Paper detail

Gender Inequities Throughout STEM: Compared to Men, Women with Significantly Higher Grades Drop STEM Majors

Efforts to promote equity and inclusion using evidence-based approaches are vital to correcting long-standing societal inequities that have disadvantaged women and discouraged them from pursuing studies, including in many STEM disciplines. We used 10 years of institutional data from a large public university to investigate the grade point average trends in different STEM disciplines for men and women who declared a major and then either completed the degree or dropped the major after declaring it. We found alarming trends, such as that women who dropped majors on average earned higher grades than men, and in some STEM majors, women who dropped the majors were earning comparable grades to men who persisted in those majors. While these quantitative findings call for a deeper understanding of the reasons women and men drop a major, we provide suggestions for approaches to make learning environments more equitable and inclusive so that traditionally excluded stereotyped groups can have a higher sense of belonging and thrive.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.