Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-768dbb666b-gx6zg Total loading time: 0.578 Render date: 2023-02-03T00:38:13.545Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

13 - What happens to high-achieving females after high school?

Gender and persistence on the postsecondary STEM pipeline

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2014

Lara Perez-Felkner
Florida State University
Sarah-Kathryn McDonald
University of Chicago
Barbara Schneider
Michigan State University
Ingrid Schoon
Institute of Education, University of London
Jacquelynne S. Eccles
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
HTML view is not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.



Although progress has been made in reducing gender inequality in postsecondary education, in the US and in other countries, gender gaps remain in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields judged so critical to economic competitiveness. Using the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002, we examine the influence of young women and men’s secondary school experiences of on their subsequent courses of study in college. In particular, we use this large-scale study to examine the effect of the psychological indicators (such as deep interest or absorption in the subject matter) suggested to be important predictors of persistence in small-scale studies of women specializing in STEM fields at the postsecondary level. Focusing the analysis on high-achieving youth who have completed the secondary school STEM pipeline course sequences, we find that academic preparation in secondary school is the critically important consideration in keeping US boys on the STEM pipeline midway through their undergraduate postsecondary educational experience. African American boys who have completed these sequences are the most likely to declare STEM majors and Latino males are least likely, net of nativity status. For high-achieving girls on the whole, however, course taking is insufficient to keep them on the STEM pipeline. Their orientation toward mathematics and external supports from engaged family, school staff, and friends are powerful predictors of their persistence in STEM at the postsecondary level.

Gender Differences in Aspirations and Attainment
A Life Course Perspective
, pp. 285 - 320
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014


Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the toolbox: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Adelman, C. (2006). The toolbox revisited: Paths to degree completion from high school through college. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.Google Scholar
Allensworth, E., Nomi, T., Montgomery, N., & Lee, V. E. (2009). College preparatory curriculum for all: Academic consequences of requiring algebra and English I for ninth graders in Chicago. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 367–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Association of University Women (AAUW). (2000). Tech-savvy: Educating girls in the new computer age. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.Google Scholar
Anderson-Rowland, M., Bernstein, B., & Russo, N. F. (2007). Encouragers and discouragers for domestic and international women in doctoral programs in engineering and computer science. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) 2007 Annual Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, June 2007. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from .Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, S. (2009). Why so few women in math and science? In Sommers, C. (Ed.), The science on women and science. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Bozick, R., & Ingels, S. J. (2007). Mathematics coursetaking and achievement at the end of high school: Evidence from the education longitudinal study of 2002 (ELS:2002) (NCES 2008–319). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.Google Scholar
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Burke, R. (2007). Women and minorities in STEM: A primer. In Burke, R. J. & Mattis, M. C. (Eds.), Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (pp. 3–27). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlone, H. (2004). The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: Girls’ access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 392–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheryan, S., & Plaut, V. C. (2010). Explaining underrepresentation: A theory of precluded interest. Sex Roles, 63, 475–488. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from .CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P. G., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1045–1060. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from .CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chhin, C. S., Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2008). Gender-typed occupational choices: The long-term impact of parents’ beliefs and expectations. In Watt, H. M. G. & Eccles, J. S. (Eds.), Gender and occupational outcomes: Longitudinal assessments of individual, social, and cultural influences (pp. 215–234). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments. The American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1691–1730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correll, S. J. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69(1), 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, B., Ingels, S., Downing, J., & Bozick, R. (2007). Moving beyond the basics: Advanced mathematics and science coursetaking in the high school classes of 1982, 1992, and 2004 (NCES 2007–312). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Dworkin, T. M., Kwolek-Folland, A., Maurer, V., & Schipani, C. A. (2008). Pathways to success for women scientists in higher education in the US. In Grenz, S., Kortendiek, B., Kriszio, M., & Löther, A. (Eds.), Gender equality programmes in higher education: International perspectives (pp. 69–86). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eccles, J., & Hoffman, L. (1984). Sex roles, socialization, and occupational behavior. In Stevenson, H. W. & Siegel, A. E. (Eds.), Child development research and social policy (Vol. 1, pp. 367). University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Eccles (Parsons), J. S., Adler, T., Futterman, R., Goff, S., Kaczala, C., Meece, J., et al. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In Spence, J. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 75–146). San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 103–127. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from .CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farland-Smith, D. (2009). Exploring middle school girl’s science identities: Examining attitudes and perceptions of scientists when working “side-by-side” with scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 109(7), 415–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geary, D. (1996). Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(2), 229–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldin, C., Katz, L., & Kuziemko, I. (2006). The homecoming of American college women: The reversal of the college gender gap. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(4), 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, I., Cunningham, C., Lachapelle, C., Thompson, M., Bittinger, K., Brennan, R., et al. (2002). Final report of the Women’s Experiences in College Engineering Project. Cambridge, MA: Goodman Research Group.Google Scholar
Gunderson, E., Ramirez, G., Levine, S., & Beilock, S. (2012). The role of parents and teachers in the development of gender-related math attitudes. Sex Roles, 66(3), 153–166. doi: .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women.Google Scholar
Huston, A. C. (1985). The development of sex typing: Themes from recent research. Developmental Review, 5(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingels, S., & Dalton, B. (2008). Trends among high school seniors, 1972–2004 (NCES 2008- 320). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute for Education Sciences, US Department of Education.Google Scholar
Kao, G. (2004). Parental influences on the educational outcomes of immigrant youth. International Migration Review, 38(2), 427–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, S., & Myhill, D. (2004). Seeing things differently: Teachers’ constructions of underachievement. Gender and Education, 16(4), 531–546. doi: .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McDonough, P. (2004). The school-to-college transition: Challenges and prospects. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Mickelson, R. A. (1989). Why does Jane read and write so well? The anomaly of women’s achievement. Sociology of Education, 62(1), 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mickelson, R. A. (2003). Gender, Bourdieu, and the anomaly of women’s achievement redux. Sociology of Education, 76(4), 373–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Science Foundation (NSF). (2000). Land of plenty: Diversity as America’s competitive edge in science, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
National Science Foundation (NSF) (2009). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2009 (NSF 09-305). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). Education at a Glance 2010. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Perez-Felkner, L. (in press). Perceptions and Resilience in Underrepresented Students’ Pathways to College. [Feature Article]. Teachers College Record, 117(8), 1–69.
Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2008). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata (2nd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Corp.Google Scholar
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender and Society, 18(4), 510–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riegle-Crumb, C. (2006). The path through math: Course sequences and academic performance at the intersection of race-ethnicity and gender. American Journal of Education, 113(1), 101–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riegle-Crumb, C. (2010). More girls go to college: Exploring the social and academic factors behind the female postsecondary advantage among Hispanic and white students. Research in Higher Education, 51, 573–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohlfing, J., Kube, E., Yabko, B., Murguia, E., Bekki, J., & Bernstein, B. (2009). Improving STEM doctoral students’ relationships with their advisors: Web-based training in interpersonal problem-solving skills. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) 2009 Annual Conference. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from .Google Scholar
Schmidt, W. H., Cogan, L. S., Houang, R. T., & McKnight, C. (2009). Equality of educational opportunity: A myth or reality in US schooling. Lansing, MI: The Education Policy Center at Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Schneider, B. (2007). Forming a college going culture in US public high schools. Seattle, WA: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.Google Scholar
Schneider, B., & Stevenson, D. (1999). The ambitious generation: America’s teenagers, motivated but directionless. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Schoon, I. (2010). Planning for the future: Changing education expectations in three British cohorts. Historical Social Research–Historische Sozialforschung, 35(2), 99–119.Google Scholar
Schoon, I., & Parsons, S. (2002). Teenage aspirations for future career and occupational outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60(2), 262–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, K., Allen, K. R., Scheckler, R., & Darlington, L. (2007). Women in computer-related majors: A critical synthesis of research and theory from 1994 to 2005. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 500–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. C. (2002). Gender, ethnicity, and race in school and work outcomes of second-generation Mexican-Americans. In Suarez-Orozco, M. M. & Paez, M. M. (Eds.), Latinos: Remaking America (pp. 110–125). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Stattin, H., & Kerr, M. (2000). Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development, 71(4), 1072–1085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trusty, J., & Niles, S. G. (2003). High-school math courses and completion of the bachelor’s degree. Professional School Counseling, 7, 99–107.Google Scholar
US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1995). Findings from The Condition of Education 1995. No. 5: The Educational Progress of Women (NCES 95–768). Washington, DC: US Department of Education. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from .Google Scholar
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: US Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2008). The reversal of gender inequalities in higher education: An ongoing trend. In Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Ed.). Higher education to 2030: Vol. 1: Demography (pp. 265–298). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wai, J., Cacchio, M., Putallaz, M., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30 year examination. Intelligence, 38(4), 412–423. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J. (1999). A structural model of student career aspiration and science education. Research in Schools, 6(1), 53–63.Google Scholar
Wang, J., & Staver, J. (2001). Examining relationships between factors of science education and student career aspirations. The Journal of Education Research, 94(5), 312–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, H. M. G. (2008). What motivates females and males to pursue sex-stereotyped careers? In Watt, H. M. G. & Eccles, J. S. (Eds.), Gender and occupational outcomes: Longitudinal assessments of individual, social, and cultural influences (pp. 87–114). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have Access
Cited by

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats