Less than three months ago, James Damore, a successful engineer for Google, ignited controversy after asserting that the abilities and success of men and women differ in part due to biological differences (Barnet and Rivers). He further added that these intrinsic differences, which have yet to be scientifically proven, are the reason that women cannot attain the same leadership positions as their male counterparts. Even in an era when there are so many social advances, unfortunately statements and opinions like these are still common today. Ultimately, these inaccurate assertions further the stigma that there are ironclad differences between sexes that undermine an individual’s academic success. Biological differences are an example of one of the factors that some current and past scientists say contribute to the gender gap in STEM fields today. The STEM fields, or science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, have grown exponentially in the past few decades. However, while the number of women attending college has increased, the number of women seeking jobs or studying in these STEM fields has declined (Sterns et al). This is especially true for the fields of engineering and computer science. To be exact, the percent of women seeking degrees in computer science dropped to just eighteen percent in 2014 (Galvin). This is almost half as few as women seeking degrees in the same area in 1984. While the data shows that a gender gap exists, there is not a clear and definitive answer as to why. In order to successfully fight this inequality and find possible solutions, it is necessary to compile a thorough investigation on the multifaceted factors that generate this social and academic problem. 

Currently, educators, experts, and various psychologists agree that even if it is subtle, there is a gap between the two genders.  However, which factors generate this gender gap is still unclear. One side of the argument asserts that there are differences in the chemical foundations of the brain that predetermine the success of males and females in certain areas of expertise, like math. This stance contends that gender differences begin at birth and are inalterable.  Others say influential role models attribute to the bias that surrounds women in the STEM fields.  These role models may include family, educators, and even school counselors. A study reported that young students spend more time with their teachers than any other adult besides their parents (Owens et al). Consequentially, a teacher can have a tremendous impact on a young and impressionable student.  In this circumstance, the bias builds over periods of time and starts to influence students in middle school. Ultimately, inaccurate information and preconceived notions begin to create a culture full of prejudice and expectation. This culture, or school and workplace environment, is a third factor that experts believe affect a woman’s success in STEM. For a young girl to express curiosity in science or mathematics, it is important that the information is conveyed in a way that resonates with her. An intimidating or characteristically masculine environment will steer many women away. 

In the United States, it is well established that a gender gap exists in education and employment. Biological predispositions and social experiences are just a few factors which attempt to explain why the bias and stratification still exist in a time when other landmark social changes are being made simultaneously. Knowledge into the root of the problem is key in determining solutions. These solutions are important to the future of this country and more specifically to the state of South Carolina. According to the Institute for Women’s Policy and Research, women only comprised 28.2% of all STEM jobs in South Carolina. This low percentage ranks the state thirtieth in the country (“Women and Men in STEM”). With the additional power and knowledge contributed by young women, a substantial difference can be made in the state’s economy. However, the state and the citizens of South Carolina must first recognize that the gender gap exists. Then, progressive changes can lead the state in the right direction. So, the state’s citizens, and more locally, those at the University of South Carolina, must investigate the factors that produce the gender gap and seek ways to resolve them to eliminate this imbalanced social issue. 

For the past three hundred years, women have been fought and made tremendous advances for equal rights and access to education in the United States. In the eighteenth century, there was a deeply rooted belief that women and young girls held an important role in the home and did not have time for education. In addition to this, many scientists and doctors alike went as far to report that schooling would negatively affect a woman’s fertility (Prinz 274). During this era, it was believed that education would push women to the “brink of destruction” (Prinz 274). For this reason, girls were kept out of the classroom until 1767, after a school in Rhode Island offered reading lessons for women so teachers could earn extra income (Owens et al). From then on, girls began to make gradual steps toward equality. However, it was not until 1972 that Congress finally enacted Title IX. This educational amendment made it illegal and unconstitutional to discriminate or exclude a person based on their sex in the academic realm. This law encouraged young women to participate in sports and also resulted in an increase in the number of girls who graduated high school. From 1971 to 1994, the percent of female high school graduates rose twenty percent (Owens et al). Thus emphasizing that equality in education provides motivation to a high school student. Also, this proves that equal opportunities in sports and the classroom can steer students toward success.  Today, there is still a gender stratification for females in education and the workforce. Although women have proven that they can pursue higher levels of education, a gap still exists for women seeking jobs and degrees in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. For instance, according to the United States Department of Commerce, women compose more than half of college educated workers but make up only one quarter of STEM workers (“Women in STEM: 2017 Update”).  Subtle offenses occur daily in schools, popular culture, and from a young student’s role models. These negative effects play a major role in a female’s decision attitude toward STEM and also generate the stigma that girls do not belong in STEM fields. 

