Only about a quarter of AP Computer-science examinees in the United States are female, and less than one fifth of Computer-science degrees are earned by women in American colleges. In a study across 67 countries and regions, girls performed about as well, if not better, than boys in the field of science. But yet in developed, more progressive and gender equal nations, the gap between boys and girls excelling in science increased, as determined by the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index.
On the other hand, in less progressive nations, the ratio of men to women in science, technology, engineering, and math shows a much smaller gap. For example, in Algeria, two fifth of college graduates in these fields of study are female. In countries like these, women tend to have fewer opportunities as opposed to men, which portrays a tendency for these fields to draw more women when economic opportunities are fewer, as opposed to essentially having the freedom to pursue whatever interests them.
The issue doesn’t appear to be girls’ aptitude for stem professions. In looking at test scores across 67 countries and regions, Stoet and Geary found that girls performed about as well or better than boys did on science in most countries, and in almost all countries, girls would have been capable of college-level science and math classes if they had enrolled in them.
But when it comes to their relative strengths, in almost all the countries—all except Romania and Lebanon—boys’ best subject was science, and girls’ was reading. (That is, even if an average girl was as good as an average boy at science, she was still likely to be even better at reading.) Across all countries, 24 percent of girls had science as their best subject, 25 percent of girls’ strength was math, and 51 percent excelled in reading. For boys, the percentages were 38 for science, 42 for math, and 20 for reading.
And the more gender-equal the country, as measured by the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index, the larger this gap between boys and girls in having science as their best subject. (The most gender-equal countries are the typical snowy utopias you hear about, like Sweden, Finland, and Iceland. Turkey and the United Arab Emirates rank among the least equal, according to the Global Gender Gap Index.)
The gap in reading “is related at least in part to girls’ advantages in basic language abilities and a generally greater interest in reading; they read more and thus practice more,” Geary told me.What’s more, the countries that minted the most female college graduates in fields like science, engineering, or math were also some of the least gender-equal countries.
They posit that this is because the countries that empower women also empower them, indirectly, to pick whatever career they’d enjoy most and be best at.“Countries with the highest gender equality tend to be welfare states,” they write, “with a high level of social security.”
Meanwhile, less gender-equal countries tend to also have less social support for people who, for example, find themselves unemployed. Thus, the authors suggest, girls in those countries might be more inclined to choose professions, since they offer a more certain financial future than, say, painting or writing.
When the study authors looked at the “overall life satisfaction” rating of each country—a measure of economic opportunity and hardship—they found that gender-equal countries had more life satisfaction. The life-satisfaction ranking explained 35 percent of the variation between gender equality and women’s participation in. That correlation echoes past research showing that the genders are actually more segregated by field of study in more economically developed places.
The upshot of this research is neither especially feminist nor especially sad: It’s not that gender equality discourages girls from pursuing science. It’s that it allows them not to if they’re not interested.
The findings will likely seem controversial, since the idea that men and women have different inherent abilities is often used as a reason, by some, to argue we should forget trying to recruit more women into the fields. But, as the University of Wisconsin gender-studies professor Janet Shibley Hyde, who wasn’t involved with the study, put it to me, that’s not quite what’s happening here.
“Some would say that the gender stem gap occurs not because girls can’t do science, but because they have other alternatives, based on their strengths in verbal skills,” she said. “In wealthy nations, they believe that they have the freedom to pursue those alternatives and not worry so much that they pay less.”
Instead, this line of research, if it’s replicated, might hold useful takeaways for people who do want to see more Western women entering stem fields. In this study, the percentage of girls who did excel in science or math was still larger than the number of women who were graduating with stem degrees.
That means there’s something in even the most liberal societies that’s nudging women away from math and science, even when those are their best subjects. The women-in-stem advocates could, for starters, focus their efforts on those would-be stem stars.
Then again, it could just be that, feeling financially secure and on equal footing with men, some women will always choose to follow their passions, rather than whatever labor economists recommend. And those passions don’t always lie within science.
The data, therefore, shows that the gap in STEM professions stems less from gender inequality imposed oppression as it does from a difference in interests. In wealthier nations, then, when not pressured by economic factors, men and women tend to pursue different areas of study and occupation from what looks like a gap in interests, more than anything else.