Summary
“Women in science” is an issue that has attracted a controversial debate among scholars, mainly because women mostly dominate the field. However, I think that host in the podcast titled "Women in Science" were reductive in the way they approached the gender issue. Thy superficially discussed why a few women are pursuing STEM subjects in colleges or universities. Specifically, the hosts oversimplified the problem because the fact that more men are involved in science fields than women is a critical issue that should be addressed. The discussion could have been improved if the hosts relied on evidence-based information and data to make an argument. I believe that evidence-based information can help in addressing serious issues like the dwindling number of women in science fields. Thus, I would use scholarly articles to a clear and in-depth understanding of why men dominate STEM fields while women are not making significant progress in the areas.
The Analysis
Gender inequality and disparity is one of the major problems in any given society, including the USA. There is hardly any society that does not face the problem of gender inequalities and disparities in various sectors such as education, employment, and health. However, based on what I have learned from the Podcast, stereotyping and socialization are some of the main factors that contribute to gender inequalities and disparities in our society ( Stuff Media, 2013) . The society is structured in such a way that there are specific behaviors, actions, and roles that are associated with men and women. At the same time, socialization does not only influence human behaviors but also their personality. Some of the gender disparities are either consciously or unconsciously facilitated by agents of socialization like parents and media. Thus, I expected the host in the podcast to provide in-depth and detailed information about women in science, leading to a clear understanding of the cause and effects of the problem in the larger society. Viewers of the podcast expect to understand why women are lagging behind in science subjects and some of the solutions to the problem.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The podcast clearly revealed that stereotyping is a major factor is causing gender inequality in society. Even though the host in the podcast did not dwell a lot on the relationship between parents and the limited number of women in various science, a study that was done by Tenenbaum and Leaper (2003) found that parents play a critical role in determining the subjects that their children are likely to pursue in schools and colleges. Specifically, the study revealed that a significant number of parents believe that science is difficult for girls. On the contrary, parents are persuaded that boys can easily pursue science. Parents' gender stereotyping, therefore, is a factor that is making it challenging for women to pursue science in various academic levels. However, the problem is not parents but society at large. The larger society mainly influences the general perception that girls are better than girls in science. The society has socialized its members to believe that science is more appropriate for men than women, resulting in a low number of female students who are pursuing STEM course in colleges and universities.
The hosts in the podcast also mention the influence of parents in their children’s academic performance. Nonetheless, the discussion was not detailed enough to help the viewers understand the role parents plays in the academic achievement of their children. Based results of the scientific literature review that was done by Tenenbaum and Leaper (2003), parents do not only influence the academic achievement of their children but also their expectations in school and colleges. Specifically, the study revealed that parents determine the self-efficacy and interests of their children, which finally influence the type of subjects that they are likely to study at various levels of education. Interestingly, mothers have more influence on a child’s math self-concept than fathers. Mothers are more influential than fathers when it comes to the self-concept of children because they are always aware of their children’s behavior and abilities.
Therefore, parents have a lot of influence on the subject their children undertaken in schools and colleges. Therefore, the problem of the dwindling number of women in the science field is complex than it is portrayed in the podcast. The ability of girls to perform in science subjects goes beyond their school environment. Apart from parents, the research by Tenenbaum and Leaper (2003) showed that both macro and microsystems in society determined a child's achievement in schools, especially in science subjects. Hence, even though the host in the podcast may blame some of the government policies and actions as the cause of the problem, parents should also be blamed for not encouraging their female children to pursue STEM subjects. Parents should stop the gender-biased approach towards STEM subjects to ensure gender equality in such fields. At the same time, they should make girls believe that they have the ability and skills to master science subjects just like their male counterparts. Importantly, they should start socializing girls at an early stage in their life to develop interest and passion for science subjects. According to Tenenbaum and Leaper (2003), the ability of children to develop a sense of efficacy at an early stage in life, especially in science subjects results in a significant improved in academic achievement and success in the future career.