A major influence on this societal prejudice is science. Many scientists believe that females are predisposed to be inferior in STEM because of biological differences in their brains (Barnet and Rivers). According to studies, chemical and structural differences cause women to be worse in both mathematics and spatial reasoning. However, neuroscientists have actually “found few sex differences in children’s brains [which] […] relate to learning” (Barnet and Rivers). Scientific labs produce different results on the subject and many reports cannot be reproduced to provide the same data (Prinz 281). When data cannot be reproduced, it is often considered invalid. However, many people are unaware of this problem and tend to believe scientific claims without investigating any further into the source (Fine 211). In consequence, inaccurate information then produces the principle that males are hard-wired to dominate certain professions.  These assumed neurological sex differences are often unjustified and detrimental because “brain facts […] can change people’s attitudes and feelings about a particular social group” (Fine 213). Instead, many neurologists refute the existence of such differences and pin the blame on society and cultural expectations.

It can be justifiably argued that there are no biological differences and that females are equally as capable of succeeding academically and in the workplace. Women are capable of attaining high levels of education and obtaining powerful jobs. By 2011, the number of women earning undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral degrees was almost equal to that of men (Sterns et al 88). Even more recently, the National Assessment of Educational Progress report, an annual study that tests proficiency in reading, writing, math and science, showed that elementary school girls scored three percent higher overall than males (Richmond). Thus, when given the opportunity, girls and women can succeed; however, there are obstacles that hinder them further. A few of the major contributors are the work or school environment, teachers and school counselors, and popular culture. These factors influence women over their entire lifetime. 

Without a doubt, a welcoming work and school environment is fundamental in the success of a student or an employee. However, this sort of atmosphere is not available to many females. In his Google Memo, Damore implied that females do not succeed in high powered jobs because of high levels of anxiety that men do not experience (Barnet and Rivers). Erroneously, he attributed the anxiety to their biological disposition and not to the environment. However, some fields are so male-dominated that they fail to provide an inclusive setting for female workers. For example, a study done by the Athena Factor found that females face harsher punishments than males when they make a mistake (Barnet and Rivers). Factors similar to this construct a cut-throat work environment that deters females from pursuing work in the field.

Many social psychologists assert that the stratification between genders in the STEM fields is generated by influences in the school and from other role models such as family and friends. Although surprising, it is reported that teachers and guidance counselors sometimes are the biggest offenders of believing gender bias. For instance, even a well-intentioned teacher can indirectly project prejudice in the classroom by repeatedly asking boys harder questions or providing more complex feedback. Also, it has been noted that boys receive more praise and criticism than their female counterparts (Prinz 285). Sadly, many studies have pointed to the school as the main place that young girls develop their avoidance of science and mathematics, as well. Shockingly, when surveyed, 17% of teachers did not think it was important for girls to be good at math (Olinger).  Similarly, while a school counselor is supposed to guide and encourage students equally, they often feel sorry for girls enrolled in STEM classes as they think the coursework is too difficult (Owens et al). Instead, counselors influence enrollment in other classes that are perceived as easier or more feminine. Years of this sort of negative reinforcement has a significant effect on a young girl. This phenomenon has been repeated hundreds of times in studies and is known as a stereotype threat. In this case, when a teacher or counselor insinuates that a girl will not be able to succeed in a course because it is typically male dominated, the student then begins to conform to this stereotype (Prinz 280). When considering the amount of time that a female student spends in school, it is easy to imagine how a gender biased environment can ultimately deter her from pursuing an interest in the STEM fields. 

