– Gendered choices they make remain largely intact after conditioning on prior test scores, indicating that these choices are not driven by differences in perceived mathematical ability, or by boys’ comparative advantage in mathematics.

– Girls who choose matriculation electives in physics and computer science score higher than boys, on average.

– Girls and boys react differently to early signals of mathematical and verbal ability.

– Girls are less adversely affected by socioeconomic disadvantage.

– Girls score higher in all four subjects, with a greater advantage in

language arts than in mathematics and science, implying that boys have a comparative advantage in mathematics and science.

– There is a strong pattern of gender streaming in the choice of electives in science and mathematics. The share of boys choosing advanced physics or computer science is more than twice that of girls; the share of boys choosing advanced mathematics is about 20% higher; while the share of girls choosing advanced biology is about 60% higher than boys and their share in advanced chemistry is 40% higher.

– For physics or computer science and for advanced mathematics, accounting for the observed gender difference in the distribution of prior mathematics achievement widens the gender gap very slightly.

– For biology and chemistry, accounting for differences in prior

achievement reduces the gap favoring girls by 0.6 percentage points.

– In the regression, as girls do slightly better than boys in eighth-

grade mathematics, controlling for prior achievement in mathematics increases the gender gap favoring boys in physics or computer science and in advanced mathematics, by 1.0 and 1.2 percentage points respectively while reducing the gender gap favoring girls in biology or chemistry by 0.8 of a percentage point.

– The largest effect is in advanced mathematics and the smallest in biology or chemistry, in line with the relevance of mathematical ability for each subject.

– All prior scores exhibit a statistically signiﬁcant, positive (and in most cases convex) relationship with the probability of choosing a science or mathematics elective.

– An interaction term, the product of the mathematics and Hebrew scores, also has a signiﬁcant positive effect.

– Boys’ and girls’ different propensities to choose science and mathematics electives are partly a reﬂection of their different responses to prior signals of ability. A signal of strong mathematical ability has a positive effect on both boys and girls for all three categories, but the effect is stronger for boys with regard to choosing advanced mathematics and physics or computer science, and stronger for girls with respect to choosing biology or chemistry; and a similar pattern applies to prior achievement in science.

– Selection of science and mathematics electives increases in parents’ education. The rate of increase is more moderate in biology or chemistry; and the share of girls declines with parents’ education in all electives. These ﬁndings are a further indication that boys beneﬁt from a strong family background more than girls.

– The size of the gender gap increases in parental education for all electives, and more steeply in the male-dominated subjects, mathematics and physics or computer science, showing again that boys beneﬁt more from a strong family background.

– Of the three groups, coeducational religious schools serve a population of students from markedly lower income groups, and achieve the lowest GEMS scores in all subjects for both male and female students in these schools. Coeducational non-religious schools and single-sex religious schools have more similar student populations.

– In non-religious schools, girls outperform boys, whereas boys outperform girls in religious schools.

– Single-sex religious schools have the highest matriculation rates, followed by coeducational non-religious schools.

#### Current Selections

Clear## Gender Streaming and Prior Achievement in High School Science and Mathematics

## Understanding the Changing Dynamics of the Gender Gap in Undergraduate Engineering Majors: 1971-2011

This paper examines the level and determinants of students’ plans to major in engineering when entering college. (1) How has the gender gap in incoming college students’ intent to major in engineering changed over the past 4 decades? (2) What are the determinants of women’s and men’s decision to major in engineering versus all other fields? To what extent have these determinants and/or their salience changed over time for women and men? (3) To what extent is the gender gap in the selection of engineering due to (a) gender differences in attributes, versus (b) gender differences in the salience of these attributes? How has this changed over time?

## Ethnic Variation in Gender-STEM Stereotypes and STEM Participation: An Intersectional Approach

The authors examine ethnic variation in gender-

STEM stereotypes and STEM participation among African American and European American college students.

## Predicting High School Students' Interest in Majoring in a STEM Field: Insight into High School Students' Postsecondary Plans

This study examined how various individual, family, and school level contextual factors impact the likelihood of planning to major in one of the science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields for high school students.

## Are Math Readiness and Personality Predictive of First-Year Retention in Engineering?

The current study foci are on both entering scholastic aptitude and affective factors of personality in aiding in the prediction of retention in engineering at the end of the freshman year.