harassment from their supervisors. Taking on women PhD scholars was also considered a risk by male professors as women may get married and not complete the degree. The politics in such institutes were such that women were pushed to do more experimental work than the theoretical work that required more deep thinking. On probing, it was revealed that it was mostly tasks that men disliked doing that were delegated to the women. Such negative beliefs and behaviour towards women serve as a sort of gatekeeping and discourage women from pursuing science in higher education. Clearly, gendered stereotypes and gendered attitudes exist at all stages and levels, right from early childhood to adulthood, and interventions are required at each of them.

What are some solutions?

The gender gap in STEM is not a newly discovered problem. It has been acknowledged for decades. Worldwide and in India there are several initiatives aimed at addressing the specific challenges faced by girls and women in STEM. Some India-based initiatives and organizations include the Atal Tinkering Labs, Women for STEM India, Mobile Science Labs, and Vigyan Mitra among others. These initiatives and organizations focus on research, capacity building, mentorship, and internship opportunities. However, besides such a targeted approach, an overhaul of mindset and attitude towards women is necessary for sustainable, long-term, and real change. This is where teachers, educators, parents, and invested adults can play a pivotal role.

Below are some strategies that teachers and invested adults can practise to create a more gender-equitable environment for children and young adults that can encourage them to pursue their natural interests:

Practise inclusive pedagogy and providing equal opportunities: Ample studies (see References) from across the world show how teachers and parents hold gendered beliefs regarding STEM. Such subconscious beliefs get transferred to the younger generations through the attitudes and actions of adults. Thus, a crucial prerequisite for teachers and invested adults is to examine their own biases and beliefs, which could foster stereotypical attitudes that steer girls towards humanities and social sciences and boys towards maths and science.

Teachers should take care that they do not call upon boys routinely to answer certain types of questions or do certain kinds of tasks, and ensure that they are more balanced in the allocation of tasks and activities. Some research points to how the context can also impact the interest levels of students. Kerkhoven et al (2016) point out that the same concept when introduced in a feminine context such as ‘discussing the dangers of smoking’ was more interesting for girls, than when it was introduced as ‘examine which poisons have an effect on the nervous system’. The authors advocate for a mix of feminine and masculine contexts to ensure that different learners are drawn in and engaged with science and mathematics.

Revisiting one’s pedagogical style and repertoire from a gender lens to see how well boys and girls respond to different kinds of activities or forms of instruction can be an enriching exercise that teachers engage in for feedback on what changes can be made.

Carry out a gender audit: Check if the robotics club in your school is predominantly full of boys. How is the participation of girls in science fairs? Are there more girls in arts and crafts clubs than boys? Instead of letting such things go unnoticed or normalizing them as differences between genders, it is vital to take stock of and remedy such scenarios through a holistic investigation of why this is the case, and then adopting relevant approaches to foster an environment where children can follow their natural inclinations without the burden of gender stereotypes and expectations. It is critical to be wary of surface-level fixes such as trying to increase the number of girls in robotics clubs without truly engaging with why that is the case.

Use gender-inclusive content: The importance of non-stereotypical representation of men and women as well as of role models cannot be emphasized more. Children need to see other girls and women engaged in STEM subjects to foster a sense of possibility and belonging. Educational material and resources ranging from textbooks to digital content need to go beyond tokenistic representations of women or stereotypical representations, (such as scientists and engineers as male), and ensure that resources are gender-balanced and the language used is gender-neutral.

Again, such efforts towards gender-neutral and gender-balanced content need to be made at every stage of education right from early childhood to higher education, as such beliefs constantly get formed and reshaped in the minds of young children and adolescents. Hence, if textbooks and other teaching-learning materials are not aligned with such representations, teachers and parents can curate or create supplementary material to ensure that girls and women are not shown in passive roles (care-giving, nursing) but in roles where they are taking the lead, or that the number of times men are depicted is not more than that of women. A gender audit of textbooks and educational material used, including literature readers, can be an important and useful exercise to conduct as an input for the next steps.

Involve role models and mentors: Teachers and/or parents can create and build networks with women in STEM and invite them as role models or mentors formally or informally. It can be extremely inspiring for young children to meet and interact with other girls/women working in STEM to truly demonstrate that gender need not be a barrier to success in science, technology, engineering, and math fields. Normalizing women in STEM can be powerful for shaping the future aspirations of girls and their acceptance in STEM. At times, women working in STEM may also be needed to facilitate advocacy that can influence families and communities to understand that STEM is a viable career choice for girls.

Effect real change in our lives as adults: Perhaps the most powerful step that educators and invested adults can take is to lead lives that reflect gender equality. Collaboration and respect between genders, checking one’s own biases as well as one’s privilege regarding gender, caste, and class are essential for setting an example for children and contribute to reducing discrimination of various kinds that plague society. For teachers, this could even mean examining the social dynamics of their staff rooms. Anecdotal evidence suggests that gendered behaviour is common in most Indian staffrooms with women teachers being expected to take on domestic tasks (like caring for sick children and planning important school days) and men teachers being more passive. The division of non-academic tasks also tends to be gendered with men involved in more masculine work such as disciplining or rapport-building with students.

Let us remember that meaningful change takes time

A ‘wicked problem’ is one that is elusive and complex with no clear solutions. It often even seems resistant to resolution. Climate change, education, poverty, and gender are some of the biggest and most important wicked problems facing humankind. Collaborative problem-solving, systems thinking, policy innovations, participatory approaches, and shifting mindsets and cultures are all required to make progress with such wicked problems. The STEM gender gap is not a very recent problem. It has been around for a while. A meta-analysis spanning five decades (Miller et al., 2018) has noted that owing to mass media depicting more women in science and improved efforts towards representation of women in science in the USA, children’s drawings of scientists are now slightly more diverse and include more women than earlier. However, children still associate scientists with men as they grow older. Change is painfully slow when it comes to wicked problems. One can compare efforts to the dispersal of seeds and hope that some will sprout soon, while others may take longer. Education, however, is an optimistic endeavour, and educators are idealists who need to carry on even in the face of persistent and wicked problems that seemingly do not change. To borrow the wise words of American thinker Thomas Merton: “Do not depend on the hope of results. You may have to face the fact that your work will be apparently worthless and even achieve no result at all, if not perhaps results opposite to what you expect. As you get used to this idea, you start more and more to concentrate not on the results, but on the value, the rightness, the truth of the work itself.”

[i]https://www.deccanherald.com/education/stem-education-for-girls-the-path-to-equity-2778251

[ii]https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/stem-in-india-sees-only-13-5-women-faculty-why-is-female-representation-so-low-in-this-field-and-iits/articleshow/109316947.cms#:~:text=A%20BiasWatchIndia%20study%2C%20published%20in,like%20the%20US%20and%20UK

[iii]https://genderaveda.cz/en/the-state-of-women-in-science-in-india-not-intelligent-enough/

[iv]https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/stem-in-india-sees-only-13-5-women-faculty-why-is-female-representation-so-low-in-this-field-and-iits/articleshow/109316947.cms

[v]https://iwwage.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Women-in-STEM-Challenges-and-Opportunities-in-India-Report.pdf

[vi]https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/women-and-stem-the-inexplicable-gap-between-education-and-workforce-participation

[vii]Sahoo, S., & Klasen, S. (2021). Gender Segregation in Education: Evidence from Higher Secondary Stream Choice in India. Demography, 58(3), 987-1010. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48687157

References

• Subramanian, J. (2007). Perceiving and Producing Merit. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 14(2), 259-284. doi:10.1177/097152150701400203
• Makarova, E., & Herzog, W. (2015). Trapped in the gender stereotype? The image of science among secondary school students and teachers. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 34(2), 106-123. doi:10.1108/edi-11-2013-0097
• Miller, D.I., Nolla, K.M., Eagly, A.H. and Uttal, D.H. (2018), The Development of Children’s Gender-Science Stereotypes: A Meta-analysis of 5 Decades of U.S. Draw-A-Scientist Studies. Child Dev, 89: 1943-1955. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13039
• Wang, N., Tan, AL., Zhou, X. et al. Gender differences in high school students’ interest in STEM careers: a multi-group comparison based on structural equation model. IJ STEM Ed 10, 59 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00443-6
• Msambwa, M. M., Daniel, K., Lianyu, C., & Fute, A. (2023). A systematic review of the factors affecting girls’ participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 32(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22707
• McGuire, L., Mulvey, K. L., Goff, E., Irvin, M. J., Winterbottom, M., Fields, G. E., Hartstone-Rose, A., & Rutland, A. (2020). STEM gender stereotypes from early childhood through adolescence at informal science centers. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 67, 101109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101109

The author holds a PhD in Education from the School of Education, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai. She also has a Master’s in English from Jadavpur University, Kolkata, and a Master’s in Education from TISS, Mumbai. A former Fulbright Foreign Language Teaching Assistant at Stanford University (2013-14), Simran has over a decade of experience in the field of education. Currently based in Pune, she continues to contribute to education through her research, teaching, and writing. She can be reached at simranluthra@gmail.com.