Girls Don’t Have a STEM Skills Deficiency — Just Advantages in Other Subjects

Summary

Research indicates that girls perform as well as boys in STEM subjects, with their higher scores in humanities suggesting that social pressures rather than skill deficiencies may be why they are less represented in STEM careers.

Abstract

A recent analysis of 70,000 high school students over a decade reveals that girls achieve just as highly, if not slightly better, in STEM subjects compared to boys. The study challenges the myth of male superiority in math and science, attributing the disparity in STEM career paths to girls' comparative advantage in language and humanities, and the influence of social stereotypes and peer comparisons. The research underscores the importance of recognizing girls' innate STEM abilities and the value of their diverse skill set, which includes strengths in language, to enrich and humanize the fields of science and technology. The findings suggest that educational environments and societal attitudes play a crucial role in shaping career choices and that addressing these factors could lead to more equitable participation in STEM.

Opinions

The myth that men are naturally better at math and science is debunked by evidence showing girls' equal proficiency in STEM subjects.
Girls' higher performance in humanities compared to STEM, and relative to boys, may influence their career choices due to a perceived comparative advantage in non-STEM areas.
Social pressures, including stereotypes and potential teacher biases, could contribute to girls' underrepresentation in STEM fields.
The inclusion of girls and women in STEM is vital for diversifying perspectives and skills, which is currently undervalued in a male-dominated industry.
The current state of STEM, shaped predominantly by men, may not be the most effective or beneficial version of science and technology due to the lack of diverse input.
Skills in arts and humanities are erroneously stigmatized as distracting from "cold, hard science," which is detrimental to the progress of STEM fields.
Equal female participation in STEM is anticipated to fundamentally improve these fields by incorporating a broader range of skills and viewpoints.

They are likely kept out of STEM fields due to social pressure.

Do you know the myth proverbial tech bros love to propagate — the one that men have an inborn advantage in math and science? That somewhere along the line, due to the pressures of the hunter-gather lifestyle, evolution conferred upon them special math and science gene that additionally enables them to talk directly out of their butts?

Good news: all those superior math and science skills will enable them to understand the results of this study.

The authors analyzed data from 70,000 high school students over 10 years and found that girls score just as high as boys in STEM subjects — even a little higher.

The only real difference between boys’ and girls’ high school performance was that girls scored higher in humanities than they did in STEM, and they scored higher in humanities than did boys.

The evidence is enough to dispel the myth that girls have an inborn, evolutionary, or biologically predisposed disadvantage in math and science. Rather, the only apparent inborn difference between the sexes is an advantage in language for girls.

If you don’t believe that high school scores reflect an innate skill level, that’s a fair point. Take a look at these studies instead:

Additionally, these researchers found that what determines a girl’s choice of career path is how her individual STEM advantage stacked up to that of her peers. This comparative advantage did not influence boys’ career path choices.

The only case in which sex differences (or lack thereof) affect career choice is in the classroom, as a result of comparison with one’s peers. The data collected for this study show that if a girl’s individual STEM advantage (the extent to which she performed better in STEM than humanities) was less than that of her peers, she was less likely to chose a STEM career path — even if her raw STEM scores were equal to those of her peers.

We don’t know whether this apparent tendency to make choices based on comparison with peers is somehow biologically predisposed or a result of social conditioning. But, citing supporting research, the authors of this paper claim that girls may be more influenced by negative grades in STEM subjects than boys, and are affected by negative stereotypes about their ability in STEM fields, which may be unconsciously reinforced by teachers.

The bottom line is this: girls seem to have equal inherent skills in STEM fields. We need to treat them as such, starting early on and in the classroom.

That girls and women have advantages in language and humanities make their participation in science and tech all the more important, because these additional skills bring with them the potential to enrich, diversify, and humanize the way that science and technology are practiced. But rather than being viewed as a valuable asset, a wide skill range can be viewed as a liability.

I’ve worked in various STEM fields for over ten years, and my experience has taught me that having skills in arts and humanities can be stigmatized as frivolous: the potential for distraction from the cold, hard science. This type of mindset is exactly the opposite of what we need for STEM fields to move forward in a constructive way that benefits humanity. And, with the results of this study for context, it could be the very reason women and girls still feel like outsiders in STEM fields.

The sad truth is that STEM fields were primarily built by men, largely without the input of people who not only have equal skill but a whole host of other skills and perspectives to offer. Can this possibly be the best version of the science and technology we have? I’m going to say no.

STEM fields will fundamentally change for the better once we have equal female participation. Watch for it.