Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Girls’ Science Affinities Through an Informal Science Education Program

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines science interests, efficacy, attitudes, and identity—referred to as affinities, in the context of an informal science outreach program for girls. A mixed methods design was used to explore girls’ science affinities before, during, and after participation in a cohort-based summer science camp. Multivariate analysis of survey data revealed that girls’ science affinities varied as a function of the joint relationship between family background and number of years in the program, with girls from more affluent families predicted to increase affinities over time and girls from lower income families to experience initial gains in affinities that diminish over time. Qualitative examination of girls’ perspectives on gender and science efficacy, attitudes toward science, and elements of science identities revealed a complex interplay of gendered stereotypes of science and girls’ personal desires to prove themselves knowledgeable and competent scientists. Implications for the best practice in fostering science engagement and identities in middle school-aged girls are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. While careers in medicine heavily employ the tools and knowledge of the STEM domains, they are not traditionally included in the umbrella of STEM (Gonzalez and Kuenzi 2012; National Science Foundation 2016). Furthermore, inclusion of these careers, where women are better represented, masks the persistent gender disparities in STEM (National Science Foundation and Directorate for Social 2017). Seems like something is missing after Social

References

  • Ahlqvist, S., London, B., & Rosenthal, L. (2013). Unstable identity compatibility how gender rejection sensitivity undermines the success of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1644–1652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, J. M., Johnson, K. E., & Kelley, K. (2012). Longitudinal analysis of the relations between opportunities to learn about science and the development of interests related to science. Science Education, 96(5), 763–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alper, J. (1993). The pipeline is leaking women all the way along. Science, 260(5106), 409–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Chemical Society. (2017). Community outreach Retrieved 5/13/2017, 2017, from https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/education/outreach.html.

  • American Physical Society. (2017). Physics outreach Retrieved 5/13/2017, 2017, from http://www.aps.org/programs/outreach/.

  • Archer, L., Dewitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “Being” a scientist: examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, L., Dewitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). “Balancing acts”: elementary school girls’ negotiations of femininity, achievement, and science. Science Education, 80(1), 967–989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, L., Dewitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). ‘Not girly, not sexy, not glamorous’: primary school girls’ and parents’ constructions of science aspirations. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 21(1), 171–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, L., Moote, J., Francis, B., Dewitt, J., & Yeomans, L. (2017). The “exceptional” physics girl: a sociological analysis of multimethod data from you women aged 10-16 to explore gendered patterns of post-16 participation. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 88–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1976). Social Learning Theory (1st ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997a). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997b). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banzi, M., Cuartielles, D., Igoe, T., Martino, G., Mellis, D. (2016). Arduino, 2016, from https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/Credits.

  • Baumeister, R., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer Corporation (2010). Bayer facts of science education XIV: female and minority chemists and chemical engineers speak about diversity and underrepresentation in STEM (pp. 36): Bayer Corporation.

  • Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., & Levine, S. C. (2010). Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(5), 1860–1863.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergen, D. (2002). The role of pretend play in children’s cognitive development. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 4(1), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(5), 399–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brainard, S. G., & Carlin, L. (1998). A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 369–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Embodying science: a feminist perspective on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 282–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickhouse, N. W., Lowery, P., & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of a girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: a review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971–1002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck, G. A., Clark, V. L. P., Leslie-Pelecky, D., Lu, Y., & Cerda-Lizarraga, P. (2008). Examining the cognitive processes used by adolescent girls and women scientists in identifying science role models: a feminist approach. Science Education, 92(4), 688–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkam, D. T., Lee, V. E., & Smerdon, B. A. (1997). Gender and science learning early in high school: subject matter and laboratory experiences. American Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 297–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese Barton, A., & Brickhouse, N. W. (2006). Engaging girls in science. In C. Skelton, B. Fracis, & L. Smulyan (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of gender and education. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlone, H. B., Johnson, A., & Scott, C. M. (2015). Agency amid formidable structures: how girls perform gender in science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 474–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, D. W. (2006). Stereotypic images of the scientist: the draw a scientist test. Science Education, 67(2), 255–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X., & Soldner, M. (2013). STEM attrition: college students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (pp. 104). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesler, N., Barabino, G., Bhatia, S., & Richards-Kortum, R. (2010). The pipeline still leaks and more than you think: a status report on gender diversity in biomedical engineering. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, (5), 38, 1928–1935. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-010-9958-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christidou, V. (2011). Interest, attitudes and images related to science: combining students’ voices with the voices of school science, teachers, and popular science. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 6(2), 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colvin, W., Lyden, S., & Leon de la Barra, B. (2013). Attracting girls to civil engineering through hands-on activities that reveal the communal goals and values of the profession. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 13(1), 35–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, C., & Hill, C. (2015). Solving the equations: the variables for women’s success in engineering and computing (p. 159). Washington, DC: AAUW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Côté, J. E., & Levine, C. G. (2002). Identity, formation, agency, and culture: a social psychological synthesis. Mahwah: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cundiff, J. L., Vescio, T. K., Loken, E., & Lo, L. (2013). Do gender-science stereotypes predict science identification and science career aspirations among undergraduate science majors? Social Psychology of Education, 16(4), 541–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A., & Greenwald, A. (2011). Math-gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child Development, 82(3), 766–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorius, S. F., & Firebaugh, G. (2010). Trends in global gender inequality. Social Forces, 88(5), 1941–1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dukeshire, E. (2014). How I came to study, teach, and love science.

  • Dweck, C. S. (2006). Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindsets and Math/Science Achievement (pp. 17). New York: Carnegie Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. (1987). Gender roles and women’s achievement-related decisions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11(2), 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (1985). Classroom experiences and student gender: are there differences and do they matter. In L. Wilkinson & C. Marrett (Eds.), Gender influences in classroom interaction (pp. 79–114). New York: Academic Press Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor—the structure of adolescents achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J., Adler, T., & Meece, J. L. (1984). Sex differences in achievement: a test of alternate theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 26–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Else-Quest, N. M., Mineo, C. C., & Higgins, A. (2013). Math and science attitudes and achievement at the intersection of gender and ethnicity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(3), 293–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, E. (1968). Identity, youth and crisis. Oxford: W.W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M. A., & Whigham, M. (1995). The effect of a role model project upon the attitudes of ninth-grade science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2), 195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J. H., Storksdieck, M., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding: evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4), 455–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Files, J. A., Blair, J. E., Mayer, A. P., & Ko, M. G. (2008). Facilitated peer mentorship: a pilot program for academic advancement of female medical faculty. Journal of Womens Health, 17(6), 1009–1015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouad, N. A., & Guillen, A. (2006). Outcome expectations: looking to the past and potential future. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 130–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (1996). A test of a social cognitive model for middle school students: Math and science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43(3), 338–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. (2002). Children’s competence and value beliefs from childhood through adolescence: growth trajectories in two male-sex-typed domains. Developmental Psychology, 38, 519–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gennep, A. V. (1909). The rites of passage. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germann, P. J. (1988). Development of the attitude toward science in school assessment and its use to investigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude toward science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 689–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. (2001). Science and its ‘other’: looking underneath ‘woman’ and ‘science’ for new directions in research on gender and science education. Gender and Education, 13(3), 291–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, J. L., Sassler, S., Levitte, Y., & Michelmore, K. M. (2013). What’s so special about STEM? A comparison of women’s retention in STEM and professional occupations. Social Forces, 92(2), 723–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonsalves, A., Rahm, J., & Carvalho, A. (2013). “We could think of things that could be science”: girls’ re-figuring of science in an out-of-school-time club. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(9), 1068–1097.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: a primer. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, C., Aronson, J., & Harder, J. A. (2008). Problems in the pipeline: sterotype threat and women’s achievement in high-level math courses. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(1), 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, A. L. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: is it the school that matters? Ithaca: Working Papers: ILR collection. Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy/mathematics performance correspondence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(3), 261–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., Aronson, J., Reimer, N., Simpkins, S., Star, J. R., & Wentzel, K. (2007). Encouraging girls in math and science. Washington, DC: Department of Education, National Center for Education Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harackiewicz, J. M., Rozek, C. S., Hulleman, C. S., & Hyde, J. S. (2012). Helping parents to motivate adolescents in mathematics and science an experimental test of a utility-value intervention. Psychological Science, 23(8), 899–906.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: the reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haussler, P., & Hoffman, L. (2002). An intervention study to enhance girls’ interest, self-concept, and achievement in physics classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 870–888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazari, Z., & Potvin, G. (2005). Views on female under-representation in physics: retraining women or reinventing physics? Electronic Journal of Science Education, 10(1), 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P., & Shanahan, M. (2010). Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: a gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978–1003. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazari, Z., Potvin, G., Lock, R. M., Lung, F., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2013). Factors that affect the physical science career interest of female students: testing five common hypotheses. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 9(2), 020115 020111-020118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewlett, S. A., Buck Luce, C., Servon, L. J., Sherbin, L., Shiller, P., Sosnovich, E., et al. (2008). The Athena factor: reversing the brain drain in science, engineering and technology Harvard Business Review Research Report. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, M. (2011). Does gender bias influence awards given by societies. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 92(47), 421–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, M. L. (1997). Girls in science: the effect role models have on student interest. Lethbridge: Masters of Education, University of Lethbridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326(5958), 1410–1412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyun, T. E. (2014). Middle school girls: perceptions and experiences with robotics. Ph.D., California University, Fullerton.

  • Jayaratne, T. E., Thomas, N. G., & Trautmann, M. (2003). Intervention program to keep girls in the science pipeline: outcome differences by ethnic status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 393–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovanovic, J., & King, S. S. (1998). Boys and girls in the performance-based science classroom: who’s doing the performing? American Educational Research Journal, 35(3), 477–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1977). Some effects of proportions on group life—skewed sex-ratios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 965–990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. (1981). The missing half: girls and science education. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerpelman, J. L., Pittman, J. F., & Lamke, L. K. (1997). Toward a microprocess perspective on adolescent identity development. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12(3), 325–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitts, K. (2009). The paradox of middle and high school students’ attitudes towards science versus their attitudes about science as a career. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57(2), 159–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, S., Liston, C., Thiry, H., & Graf, J. (2007). What good is a scientist in the classroom? Participant outcomes and program design features for a short-duration science outreach intervention in K-12 classrooms. CBE Life Science Education, 6(1), 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibham, M. B., Alexander, J. M., & Johnson, K. E. (2013). Science interests in preschool boys and girls: relations to later self-concept and science achievement. Science Education, 97(4), 574–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leslie, S.-J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219), 262–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in science inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubinksi, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2006). Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years: uncovering antecedents for the development of math-science expertise. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(4), 316–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, T. L. (2000). Junior high female role model intervention improves science persistence and attitudes in girls over time Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 8th CCWESTT Conference, St. John’s, NF.

  • Matsui, T., Mastsui, K., & Ohnishi, R. (1990). Mechanism underlying math self-efficacy learning of college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37(225–238), 225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattern, N., & Schau, C. (2002). Gender differences in science attitude-achievement relationships over time among white middle-school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 324–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merolla, D. M., & Serpe, R. T. (2013). STEM enrichment programs and graduate school matriculation: the role of science identity salience. Social Psychology of Education, 16(4), 575–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, P. H., Blessing, J. S., & Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender differences in high-school students’ views about science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 363–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2008a). Broadening participation at the national science foundation: a framework for action (pp. 52). Washington, DC: National Science Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2008b). Research and development: essential foundation for U.S. competitiveness in a global economy—a companion to science and engineering indicators 2008 (p. 12). Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2010a). Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators: identifying and developing our nation’s human capital (pp. 49). Arlington: National Science Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2010b). Science and engineering indicators. National Science Foundation Report.

