How to Attract Women in STEM and Help Them Become Successful: The Review of Practices of Overcoming Gender Stereotypes
https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2022-31-11-63-89
Abstract
Gender imbalance among students in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) is a worldwide problem leading to negative social and economic consequences. Despite the widespread “myth of gender equality” in Russia, this problem is also relevant for our country. The share of male students in most STEM fields in Russian universities significantly exceeds the share of female students, especially in engineering and technical fields. The article is aimed at analyzing the existing experience of combating gender stereotypes in STEM educational programs. It provides an overview of seven types of practices: 1) informing girls about gender stereotypes and their negative consequences; 2) practices aimed at developing “growth mindset”; 3) influence through “role models” and the formation of friendship networks based on interest in STEM; 4) class composition management; 5) organization of active learning; 6) emphasis on the public benefit of career in STEM; 7) creating a positive climate through working with stereotypes of male teachers and students. The article also discusses the applicability of these practices in the Russian educational context.
Keywords
Supporting agencies: The research was funded by the grant from the Russian Science Foundation (No. 22-28-00882), https://rscf.ru/en/project/22-28-00882/.
About the Authors
N. G. Maloshonok
HSE University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Natalia G. Maloshonok – Cand. Sci. (Sociology), Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Sociology of Higher Education, Institute of Education
Researcher ID: K-2877-2015
16, bldg. 10, Potapovsky alley, Moscow, 101000
I. A. Shcheglova
HSE University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina A. Shcheglova – Cand. Sci. (Education), Junior Research Fellow, Centre for Sociology of Higher Education, Institute of Education
Researcher ID: Q-9272-2016
16, bldg. 10, Potapovsky alley, Moscow, 101000
K. A. Vilkova
HSE University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Kseniya A. Vilkova – PhD in Education, Junior Research Fellow, Centre for Sociology of Higher Education, Institute of Education
Researcher ID: Y-5455-2018
16, bldg. 10, Potapovsky alley, Moscow, 101000
M. O. Abramova
National Research Tomsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Maria O. Abramova – Cand. Sci. (Philosophy), Director, Center for Sociology of Education, Institute of Education
Researcher ID: K-7360-2017
34а, Lenin Ave, Tomsk, 634050
References
1. Riegle-Crumb, C., Farkas, G., Muller, C. (2006). The Role of Gender and Friendship in Advanced Course Taking. Sociology of Education. Vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 206-228, doi: 10.1177/003804070607900302
2. Farrell, L., McHugh, L. (2017). Examining Gender-STEM Bias Among STEM and Non-STEM Students Using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP). Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science. Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 80-90, doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.02.001
3. Ertl, B., Luttenberger, S., Paechter, M. (2017). The Impact of Gender Stereotypes on the Self-Concept of Female Students in STEM Subjects with an Under-Representation of Females. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 8 (703), doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00703
4. Maloshonok, N.G., Shcheglova, I.A. (2020). Role of Gender Stereotypes in Student Dropouts of STEM Programs. Monitoring Obshchestvennogo Mneniya: Economicheskie i social’nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 2, pp. 273-292, doi: 10.14515/monitoring.2020.2.945. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
5. Bahr, P.R., Jackson, G., McNaughtan, J., Oster, M., Gross, J. (2017). Unrealized Potential: Community College Pathways to STEM Baccalaureate Degrees. The Journal of Higher Education. Vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 430-478, doi: 10.1080/00221546.2016.1257313
6. Ferrant, G., Kolev, A. (2016). Does Gender Discrimination in Social Institutions Matter for Long-term Growth? : Cross-Country Evidence. OECD Development Centre Working Papers. No. 330, OECD Publishing, Paris, doi: 10.1787/5jm2hz8dgls6-en
7. Rudakov, V., Kiryushina, M., Figueiredo, H., Teixeira, P.N. (2022). Early Career Gender Wage Gaps Among University Graduates in Russia. International Journal of Manpower (ahead-of-print), doi: 10.1108/ijm-03-2021-0206
8. Fox, M.F., Sonnert, G., Nikiforova, I. (2011). Programs for Undergraduate Women in Science and Engineering: Issues, Problems, and Solutions. Gender & Society. Vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 589-615, doi: 10.1177/0891243211416809
9. O’Dea, R.E., Lagisz, M., Jennions, M.D., Nakagawa, S. (2018). Gender Differences in Individual Variation in Academic Grades Fail to Fit Expected Patterns for STEM. Nature Communications. Vol. 9, Article no. 3777, doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-06292-0
10. Stoet, G., Geary, D.C. (2018). The Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. Psychological Science. Vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 581-593, doi: 10.1177/0956797617741719
11. Ceci, S.J., Williams, W.M. (2010). Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields. Current Directions in Psychological Science. Vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 275-279, doi: 10.1177/0963721410383241
12. Zamiatnina, E.S. (2017). Gender-Related Differences in Specialty Choices in Russia. Monitoring Obshchestvennogo Mneniya: Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 3, pp. 163-176, doi: 10.14515/monitoring.2017.3.11 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
13. Franceschini, G., Galli, S., Chiesi, F., Primi, C. (2014). Implicit Gender-Math Stereotype and Women’s Susceptibility to Stereotype Threat and Stereotype Lift. Learning and Individual Differences. Vol. 32, pp. 273-277, doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.020
14. Schuster, C., Martiny, S.E. (2017). Not Feeling Good in STEM: Effects of Stereotype Activation and Anticipated Effect on Women’s Career Aspirations. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research. Vol. 76, no. 1–2, pp. 40-55, doi: 10.1007/s11199-016-0665-3
15. Bloodhart, B., Balgopal, M.M., Casper, A.M.A., Sample McMeeking, L.B., Fischer, E.V. (2020). Outperforming Yet Undervalued: Undergraduate Women in STEM. PLoS ONE. Vol. 15, no. 6, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234685
16. Spencer, S.J., Steele, C.M., Quinn, D.M. (1999). Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 4-28, doi: 10.1006/jesp.1998.1373
17. Khasbulatova, O.A., Smirnova, I.N. (2020). Gender Stereotypes in Digital Society: Modern Tendencies. Narodonaselenie [Population]. Vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 161-171, doi: 10.19181/population.2020.23.2.14 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
18. Savinskaya, O.B., Mkhitaryan, T.A. (2020). [Why Girls Don’t Go to Robotics Circles: Gender Stereotypes and Parents’ Choice]. In: Khasbulatova, O.A. (Ed.). Zhenshchiny v professiyakh XXI veka: tendentsii, problemy, perspektivy [Women in Professions of the XXI Century: Trends, Problems, Prospects: Materials of the All-Russian Sci. Conf. with International Participation. Bvanono, 3 March 2020]. Moscow : Ivanovsky State University, pp. 61-66. (In Russ.).
19. Savinskaya, O.B., Lebedeva, N.V. (2020). Why Women Leave STEM: The Role of Stereotypes. Woman in Russian Society. No. 2, рр. 62-75, doi: 10.21064/WinRS.2020.2.6 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
20. Antoshchuk, I.A. (2021). Moving Through the STEM Pipeline: A Systematic Literature Review of the Gender Inequality in Russian Engineering. Monitoring Obshchestvennogo Mneniya: Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 3, pp. 57-87, doi: 10.14515/monitoring.2021.3.1912 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
21. Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2008). The Reversal of Gender Inequalities in Higher Education: An On-Going Trend. In: Higher Education to 2030, 42. Paris: OECD Publishing. Pp. 286-298, doi: 10.1787/9789264040663-11-en
22. Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors. (2020). In: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington (DC): The National Academies Press. 214 p., doi: 10.17226/25585
23. Weisgram, E.S., Bigler, R.S. (2007). Effects of Learning About Gender Discrimination on Adolescent Girls’ Attitudes Towards and Interest in Science. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 262-269, doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00369.x
24. Lee, J., Lee, H.J., Song, J., Bong, M. (2021). Enhancing Children’s Math Motivation with a Joint Intervention on Mindset and Gender Stereotypes. Learning and Instruction. Vol. 73, article no. 101416, doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101416
25. Jansen, N., Joukes, G. (2013). Long Term, Interrelated Interventions to Increase Women’s Participation in STEM in the Netherlands. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology. Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 306-316. Available at: https://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/314 (accessed 01.05.2022).