Apart from parents, learning institutions contribute a lot to gender disparity in science subjects. The podcast briefly touches on the role of learning institutions in determining the success of students, especially female learners, in science subjects. Primarily, what came out from the podcast is the influence of science faculties in determines the success of STEM students. Generally, there is a common notion in science faculties that men students are more competent in STEM subjects than their female counterparts. Hence, even though this argument is not mentioned in the podcast, a study that was done by Moss-Racus et al. (2012) revealed that a significant number of both male and female staff in science faculties believes that female students are not capable and worthy of pursuing science subjects. At the same time, only a few women are employed in science faculties in various institutions of higher learning. Thus, male students are likely to be selected for STEM subjects than their female counterparts. The study by Moss-Racus et al. (2012) interestingly found that female staff in science faculties is inclined to favor male students. Faculty biases exist in biological and physical sciences in many learning institutions in the country.
As a result, it is true, as argued in the podcast that external factors mostly influence the decision by female students to choose STEM subjects. It is possible for a female student to have a lot of interest in a given science subject but still fails to pursue it because of the decisions made by either parents or staff in science faculties in various universities or colleges. At the same, indeed, biological sex differences do not play a significant role in determining the ability of a student to pursue science subjects successfully. According to Moss-Racus et al. (2012), the difference in aptitude for science subjects between male and female students is insignificant or does not exist at all. Also, as argued by scholars like Julie Douglas, the hesitance by employers to hire women who have pursued STEM subjects discourages students from doing sciences in colleges and university ( Stuff Media, 2013) . Women employees who have majored on science subjects are grossly underrepresented in various employment sectors. Consequently, the report that was released by the President’s Council of Advisors in 2012 recommended the hiring of more women with technical skills to narrow the gender gap in STEM fields (Moss-Racus et al., 2012).
Also, the media is facilitating some of the problems that are linked to gender disparity in science subjects in various learning institutions and industries. A significant number of people who feature in adverts involving science-related issues are men ( Barbercheck, 2008) . Besides, most science heroes in movies are men. Women hardly play science roles in adverts or movies. Therefore, the media is perpetuating the stereotype that men are more capable of doing science-related work than women, even though this is not scientifically proven. Hence, as partially argued in the podcast, the media should help in changing how society perceives STEM subjects, especially in relations to women's ability and worthiness.
Therefore, based on the information contained in the three articles, women in science is a serious issue that should not be simplified. The problem affects a significant number of women in both developed and developing nations across the globe. Importantly, the discussion on the topic should not ignore some of the core causes of the problem. Contrary to common beliefs and perception, individuals characteristics play an insignificant role in the gender-based disparity that exists in society ( Stuff Media, 2013) . Both men and men have the cognitive ability to do science subjects successfully. People have been brainwashed by both the media and societal culture to believe that men are better in STEM subjects than women, even though the argument is not based on scientific evidence. Nonetheless, even though the discussion in the podcast tried to over-simplify the problem, it provides a background or the basis to discuss the topic of women in science.
Many studies have been done to explore the topic of "women in science." Findings from various studies confirm that gender disparity in STEM subjects is still an issue that should be addressed at both the local and national level. A lot of scientific-based information is now available, and scholars like Julie Douglas can enhance their discussion by relying on research findings. To address the problem, the discussion should not largely be based on personal opinion. Om the contrary, the discussion should be objective with limited biases. At the same time, experts who understand genders issues should be involved in such a discussion. It is clear from the three scholarly articles that society contributes a lot to the gender disparity in science. The debate on the issue should take multidimensional and multidisciplinary approaches.
In collusion, the podcast helps in highlighting some of the issues that affect women in society, especially concerning science subjects. "Women in science" is a wide and complex subject that requires in-depth discussion. As a result, it cannot be comprehensively discussed in a 45-minute podcast. Thus, it is understandable that the topic is over-simplified in the podcast. Individuals, organizations, and the government have a role to play in reducing gender disparity in science subjects and careers. Women should be empowered, motivated, and encouraged to undertake and pursue science subjects and careers. The discussion on the subjects should mainly be geared towards a long-term and sustainable solution to the problem.
References
Barbercheck, M. (2008). Science, Sex, Stereotyping Images in Scientific advertising.
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 109 (41), 16474-16479.
Stuff Media. (2013, November 4). Women in Science. Retrieved from https://www.stuffmomnevertoldyou.com/podcasts/women-in-science.htm
Tenenbaum, H. R., & Leaper, C. (2003). Parent-child conversations about science: The socialization of gender inequities? Developmental psychology , 39 (1), 34-47.