  • National Science Board. (2014a). TABLE 2–17. Earned bachelor’s degrees, by sex and field: 2000–11. In National Science Foundation (Ed.), Science & Engineering Indicators (pp. 1). Washington, DC.

  • National Science Board. (2014b). TABLE 7–2. Doctoral degrees awarded to women, by field: 2002–12 In National Science Foundation (Ed.), Science & Engineering Indicators. Washington, DC.

  • National Science Foundation. (2008). Table 8–1. S&E postdoctoral fellows in academic institutions, by field, citizenship, and sex: 2008 Women, Minorities, and Person’s With Disabilities in Science Education. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation. (2011). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2011. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation. (2014). Awards: advance portfolio overview Retrieved 3/15/14, 2014, from http://www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/advance/awards.jsp- it.

  • National Science Foundation. (2016). NSF graduate research fellowship program. Arlington: National Science Foundation Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2016/nsf16588/nsf16588.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation, & Directorate for Social, B., and Economic Sciences. (2017). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2017. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Student Clearing House Research Center. (2015). Snapshot report—degree attainment (pp. 5). Herndon: National Student Clearinghouse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nord, C., Roey, S., Perkins, R., Lyons, M., Lemanski, N., Bronw, J., et al. (2011). The nation’s report card: America’s high school graduates (NCES 2011-462). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, B., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002a). Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(1), 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, B., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002b). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 44–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, B., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., et al. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(26), 10593–10597.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Rourke, E. O., Haimovitz, K., Ballwebber, C., Dweck, C. S., Popovic, Z. (2014). Brain points: a growth mindset incentive structure boosts persistence in an educational game. Paper presented at the CHI’14 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY.

  • Olitsky, S. (2007). Facilitating identity formation, group membership, and learning in science classrooms: what can be learned from out-of-field teaching in an urban school? Science Education, 91(2), 201–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. [Review]. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-efficacy research. In M. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achivement (Vol. 10). Greenwich: JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, V. (2000). Effects of a science intervention program on middle-grade student achievement and attitudes. School Science and Mathematics, 100(5), 236–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, L., & Rennie, L. (2002). Teachers’ implementation of gender-inclusive instructional strategies in single-sex and mixed-sex science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 881–897.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabenberg, T. A. (2013). Middle school girls’ STEM education: using teacher influences, parent encouragement, peer influences, and self efficacy to predict confidence and interest in Math and Science. Ph.D. Dissertation, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa.

  • Ride, S. (2012). Great education starts with inspired teachers.

  • Riegle-Crumb, C., & King, B. (2010). Questioning a white male advantage in STEM: examining disparities in college major by gender and race/ethnicity. Educational Research, 39(9), 656–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riegle-Crumb, C., & Moore, C. (2013). The gender gap in high school physics: considering the context of local communities. Social Science Quarterly, 95(1), 253–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J., & Lubienski, S. (2011). The development of gender achievement gaps in mathematics and reading during elementary and middle school: examining direct cognitive assessments and teacher ratings. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 268–302. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210372249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosser, S. (2012). Breaking into the lab. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, M. (2009). Integrative STEM education: primer. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saraga, E., & Griffiths, D. (1981). Biological inevitabilities or political choices? The future for girls in science. In A. Kelly (Ed.), The missing half: girls and science education (pp. 85–97). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawtelle, V., Brewe, E., & Kramer, L. H. (2013). Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and retention in introductory physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1096–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S., Luyckx, K., & Vignoles, V. (2011). Handbook of identity theory and research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoffner, M. F., & Newson, D. W. (2001). Identity development of gifted female adolescents: the influence of career development, age, and life-role salience. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 12, 201–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simard, C., Henderson, A. D., Gilmartin, S. K., Scheibinger, L., & Whitney, T. (2008). Climbing the technical ladder: obstacles and solutions for mid-level women in technology. Stanford: Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research, Stanford University, & Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Society of Women Engineers. (2017). K-12 Outreach Retrieved 5/13/2017, 2017, from http://societyofwomenengineers.swe.org/k-12-outreach.