26. Lenton, A.P., Bruder, M., Sedikides, C.А. (2009). A Meta-Analysis on the Malleability of Automatic Gender Stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 183-196, doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01488.x
27. Murphy, T.E., Gaughan, M., Hume, R., Moore, S.G. Jr. (2010). College Graduation Rates for Minority Students in a Selective Technical University: Will Participation in a Summer Bridge Program Contribute to Success? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 70-83, doi: 10.3102/0162373709360064
28. Orosz, G., Péter-Szarka, S., Bőthe, B., Tóth-Király, I., Berger, R. (2017). How Not to Do a Mindset Intervention: Learning from a Mindset Intervention Among Students with Good Grades. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 8 (311), pp. 1-11, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00311
29. Dasgupta, N., Scircle, M.M., Hunsinger, M. (2015). Female Peers in Small Work Groups Enhance Women’s Motivation, Verbal Participation, and Career Aspirations in Engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol. 112, no. 16, pp. 4988-4993, doi: 10.1073/pnas.142282211
30. Lewis, N.A.Jr., Sekaquaptewa, D., Meadows, L.A. (2019). Modeling Gender Counter-Stereotypic Group Behavior: A Brief Video Intervention Reduces Participation Gender Gaps on STEM Teams. Social Psychology of Education. Vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 557-577, doi: 10.1007/s11218-019-09489-3
31. Belanger, A.L., Diekman, A.B., Steinberg, M. (2017). Leveraging Communal Experiences in the Curriculum: Increasing Interest in Pursuing Engineering by Changing Stereotypic Expectations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 305-319, doi: 10.1111/jasp.12438
32. Zhao, F., Zhang, Y., Alterman, V., Zhang, B., Yu, G. (2018). Can Math-Gender Stereotypes Be Reduced? A Theory-Based Intervention Program with Adolescent Girls. Current Psychology. Vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 612-624, doi: 10.1007/S12144-016-9543-Y
33. Le, H., Robbins, S.B., Westrick, P.A. (2014). Predicting Student Enrollment and Persistence in College STEM Fields Using an Expanded PE Fit Framework: A Large-Scale Multilevel Study. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 99, no. 5, pp. 915-947, doi: 10.1037/a0035998
34. Goy, S.C., Wong, Y.L., Low, W.Y., Noor, S.N.M., Fazli-Khalaf, Z., Onyeneho, N., Daniel, E., Azizan, S., Hasbullah, M. GinikaUzoigwe, A. (2018). Swimming Against the Tide in STEM Education and Gender Equality: A Problem of Recruitment or Retention in Malaysia. Studies in Higher Education. Vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 1793-1809, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2016.1277383
35. Johns, M., Schmader, T., Martens, A. (2005). Knowing is Half the Battle: Teaching Stereotype Threat as a Means of Improving Women’s Math Performance. Psychological Science. Vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 175-179, doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00799.x
36. Reilly, D., Neumann, D.L., Andrews, G. (2022). Gender Differences in Self-Estimated Intelligence: Exploring the Male Hubris, Female Humility Problem. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 13, article no. 812483, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812483
37. McMullin, J.A., Cairney, J. (2004). Self-Esteem and the Intersection of Age, Class, and Gender. Journal of Aging Studies. Vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 75-90, doi: 10.1016/J.JAGING.2003.09.006
38. Steele, C.M., Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 69 (5), pp. 797-811, doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.69.5.797
39. Shapiro, J.R., Williams, A.M. (2012). The Role of Stereotype Threats in Undermining Girls’ and Women’s Performance and Interest in STEM Fields. Sex roles: A Journal of Research. Vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 175-183, doi: 10.1007/S11199-011-0051-0
40. Dweck, C.S., Yeager, D.S. (2019). Mindsets: A View from Two Eras. Perspectives on Psychological Science. Vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 481-496, doi: 10.1177/1745691618804166
41. Lin-Siegler, X., Dweck, C.S., Cohen, G.L. (2016). Instructional Interventions That Motivate Classroom Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 295-299, doi: 10.1037/EDU0000124
42. Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H., Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement Across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention. Child development. Vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 246-263, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x
