{"id":5051,"date":"2021-06-29T06:30:23","date_gmt":"2021-06-29T04:30:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/webecpol.esade.edu\/?post_type=publicaciones&p=5051"},"modified":"2026-09-16T18:27:24","modified_gmt":"2026-09-16T16:27:24","slug":"como-aumentar-el-acceso-de-las-mujeres-a-disciplinas-cientificas-y-tecnicas-en-la-educacion-superior","status":"publish","type":"publicaciones","link":"http:\/\/webecpol.esade.edu\/en\/publications\/como-aumentar-el-acceso-de-las-mujeres-a-disciplinas-cientificas-y-tecnicas-en-la-educacion-superior\/","title":{"rendered":"How can we increase women’s access to scientific and technical disciplines in higher education?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Despite the narrowing of other gender gaps in the labour market, women choose degrees in science, technology, engineering and <\/strong>mathematics (STEM) <\/strong>less often.<\/strong> Using microdata from diagnostic tests in the Community of Madrid between 2016 and 2019, we see the labour market gap reflected in compulsory education: on average, girls outperform boys in reading, but boys outperform girls in mathematics. This latter difference doubles as compulsory education progresses (between the 3rd year of primary school and the 4th year of ESO).<\/p>\n

Boys outperform girls in the 3rd year of primary school by the equivalent of 5 months of schooling, which doubles to 10 months in the 4th year of ESO. Moreover, these differences are concentrated at the extremes, among the highest- and lowest-performing students. All this points to an apparent comparative advantage of boys over girls in mathematics. But stopping here only tells part of the story:<\/p>\n

\u2192 The data show<\/strong> that girls report feeling 50% more nervous when taking
\nthe mathematics test than boys, indicating that they are under more
\npressure and connecting with accumulated evidence pointing to gender differences
\nin performance in competitive settings.
\n\u2192 Girls report<\/strong> lower confidence in their mathematics skills, and
\nwhen they are the best in the class, they make more errors in predicting their own level:
\ngirls appear to have worse information about their abilities.
\n\u2192 All these results<\/strong> contrast with the fact that, in language, the differences are practically non-existent, which fits with explanations linked to gender stereotypes. To close the gap and improve students’ performance and educational decisions, four groups of policies are proposed.<\/p>\n

For low-performing students:
\n\u2192 Tutoring programmes:<\/strong> these programmes have a high impact on the performance and
\neducational aspirations of low-performing students.
\n\u2192 Remedial education:<\/strong> these programmes usually increase instruction time
\nfor these students. Empirical evidence shows that they have a significant effect on
\nimproving the academic performance of the students with the worst results.<\/p>\n

For high-performing students:
\n\u2192 Mentoring programmes, school counsellors and role models:<\/strong> programmes in which
\nstudents are advised by a mentor, or having a female science adviser (instead
\nof a male one), substantially increase women’s access to and graduation from
\nSTEM degrees.
\n\u2192 Providing information on relative performance:<\/strong> giving students
\ninformation on their relative performance can help improve their motivation and confidence.<\/p>\n

All the proposed public policies have two major advantages: they show high returns
\nin improving performance and access to STEM degrees, and they are very low cost
\ncompared with other programmes.<\/p>\n

\n

?En este video, el autor del informe, @jmontalbancas<\/a> nos resume los principales motivos que podr\u00edan estar detr\u00e1s de la menor proporci\u00f3n de mujeres en disciplinas cient\u00edficas y t\u00e9cnicas. pic.twitter.com\/nHUtAdNA8z<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 EsadeEcPol (@EsadeEcPol) June 29, 2021<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n