Popular culture continuously plays a role in the gender gap that is affecting women throughout the United States. Girls oftentimes neglect education because of the stress felt to conform to social norms and achieve perfection (Owens et al). For a young girl, what is perceived as popular or normal usually originates from movies or social media. In a study, it was found that when adolescents were asked to draw a STEM professional, they drew a male who was often depicted as quirky or unattractive (Steinke). These gender stereotypes are often reinforced in today’s culture because of the lack of representation of women in STEM professionals in media. For instance, shows rarely cast likeable females as the smart scientist. A study in 2006 found that female researchers or scientists were outnumbered by males in popular children's television shows by a two to one ratio (Steinke). As a result, young girls may avoid STEM subjects as the media creates a generalization about the role and status of women in science.

There is substantial evidence that a major influence is a student’s school or work environment, popular culture, and peers. So, in order to successfully fight the growing gender gap, actions must be taken to change the stimuli into positive factors. In this case, there is not one specific solution; however, an array of small changes can initiate the steps needed for equality in the science, technology, mathematics, and engineering fields. Through research, it has been proven that a cut throat and masculine environment often leads girls to believe that they do not belong. Similarly, popular culture shows or media that consistently have the computer wiz as a male leaves an impression. Most importantly, a female’s peers have a strong influence on whether or not she will pursue a future in the STEM fields. Role models who dismiss a female’s need for mathematics classes instead of encouraging her ultimately deter her from success. A study performed in North Carolina high schools showed that females were more likely to major and graduate with STEM degrees when they attended a high school with a higher proportion of female math and science teachers (Sterns 87). This is because of a teacher poses an example of a woman that is successful in a field that is often perceived as masculine.  So, it is important for school officials to be cognizant on who they are hiring as role models for young students. In order to effectively combat the gender gap in the STEM fields, actions must be taken to prevent inaccurate prejudices and to provide an inclusive environment for all.  

In reference to the workplace, a welcoming environment will stimulate more interest in stereotypically intense and masculine industries such as computer science. Companies need to offer equal benefits and opportunities to both their male and female employees. While bias may linger, it is important for bosses to treat both genders likewise. If a boss fails to do so, inaccurate stereotypes will begin to influence other employees as well. Similar to a workplace environment, young female students experience the same type of exclusiveness in typically male dominated subjects like computer science and math. In order to combat preconceived notions, it is important for teachers and other school officials to provide an all-encompassing environment that resonates with both males and females. To do this, it is necessary to think creatively and be cognizant of the interests of young female students. If successful, the gap in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology will soon be decimated. 

 Ultimately, young girls will not be attentive toward a subject if it does not appeal to her values. A teacher, Heidi Olinger, appealed to this notion by creating a nonprofit which invites girls to explore STEM through art and specifically, fashion design (Olinger). She provides classes that prove to young girls that STEM is not only about computers or abstract mathematical problems, but instead can apply to everyday life. Olinger poses as an example to educators on how to successfully attract girls to a seemingly male dominated field. Like the workplace, teachers need to provide an inclusive environment where girls can collaborate and experience new ideas. 

While appealing to female’s interests is important, according to Olinger, the most important factor is that they know they can succeed and that they have supporters (Olinger). Because of this, it is fundamental that students have role models who they can look up to. Whether it be a family member, teacher, or any other woman in the field, any respectable influence will prove that they too can succeed in the STEM fields. A way to provide role models is to create clubs or organizations where females can see and hear stories from other females who have gone through the same experiences. In South Carolina alone, there are many groups and organizations that are promoting the increase of women in STEM. A growing group is known as the “Million Women Mentors of South Carolina” which looks to connect young girls with successful women in STEM careers. Organizations like this are vital, and with dedication, there will be an obvious increase in young girls who are interested and motivated about the STEM fields.

In October of 2016, Clemson University, a university located in the northern part of South Carolina, proposed an initiative to transform the culture surrounding women in STEM (Colmenares). With the money provided from the National Science Foundation, the school hopes to increase the representation of women and also reduce “implicit bias against women” on campus (Colmenares). A proposition such as this should occur at the University of South Carolina, as well. However, to do this, there needs to be more awareness of the issue. As of right now, there is not a club or organization geared toward women in STEM. An organization like this could prove to the university that the issue is relevant and deserving of more attention. With the help of faculty mentors, students could create this sort of club and begin to pave the way for future generations of college students at the University of South Carolina.  

 In the past century, females have made tremendous strides toward equality in education and the workforce. However, recently, the gender gap in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics has yet to be diminished. Thus, it is important to thoroughly investigate the major influences on whether or not a female will pursue a degree in the STEM fields. Unfortunately, there is not one factor that influences a girl’s decision, but instead a combination of many. Contrary to popular culture, a girl’s success in STEM is not due to biological differences between the genders, as this has yet to be proven by extensive research. Whereas, the gap can be attributed to environment, role models, and pop culture. Accordingly, in order to combat the gender gap, our society needs to be in tune to the needs of females. A way to do this is to appeal to a young girl’s interests and change how STEM fields are perceived. For example, if a young girl can identify with a positive female role model, the gender gap will be less prevalent. Young females are the future of this country and vital to the economy, so it is important to identify the factors that contribute to the gender gap and provide solutions before it worsens.

Works Cited

Barnet, Rosalind C., and Caryl Rivers. “We’ve Studied Gender and STEM for 25 Years. The Science Doesn’t Support the Google Memo.” Recode, 11 Aug. 2017.

Colmenares, Clinton. “Women, Diversity in STEM Focus of $3.4 Million Grant to Clemson.” The Newsstand, Clemson University, 18 Oct. 2016, newsstand.clemson.edu/mediarelations/women-diversity-in-stem-focus-of-3-4-million-grant-to-clemson/.

Fine, Cordelia. “The ‘Seductive Allure’ of Neuroscience”, The Carolina Rhetoric, edited by Ben

Harley, Hayden-McNeil Publishing, 2017, pp. 209-214.   

Galvin, Gaby. “Study: Inclusive Environment Key to Closing STEM Gap.” U.S. News & World Report, 23 Nov. 2016, https://www.usnews.com/news/stem-solutions/articles/2016-11-23/study-girls-less-interested-in-stem-fields-perceived-as-masculine. Accessed 10 Oct. 2017

Olinger, Heidi. “How to Get Girls to Like STEM.” YouTube, uploaded by TEDx Talks, 11 June 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0qBPjneLV4 

Owens, Sherry Lynn, et. al. “Are Girls Victims of Gender Bias in Our Nation’s Schools?.” Journal of Instructional Psychology,vol. 30, no. 2, June 2003, pp. 131-126. EBSCOhost,             search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eft&AN=507833110&site=eds-live. Accessed 21 Sept. 2017

Prinz, Jesse J. “Gender and Geometry” The Carolina Rhetoric, edited by Ben Harley, Hayden-McNeil Publishing, 2017, pp. 273-287.

Richmond, Emily. “The Complex Data on Girls in STEM.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 18 May 2016, https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/05/data-girls-stem/483255/ 

Stearns, Elizabeth, et al. “Demographic Characteristics of High School Math and Science Teachers and Girls’ Success in STEM.” Social Problems, vol. 63, no. 1, Feb. 2016, pp. 87-110. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1093/socpro/spv027

Steinke, Jocelyn. “Adolescent Girls’ STEM Identity Formation and Media Images of STEM Professionals: Considering the Influence of Contextual Cues.” Frontiers in Psychology 8 (2017): 716. PMC. Web. 17 Nov. 2017.

“Women and Men in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Occupations by State.” The Status of Women in the States, Institute for Women's Policy and Research, 2013, statusofwomendata.org/explore-the-data/employment-and-earnings/additional-state-data/stem/.

“Women in STEM: 2017 Update.” Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 2017, www.esa.gov/sites/default/files/women-in-stem-2017-update.pdf.