43. Casad, B.J., Oyler, D.L., Sullivan, E.T., McClellan, E.M., Tierney, D.N., Anderson, D.A., Greeley P.A., Fague M.A., Flammang, B.J. (2018). Wise Psychological Interventions to Improve Gender and Racial Equality in STEM. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 767-787, doi: 10.1177/1368430218767034
44. Burnette, J.L., Russell, M.V., Hoyt, C.L., Orvidas, K., Widman, L. (2018). An Online Growth Mindset Intervention in a Sample of Rural Adolescent Girls. British Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 428-445, doi: 10.1111/bjep.12192
45. Good, C., Aronson, J., Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving Adolescents’ Standardized Test Performance: An Intervention to Reduce the Effects of Stereotype Threat. Applied Developmental Psychology. Vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 645-662, doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2003.09.002
46. Nallapothula, D., Lozano, J.B., Han, S., Herrera, C., Sayson, H.W., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., Maloy, J. (2020). M-LoCUS: a Scalable Intervention Enhances Growth Mindset and Internal Locus of Control in Undergraduate Students in STEM. Microbiology & biology education. Vol. 21, no. 2, doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v21i2.1987
47. Samuel, T.S., Buttet, S., Warner, J. (2022). “I Can Math, Too!”: Reducing Math Anxiety in STEM-Related Courses Using a Combined Mindfulness and Growth McMullinMindset Approach (MAGMA) in the Classroom. Community College Journal of Research and Practice. Pp. 1-14, doi: 10.1080/10668926.2022.2050843
48. Hacisalihoglu, G., Stephens, D., Stephens, S., Johnson, L., Edington, M. (2020). Enhancing Undergraduate Student Success in STEM Fields Through Growth-Mindset and Grit. Education Sciences. Vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 279, doi: 10.3390/educsci10100279
49. Kim, A.Y., Sinatra, G.M., Seyranian, V. (2018). Developing a STEM Identity Among Young Women: A Social Identity Perspective. Review of Educational Research. Vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 589-625, doi: 10.3102/0034654318779957
50. Murphy, M.C., Steele, C.M., Gross, J.J. (2007). Signaling Threat: How Situational Cues Affect Women in Math, Science, and Engineering Settings. Psychological Science. Vol. 18, no. 10, pp. 879-885, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x
51. Cheryan, S., Master, A., Meltzoff, A.N. (2015). Cultural Stereotypes as Gatekeepers: Increasing Girls’ Interest in Computer Science and Engineering by Diversifying Stereotypes. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 6, article no. 49, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00049
52. Prieto-Rodriguez, E., Sincock, K., Blackmore, K. (2020). STEM Initiatives Matter: Results from a Systematic Review of Secondary School Interventions for Girls. International Journal of Science Education. Vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 1144-1161, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2020.1749909
53. Ivey, S.S., Palazolo, P.J. (2011). Girls Experiencing Engineering: Evolution and Impact of a Single-Gender Outreach Program. In: 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Vancouver, BC, doi: 10.18260/1-2-18026
54. Young, D.M., Rudman L.A., Buettner H.M., McLean, M.C. (2013). The Influence of Female Role Models on Women’s Implicit Science Cognitions. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 283-292, doi: 10.1177/0361684313482109
55. Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S. (2010). Cultures and Selves: A Cycle of Mutual Constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science. Vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 420-430, doi: 10.1177/1745691610375557
56. Falco, L.D., Summers, J.J. (2019). Improving Career Decision Self-efficacy and STEM Self-Efficacy in High School Girls: Evaluation of an Intervention. Journal of Career Development. Vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 62-76, doi: 10.1177/0894845317721651
57. Leaper, C., Farkas, T., Brown, C.S. (2012). Adolescent Girls’ Experiences and Gender-Related Beliefs in Relation to Their Motivation in Math/Science and English. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. Vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 268-282, doi: 10.1007/s10964-011-9693-z
58. Robnett, R.D., Leaper, C. (2013). Friendship Groups, Personal Motivation, and Gender in Relation to High School Students’ STEM Career Interest. Journal of Research on Adolescence. Vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 652-664, doi: 10.1111/JORA.12013
59. Leaper, C. (2015). Do I Belong? Gender, Peer Groups, and STEM Achievement. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology. Vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 166-179, Available at: https://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/405 (accessed 01.05.2022).
