Paper detail

Gender inequities throughout STEM: Women with higher grades drop STEM majors while men persist

Efforts to promote equity and inclusion using evidence-based approaches are vital to correct long-standing societal inequities that have disadvantaged women and discouraged them from pursuing studies, e.g., in many STEM disciplines. We use 10 years of institutional data at a large public university to investigate trends in the majors that men and women declare, drop after declaring, and earn degrees in as well as the GPA of the students who drop or earn a degree. We find that the majors with the lowest number of students also have the highest rates of attrition. Moreover, we find alarming GPA trends, e.g., women who drop majors on average earn higher grades than men who drop those majors, and in some STEM majors, women who drop the majors were earning comparable grades to men who persist in those majors. These quantitative findings call for a better understanding of the reasons students drop a major and for making learning environments equitable and inclusive.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.