The STEM Pathway for Women: What Has Changed?

Gifted Child Quarterly

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 39-55

  Heilbronner, Nancy N ^a  

^a WESTERN CONNECTICUT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

age developmental stage; college or adult; curriculum; gifted females; science; special populations underserved gifted

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870614881     PISSN: 00169862     EISSN: 19349041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0016986212460085     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. American Physical Society. (2011). Fraction of bachelor degrees in STEM disciplines earned by women 1966-2009. Retrieved from http://www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/womenstem.cfm.
2. Arnold K.Undergraduate aspirations and career outcomes of academically talented women: A discriminant analysis.Roeper Review. 1992;15:169-175.
3. Ash S.,Carr P.,Goldstein R.,Friedman R.Compensation and advancement of women in academic medicine: Is there equity?.American College of Physicians. 2004;141:205-212.
4. Bandura A.Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.Psychological Review. 1977;84:191-215.
5. Brandwein P. F.Science talent in the young expressed within ecologies of achievement. Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut; 1995:.
6. Carr P.,Ash A.Relation of family responsibilities and gender to the productivity and career satisfaction of medical faculty.Annual Internal Medicine. 1998;129:532-538.
7. College Board. (2010). Total group profile report. Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/2010-total-group-profile-report-cbs.pdf.
8. College Board. (2011). SAT percentile ranks for males, females, and total group. Retrieved from http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/SAT-Mathemathics_Percentile_Ranks_2011.pdf.
9. Dillman D. A.Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York, NY: John Wiley; 2000:.
10. Downing R.,Crosby J.,Blake-Beard S.The perceived importance of developmental relationships on women undergraduates' pursuit of science.Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2005;29:419-426.
11. Dweck C.Why aren't more women in science?. Ceci S. J.Williams W. M., ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2007:47-55.
12. Eccles J.Understanding women's educational and occupational choices.Psychology of Women's Quarterly. 1994;18:585-609.
13. Enman M.,Lupart J.Talented female students' resistance to science: An exploratory study of post-secondary achievement motivation, persistence, and epistemological characteristics.High Ability Studies. 2000;11:161-178.
14. Feist G.The development of scientific talent in Westinghouse finalists and members of the National Academy of Sciences.Journal of Adult Development. 2006;13 (1): 23-35.
15. Fowler F. J.Survey research methods. 2002). Survey research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002:.
16. Gall M. D.,Borg W. R.,Gall J. P.Educational research: An introduction. 1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.White Plains, NY: Longman; 1996:.
17. HalpernD.AronsonJ.ReimerN.SimpkinsS.StarJ.WentzelK. (2007). Encouraging girls in math and science (NCER 2007-2003). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/20072003.pdf.
18. HeilbronnerN. N. (2008). Pathways survey. Unpublished survey, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
19. Heilbronner N. N.Stepping onto the STEM pathway: Factors affecting students' declaration of STEM majors in college.Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 2011;34:876-899.
20. HydeJ. S.MertzJ. E. (2009). Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 8801-8807. Retrieved from http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/06/01/0901265106.full.pdf+html.
21. Institute of Educational Sciences. (2009). Comparative indicators of education in the U.S. and other G-8 countries. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009039.pdf.
22. Kimura D.Human sex differences in cognition, fact, not predicament.Sexualities, Evolution, & Gender. 2004;6 (1): 45-53.
23. Lindner J. R.,Murphy T. H.,Briers G. E.Handling nonresponse in social science research.Journal of Agricultural Education. 2001;42 (4): 43-53.
24. Lubinski D.,Benbow C.Gender differences in abilities and preferences among the gifted: Implications for the math-science pipeline.Current Directions in Psychological Science. 1992;17 (3): 61-66.
25. Lubinski D.,Benbow C.Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years: Uncovering antecedents for the development of math-science expertise.Association for Psychological Science. 2001;1:316-344.
26. Maccoby E. E.,Jacklin C. N.The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1974:.
27. MoncurM. (2010). Quotations by author: Pablo Picasso. Retrieved from http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Pablo_Picasso.
28. The National Academies Press. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching Category 5. Retrieved from http://www.uic.edu/home/Chancellor/risingabove.pdf.
29. National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). STEM designated degree programs. Retrieved from http://www.avlawoffice.com/pdf/STEMDesignatedDegreePrograms.pdf.
30. Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: Author; 2010:.
31. National Science Foundation. (2010). Doctorate recipients from U.S. universities: 2009 (field of study). Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11306/data_table.cfm#12.
32. National Science Foundation. (2011). Science and engineering doctorate awards: 2007-2008. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11321/pdf/nsf11321.pdf.
33. Neber H.,Schommer-Aikins M.Self-regulated science learning with highly gifted students: The role of cognitive, motivational, epistemological, and environmental variables.High Ability Studies. 2002;13:59-74.
34. Poock M.,Love P.Factors influencing the program choice of doctoral students in higher education administration.NASPA Journal. 2001;36:202-223.
35. Reis S. M.Work left undone. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press; 1998:.
36. Reis S. M.,Graham C.Needed: Teachers to encourage girls in math, science, and technology.Gifted Child Today. 2005;28 (3): 14-21.
37. Renzulli J. S.,Reis S. M.Research related to the Schoolwide Enrichment Triad model.Gifted Child Quarterly. 1994;38:7-20.
38. Russell S. H.Evaluation of NSF Support for undergraduate research opportunities: Survey of STEM graduates. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation; 2005:.
39. Society for Science and the Public. (2011). Intel science talent search. Retrieved from http://www.societyforscience.org/sts.
40. Sosniak L.Developing talent in young people. Bloom B., ed. New York, NY: Ballantine Books; 1985:348-408.
41. Spelke E.,Grace A.Why aren't more women in science?. Ceci S. J.Williams W. M., ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2007:27-37.
42. Steiner J.,Lanphear B.,Curtis P.,Vu K.Indicators of early research productivity among primary care fellows.Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2002;17:854-860.
43. Sternberg R.,Grigorenko E. L.,Ferrari M.Giftedness and expertise. Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut; 2004:.
44. Subotnik R.,Steiner C.Adult manifestations of adolescent talent in science.Roeper Review. 1993;15:164-169.
45. Subotnik R.,Stone K. M.,Steiner C.Lost generation of elite talent in science.Journal of Secondary Gifted Education. 2001;12:33-43.
46. Tai R.,Sandler P.Gender differences in introductory undergraduate physics performance: University physics versus college physics in the USA.International Journal of Science Education. 2001;23:1017-1037.
47. Tillberg H.,Cohoon J. M.Attracting women to the CS major.Frontiers. 2005;26:126-140.
48. Toutkoushian R.,Bellas M.The effects of part-time employment and gender on faculty earnings and satisfaction.Journal of Higher Education. 2005;74:172-195.
49. U.S. Department of Commerce. (2011). Women in STEM: A gender gap to innovation. Retrieved from http://www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/reports/documents/womeninstemagaptoinnovation8311.pdf.
50. U.S. Department of Labor. (2008). The O-NET-SOC taxonomy. Retrieved from http://www.onetcenter.org/.
51. Wai J.,Lubinski D.,Benbow C. P.Creativity and occupational accomplishments among intellectually precocious youths: An age 13 to age 33 longitudinal study.Journal of Educational Psychology. 2005;97:484-492.
52. Wai J.,Lubinski D.,Benbow C. P.,Steiger J. H.Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: A 25-year longitudinal study.Journal of Educational Psychology. 2010;4:860-871.
53. Weiner B.Handbook of competence and motivation. Elliott A. J.Dweck C. S., ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2005:73-84.