60. Paluck, E.L., Green, D.P. (2009). Prejudice Reduction: What Works? A Review and Assessment of Research and Practice. Annual Review of Psychology. Vol. 60, pp. 339-367, doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163607
61. Pettigrew, T.F., Tropp, L.R. (2006). A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 90, no. 5, pp. 751-783, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
62. Inzlicht, M., Ben-Zeev T. (2000). A Threatening Intellectual Environment: Why Females Are Susceptible to Experiencing Problem-solving Deficits in the Presence of Males. Psychological Science. Vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 365-371, doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00272
63. Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., Donovan, S.S. (1999). Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. Vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 21-51, doi: 10.3102/00346543069001021
64. Bailey, E.G., Greenall, R.F., Baek, D.M., Morris, C., Nelson, N., Quirante, T.M., Williams, K.R. (2020). Female In-Class Participation and Performance Increase with More Female Peers and/or a Female Instructor in Life Sciences Courses. CBE–Life Sciences Education. Vol. 19, no. 3, doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-12-0266
65. Ballen, C.J., Aguillon, S.M., Awwad, A., Bjune, A.E., Challou, D. et al. (2019). Smaller Classes Promote Equitable Student Participation in STEM. BioScience. Vol. 69, no. 8, pp. 669-680, doi: 10.1093/biosci/biz069
66. Rowe, M.B. (1974). Wait Time and Rewards as Instructional Variables, Their Influence on Language, Logic, and Fate Control. Part 1: Wait Time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 81-94. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED061103 (accessed 01.05.2022).
67. Dahlerup, D. (1988). From a Small to a Large Minority: Women in Scandinavian Politics. Scandinavian Political Studies. Vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 275-298, doi: 10.1111/J.1467-9477.1988.TB00372.X
68. Gross, D., Pietri, E.S., Anderson, G., Moyano-Camihort, K., Graham, M.J. (2015). Increased Preclass Preparation Underlies Student Outcome Improvement in the Flipped Classroom. CBE–Life Sciences Education. Vol. 14, no. 4, doi: 10.1187/cbe.15-02-0040
69. Latulipe, C., Rorrer, A., Long, B. (2018) Longitudinal Data on Flipped Class Effects on Performance in CS1 and Retention after CS1. In: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Pp. 411-416, doi: 10.1145/3159450.3159518
70. Hartikainen, S., Rintala, H., Pylväs, L., Nokelainen, P. (2019). The Concept of Active Learning and the Measurement of Learning Outcomes: A Review of Research in Engineering Higher Education. Education Sciences. Vol. 9, no. 4, p. 276, doi: 10.3390/educsci9040276
71. Børte, K., Nesje, K., Lillejord, S. (2020). Barriers to Student Active Learning in Higher Education. Teaching in Higher Education, doi: 10.1080/13562517.2020.1839746
72. Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., Gentile, J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tilghman, S.M., Wood, W.B. (2007). Scientific Teaching. Science. Vol. 304, no. 5670, pp. 521-522, Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3836701 (accessed 01.05.2022).
73. Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Vol. 111 (23), pp. 8410-8415, doi: 10.1073/pnas.131903011
74. Horwitz, S., Rodger, S.H., Biggers, M., Binkley, D., Frantz, C.K., Gundermann, D., et al. (2009). Using Peer-Led Team Learning to Increase Participation and Success of Under-represented Groups in Introductory Computer Science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. Vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 163-167, doi: 10.1145/1539024.1508925
75. Dennehy, T.C., Dasgupta, N. (2017). Female Peer Mentors Early in College Increase Women’s Positive Academic Experiences and Retention in Engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Vol. 114 (23), pp. 5964-5969, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1613117114
76. Lyman, F.T. (1998). The Responsive Classroom Discussion: The Inclusion of All Students. In: Anderson, A.S. (Ed.). Mainstreaming Digest. College Park: University of Maryland Press. Pp. 109-113.
77. Tanner, K.D. (2009). Talking to Learn: Why Biology Students Should Be Talking in Classrooms and How to Make It Happen. CBE–Life Sciences Education. Vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 89-94, doi: 10.1187/cbe.09-03-0021
78. Aguillon, S.M., Siegmund, G.F., Petipas, R.H., Drake, A.G., Cotner, S., Ballen, C.J. (2020). Gender Differences in Student Participation in an Active-learning Classroom. CBE–Life Sciences Education. Vol. 19, no. 2, article no. 12, doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-03-0048
79. Ernest, J.B., Reinholz, D.L., Shah, N. (2019). Hidden Competence: Women’s Mathematical Participation in Public and Private Classroom Spaces. Educational Studies in Mathematics. Vol. 102, pp. 153-172, doi: 10.1007/s10649-019-09910-w
80. Diekman, A.B., Steinberg, M., Brown, E.R., Belanger, A.L., Clark, E.K. (2017). A Goal Congruity Model of Role Entry, Engagement, and Exit: Understanding Communal Goal Processes in STEM Gender Gaps. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 142-175, doi: 10.1177/1088868316642141
81. Pöhlmann, K. (2001). Agency- and Communion-Orientation in Life Goals: Impacts on Goal Pursuit Strategies and Psychological Well-being. Life Goals and Well-Being: Towards a Positive Psychology of Human Striving. Seattle, WA : Hogrefe & Huber, pp. 68-84, Available at: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-01629-004 (accessed 01.05.2022).
82. Roberts, B.W., Robins, R.W. (2000). Broad Dispositions, Broad Aspirations: The Intersection of Personality Traits and Major Life Goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 1284-1296, doi: 10.1177/0146167200262009
83. Boucher, K.L., Fuesting, M.A., Diekman, A.B., Murphy, M.C. (2017). Can I Work With and Help Others in This Field? How Communal Goals Influence Interest and Participation in STEM Fields. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 8, article no. 901, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00901
84. Diekman, A.B., Clark, E.K., Johnston, A.M., Brown, E.R., Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in Communal Goals and Beliefs Influences Attraction to Stem Careers: Evidence for a Goal Congruity Perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 902-918, doi: 10.1037/a0025199
85. Fuesting, M.A., Diekman, A.B., Bautista, N. (2021). Integrating Communal Content into Science Lessons: An Investigation of the Beliefs and Attitudes of Preservice Teachers. School Science and Mathematics. Vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 154-163, doi: 10.1111/ssm.12457
86. Brown, E.R., Smith, J.L., Thoman, D.B., Allen, J.M., Muragishi, G. (2015). From Bench to Bedside: A Communal Utility Value Intervention to Enhance Students’ Biomedical Science Motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 107, no. 4, pp. 1116-1135, doi: 10.1037/edu0000033
87. Fuesting, M.A., Diekman, A.B. (2017). Not by Success Alone: Role Models Provide Pathways to Communal Opportunities in STEM. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 163-176, doi: 10.1177/0146167216678857
88. Barthelemy, R.S., McCormick, M., Henderson, C. (2016). Gender Discrimination in Physics and Astronomy: Graduate Student Experiences of Sexism and Gender Microaggressions. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research. Vol. 12, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020119
89. Stentiford, L.J. (2019). “You Can Tell Which Ones Are the Laddy Lads”: Young Women’s Accounts of the Engineering Classroom at a High-performing English University. Journal of Gender Studies. Vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 218-230, doi: 10.1080/09589236.2018.1423957
90. Rattan, A., Good, C., Dweck, C.S. (2012). “It’s ok – Not Everyone Can Be Good at Math”: Instructors with an Entity Theory Comfort (and Demotivate) Students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 731-737, doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.12.012
91. Johnson, I.R., Pietri, E.S., Fullilove, F., Mowrer, S. (2019). Exploring Identity-safety Cues and Ally-ship Among Black Women Students in STEM Environments. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 131-150, doi: 10.1177/0361684319830926
92. Johnson, I.R., Pietri, E.S. (2022). Ally Endorsement: Exploring Allyship Cues to Promote Perceptions of Allyship and Positive STEM Beliefs Among White Female Students. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, doi: 10.1177/13684302221080467