  • Spear, M. (1987). The biasing influence of pupil sex in a science marking exercise. In A. Kelly (Ed.), Science for girls (pp. 46–51). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, J. E. (2006). The critical mediating role of social encouragement for science motivation and confidence among high school girls and boys. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 1017–1045.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, J. E., & Mares, K. R. (2001). Science enrichment programs for gifted high school girls and boys: predictors of program impact on science confidence and motivation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(10), 1065–1088.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, J. E., & Nickens, S. D. (2005). Adolescent girls’ and boys’ science peer relationships and perceptions of the possible self as scientist. Sex Roles, 52(1–2), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinke, J., Lapinski, M. K., Crocker, N., Zietsman-Thomas, A., Williams, Y., Evergreen, S. H., et al. (2007). Assessing media influences on middle school-aged children’s perceptions of women in science using the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST). Science Communication, 29(1), 35–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swail, W. S., & Perna, L. W. (2002). Pre-college outreach programs. Increasing access to college, 250.

  • Taconis, R., & Kessels, U. (2009). How choosing science depends on students’ individual fit to ‘science culture’. International Journal of Science Education, 31(8), 1115–1132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802050876PII 793170196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tai, R., & Sadler, P. (2001). Gender differences in introductory undergraduate physics performance: university physics in the USA. International Journal of Science Education, 23(10), 1017–1037.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tai, R., Qi Liu, C., Maltese, A., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, E., Calabrese Barton, A., Kang, H., & O’Neill, T. (2013). Desiring a career in STEM-related fields: how middle school girls articulate and negotiate identities-in-practice in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(10), 1143–1179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, B. (2013). The science program to inspire creativity and excellence. Paper presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science Annual Meeting 2014, Chicago, IL.

  • Todd, B. (2015). Little Scientists: Identity, Self-Efficacy, and Attitudes Toward Science in a Girls’ Science Camp. PhD Dissertation, Eugene: University of Oregon.

  • U.S. Department of Labor, & Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). Women in the labor force: a databook. Wasington, DC: U.S. Depatment of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2014). Women in Science. uis.unesco.org: United Nations Educational, Scienctific and Cultural Organization.

  • United States Census Bureau. (2011a). Table 231. Educational attainment by selected characteristics. The 2012 Statistical Abstract.

  • United States Census Bureau. (2011b). Table 299. Degrees earned by level and sex: 1960 to 2009. The 2012 Statistical Abstract.

  • Walford, G. (1981). Tracking down sexism in physics textbooks. Physics Education, 16(5), 261–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watt, H. M. G., Eccles, J., & Durik, A. M. (2006). The leaky mathematics pipeline for girls: a motivational analysis of high school enrollments in Australia and the USA. Equal Opportunities International, 25(8), 642–659.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisgram, E. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2007). Effects of learning about gender discrimination on adolescent girls’ attitudes toward and interest in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(3), 262–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, Y. (2008). Gender disparity in STEM disciplines: a study of faculty attrition and turnover intentions. Research in Higher Education, 49(7), 607–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9097-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: when students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeldin, A. L., & Pajares, F. (2000). Against the odds: self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific, and technological careers. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., & Bronshtein, B. (2005). Physics teachers’ knowledge and beliefs regarding girls’ low participation rates in advanced physics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 61–77.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1274 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403, USA

    Brandy Todd & Keith Zvoch

Authors
  1. Brandy Todd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith Zvoch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brandy Todd.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 388 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Todd, B., Zvoch, K. Exploring Girls’ Science Affinities Through an Informal Science Education Program. Res Sci Educ 49, 1647–1676 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9670-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9670-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation