Literature on STEMs' chilly climate shows that minoritized students attrite from the STEM labor force faster than White and Asian men following graduation. Demand side theories posit that this lack of diversity is the result of unwelcoming work environments relative to opportunities outside of STEM, while supply side theories argue that women in particular lack confidence to persist in STEM coursework and in the STEM labor force. We hold that educational experiences help shape both who pursues a STEM career and what ensuing climate difficulties persist in STEM work settings. We show that STEM college clubs are important sites of cultural capital development associated with students' attitudes toward womens' inclusion in the STEM workforce. Using data from two large U.S. universities, we find that student involvement in honorific clubs, where membership is based on achievement, and affinity clubs, where membership is based on common identities or interests, are associated with a decrease in sexist attitudes for most groups. Our intersectional analysis, however, reveals that the association between club involvement and sexist attitudes differs by the type of club, and by respondents' race, gender, and field of study, revealing subgroups of men for whom club involvement is associated with increased levels of hostile sexism. We find that club involvement has no effect on members'confidence in crafting a successful career and thus does not at present reduce gender disparities in career confidence. This research suggests closer scrutiny of the hidden curriculum of extracurricular STEM activities.

Many STEM degree holders, especially women and minorities, are not employed in STEM occupations in the United States, and transitions into the STEM labor force among recent graduates have been declining since the 1980 ' s. We examine transitions from school to work at two large U.S. universities in 2015-16, focusing on the internship experiences and job search strategies of graduating chemistry and chemical engineering majors. Surprisingly, 28% of our STEM respondents had no post-graduation plans, though women were significantly more likely than men to already have a job. Overall race differences in post-graduation plans were insignificant, though Black and Hispanic students were more likely to have no post-graduation plans compared to Whites and Asians. While Black, Hispanic, and LGBT students reported fewer job search behaviors overall, potentially explaining this pattern, no gender differences in job search behaviors or internship experiences emerged to explain women's employment advantage. However, better grades led to early job offers, reducing most of women's initial hiring advantage along with positive internship experiences, which did not alter men's likeli-hood of a job offer but were associated with a higher likelihood of a job offer among women.

Encouraging women to pursue STEM employment is frequently touted as a means of reducing the gender wage gap. We examine whether the attributes of computer science workers–who account for nearly half of those working in STEM jobs–explain the persistent gender wage gap in computer science, using American Community Survey (ACS) data from 2009 to 2019. Our analysis focuses on working-age respondents between the ages of 22 and 60 who had a college degree and were employed full-time. We use ordinary least squares (OLS) regression of logged wages on observed characteristics, before turning to regression decomposition techniques to estimate what proportion of the gender wage gap would remain if men and women were equally rewarded for the same attributes–such as parenthood or marital status, degree field, or occupation. Women employed in computer science jobs earned about 86.6 cents for every dollar that men earned–a raw gender gap that is smaller than it is for the overall labor force (where it was 82 percent). Controlling for compositional effects (family attributes, degree field and occupation) narrows the gender wage gap, though women continue to earn 9.1 cents per dollar less than their male counterparts. But differential returns to family characteristics and human capital measures account for almost two-thirds of the gender wage gap in computer science jobs. Women working in computer science receive both a marriage and parenthood premium relative to unmarried or childless women, but these are significantly smaller than the bonus that married men and fathers receive over their childless and unmarried peers. Men also receive sizable wage premiums for having STEM degrees in computer science and engineering when they work in computer science jobs, advantages that do not accrue to women. Closing the gender wage gap in computer science requires treating women more like men, not just increasing their representation. © 2023 Public Library of Science. All rights reserved.

Studies often cite climate issues in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) employment to explain the lack of diversity by gender and race. Yet, little research directly attends to gender and racial differences in the college experiences, expected family roles, and ideological beliefs about gender that create the racialized gendered selves graduates bring to STEM occupations. We examine the experiences and beliefs of graduating chemistry and chemical engineering majors at two U.S. universities, showing where they coalesced into intersectional gender groups whose work and family involvement and desired working conditions substantially differ. Gendered family expectations and workplace beliefs at labor market entry subsequently predict career confidence and family-based limits on job searching, both important factors affecting retention in STEM employment. We find that women at career entry are more likely to have lower confidence and more limits on their job search, though patterns differ by ethnicity. This occurs in part because both male and female graduates who report greater expected family responsibility also report lower confidence and more limits in job searching. Overall, aspirational fulfillment is easier for men whose intersectional gender identities fit the dominant STEM workplace culture, and harder for women and non-white graduates with more flexible gender ideologies and greater anticipated household responsibilities.

This study utilizes interviews from 22 young female engineers from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds as they first entered the White and male-dominated engineering labor force with the goal of examining: (1) how these women endorsed a gender-blind frame that characterizes their workplaces as fundamentally meritocratic, and alternatively, (2) how they named gender as relevant or salient to experiences and interactions at work. Drawing on the insights of intersectional scholars to answer the previous questions, the study calls attention to how the invocation of these frames differed for women of color compared to their majority White female peers. Results revealed that most respondents strongly endorsed the idea that engineering workplaces are meritocratic and that their gender is not relevant. However, there is also evidence of racial divergence in the themes expressed. For example, some White women expressed a narrative contradictory to meritocracy, discussing their workplaces as like family, while in contrast, women of color often expressed uncomfortable experiences of standing out. Overall, the results suggest that female engineers' tendency to disavow, either explicitly or implicitly, that discrimination and bias occurs in their workplaces, likely contributes to continued gender and racial inequality; subsequently, programs and interventions to facilitate awareness of inequality are critically needed.

Although it is well known that women have relatively high rates of attrition from STEM occupations in the United States, there is limited empirical research on the views and experiences of female STEM degree-earners that may underlie their commitment to their chosen fields. Utilizing survey data from 229 women completing STEM degrees at two U.S. universities, the present study examines how perceptions of occupational affordances and interactions with others in the field predict their occupational STEM commitment. Additionally, the study employs an intersectional lens to consider whether the patterns of association are different for Asian women and White women. Multivariate regression analyses reveal that although communal goal affordances do not significantly predict women's occupational STEM commitment, agentic goal affordances are a strong predictor of such commitment. Regarding experiences with others in the field, results reveal that classmate interactions are not associated with STEM commitment, whereas positive faculty interactions do significantly predict such commitment. However, further analyses reveal racial differences in these patterns because agentic goal affordances are much weaker predictors of occupational STEM commitment for Asian women than for White women, and results indicate that faculty interactions are significant predictors of STEM commitment only for White women. Thus, our results strongly suggest that the theoretical models of motivation and support that underlie much of the discussion around women in STEM do not similarly apply to women from all racial backgrounds and that more research is needed that considers how both gender and race simultaneously shape STEM engagement and persistence.