93. Chaney, K.E., Sanchez, D.T., Remedios, J.D. (2018). We Are in This Together: How the Presence of Similarly Stereotyped Allies Buffer Against Identity Threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 79, pp. 410-422, doi: 10.1016/J.JESP.2018.09.005
94. Killpack, T.L., Melón, L.C. (2016). Toward Inclusive STEM Classrooms: What Personal Role Do Faculty Play? CBE–Life Sciences Education. Vol. 15, no. 3, doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-01-0020
95. Charlesworth, T.E., Banaji, M.R. (2019). Gender in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Issues, Causes, Solutions. Journal of Neuroscience. Vol. 39, no. 37, pp. 7228-7243, doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0475-18.2019
96. Carnes, M., Devine, P.G., Manwell, L.B., Byars-Winston, A., Fine, E., Ford, C.E., et al. (2015). The Effect of an Intervention to Break the Gender Bias Habit for Faculty at One Institution: A Cluster Randomized, Controlled Trial. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. Vol. 90, no. 2, doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000552
97. Isaac, C., Manwell, L.B., Devine, P.G., Ford, C., Sheridan, J.T., Byars-Winston, A., Fine E., Carnes, M. (2016). Difficult Dialogues: Negotiating Faculty Responses to a Gender Bias Literacy Training Program. Qualitative report (Online). Vol. 21, no. 7, doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2016.2205
98. Moss-Racusin, C.A., Pietri, E.S., Hennes, E.P., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Roussos, G., Handelsman, J. (2018). Reducing STEM Gender Bias with VIDS (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. Vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 236-260, doi: 10.1037/xap0000144
99. Meadows L.A., Sekaquaptewa D. (2011). The Effect of Skewed Gender Composition on Student Participation in Undergraduate Engineering Project Teams. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, doi: 10.18260/1-2-18957
100. Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S.A., Montoya, A.K., Jiang, L. (2017). Why Are Some STEM Fields More Gender Balanced Than Others? Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 143, no. 1, pp. 1-35, doi: 10.1037/bul0000052
101. Lord, S.M., Layton, R.A., Ohland, M.W. (2011). Trajectories of Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering Students by Race and Gender. Education, IEEE Transactions on Education. Vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 610-618, doi: 10.1109/TE.2010.2100398
102. Panina, S.V. (2018). The Gender Aspect of Students’ Professional Self-Determination. Obshchestvo, sotsiologiya, psykhologiya, pegagogika = Society, Sociology, Psychology, Pedagogy. No. 1, doi: 10.24158/spp.2018.1.17 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
103. Raychuk, D.Yu, (2016). Teaching Load in the Light of International Experience. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 1, pp. 105-112. Available at: https://vovr.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/362 (accessed 01.05.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
104. Huda, M., Jasmi, K.A., Alas, Y., Qodriah, S.L., Dacholfany, M.I., Jamsari, E.A. (2018). Empowering Civic Responsibility: Insights from Service Learning. Engaged Scholarship and Civic Responsibility in Higher Education. Pp. 144-165, doi: 10.4018/978-1-5225-3649-9.CH007
105. Gerholz, K.-H., Liszt, V., Klingsieck, K.B. (2018). Effects of Learning Design Patterns in Service Learning Courses. Active Learning in Higher Education. Vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 47-59, doi: 10.1177/1469787417721420
106. Reshetnikova, O.V., Tetersky, S.V. (Eds.). (2020). Obuchenie sluzheniem: Metod. posobie [Teaching by Service: A Methodological Guide] Moscow : AVC, 216 p. Available at: https://minobrnauki.gov.ru/files/Metodicheskoe_posobie_Obuchenie_sluzheniem.pdf (accessed 01.05.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
107. Gorbunova, E.V. (2013). Adaptation of Students of 1–3 Courses of Bachelor’s / Specialist’s Degree to University Life. Universitas. Journal about the life of universities. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 48-64. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
Review
Views:
1232
Email this article 