Abstract:
In the field of higher education, gender imbalances in majors such as engineering, computer science, and nursing have long existed. In the past, they were often simply attributed to differences in academic performance or professional interests between male and female students before enrolling. However, the latest large-scale study published in the journal "Nature Human Behavior" shows that
gender selection in college majors is far more complex than it appears. Academic performance is not the decisive factor causing the representation gap. The imbalance shows significant differentiation characteristics among student groups with different academic levels.
This study, led by scholars from New York University and other institutions, conducted an in-depth analysis of nationally representative data from the U.S. Department of Education covering more than 19,000 students. The study found that in male-dominated majors such as engineering, computer science, physics, business and economics, the reason why traditional cisgender men dominate is that the largest gap does not appear among the high-scoring academics, but is concentrated among students whose high school grades and standardized test scores are below average. In other words, lower-achieving cisgender men are much more likely to enter and stay in these majors than women with the same academic level; but among high-achieving students, this gender gap narrows significantly.
The research team pointed out that this phenomenon reflects that social norms and the internal professional environment may subconsciously favor historically dominant groups, thereby providing implicit tolerance and institutional buffering for men with lower academic performance to enter these traditional fields. However, this imbalance is not limited to the traditional binary comparison of men and women. For the first time, the research also extends the scope to sexual and gender minority groups (LGBTQ+). Data shows that regardless of biological sex, LGBTQ+ students are severely underrepresented in male-dominated majors such as engineering, computer science, and business; even in female-majority fields such as nursing and health sciences, LGBTQ+ men are underrepresented.
Unlike male-dominated majors showing clear hierarchical differentiation, female-dominated majors (such as nursing and education) have not completely replicated this pattern. Research models show that high-achieving LGBTQ+ women tend to be overrepresented in female-dominated majors. Researchers believe that this phenomenon may mean that even if LGBTQ+ women enter seemingly inclusive and friendly female-dominated fields, they still need to rely on superior academic resumes as a foothold.
Scholars emphasize that academic performance and professional interests cannot fully explain the huge gap in the professional distribution of different groups. If students with potential and talent are lost or give up a specific major due to hidden barriers that have nothing to do with academic preparation, this is not only a personal loss for the student, but also restricts the diversified development of related disciplines. This study shows that eliminating the gender imbalance in college majors cannot only rely on improving the academic skills of specific groups, but also needs to start from improving the cultural environment of the discipline and breaking institutional bias to build a more equal and inclusive higher education ecosystem.
Comments