June 26, 2011
June 26, 2011
June 29, 2011
22.718.1 - 22.718.11
Gender differences, explicit and implicit, characterize the goals, self-concepts, stereotypes, and perceptions of discrimination of first-year engineering students.Despite decades of gender-gap-closing in science and math achievement, computer science andengineering remain disproportionately male at the collegiate level. Overt barriers to women’sparticipation in these fields are widely considered a thing of the past, but recent evidencesuggests that unconscious, or implicit, mindsets may continue to exert a toll. One’s implicitattitudes, stereotypes and self-concepts with respect to STEM may differ from those one self-reports. Implicit cognition, operating without conscious awareness or control, has been foundrelated to academic choices and performance independent of comparable self-reported mindsets(explicit cognition). Understanding the development and influence of both explicit and implicitmindsets about STEM should help explain the different gender patterns in selecting andpersisting in engineering majors and careers.In a study of first-semester engineering students in 5 sections of an “introduction to engineering”course (N=187), we examined explicit and implicit mindsets about STEM performance, choiceof engineering major, STEM career intentions, and the role of gender. Our primary measure ofimplicit cognition was the Implicit Association Test (IAT), which has strong psychometricproperties and has been shown to be a reliable independent predictor of math and sciencebehaviors.Results indicate that even among this highly science-engaged sample, men and women differsignificantly in their interests, self-concepts and skill assessments. As expected for engineeringstudents, these women implicitly associated the self with math more strongly than with languagearts, yet men’s implicit math self-concept was significantly stronger, by d = .31. Women andmen did not differ in the strength of their self-reported association of engineering with malesversus females. Implicitly, however, men strongly associated both math and science with male,while women did not differentially associate these domains with either gender. In the first week,men reported significantly greater liking than women did of building things (d = .43), confidencein their computer-based problem-solving ability (d = .40), and scored higher on the realistic“doing of things” dimension of vocational interest (d = .70). Women were higher than men inself-assessments of creativity (d = .35) and on the “social” dimension of vocational interest (d =.86). When asked about possible causes of the dearth of women among top university sciencefaculty, women rated more strongly than men the importance of discrimination in hiring andpromotion, whether conscious or unconscious. Finally, at semester’s end, women were alsomore likely than men (30% vs. 8%; d = .48) to report that gender stereotypes hurt their ownperformance in the introduction to engineering course. Of note, women’s ratings of these lattertwo items were uncorrelated (r = .01); that is, the early semester beliefs about the general effectsof discrimination were not related to end-of-semester beliefs about gender stereotypes affectingpersonal performance.Taken together, these findings make clear that women and men beginning engineering educationhave substantially different mindsets with respect to interests, goals, self-concepts, stereotypesand perceptions of the environment. Studying the downstream effects of implicit associationsmay help account for the decline of women’s participation in engineering across the academiccareer span.
Smyth, F. L., & Guilford, W. H., & Nosek, B. A. (2011, June), First year engineering students are strikingly impoverished in their self-concept as professional engineers Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC. https://peer.asee.org/17999
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2011 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015