期刊名称：Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal
电子版ISSN：2664-8148
出版年度：2020
卷号：4
期号：1
DOI：10.47264/idea.lassij/4.1.2
语种：English
出版社：IDEA PUBLISHERS
摘要：This article outlines the biological essentialists’ versus feminists’ explanations of girls’ underperformance in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Historically, except in the contexts of some developed countries, boys dominated girls in STEM subjects. Biological essentialists associate girls’ underperformance in STEM with the innate differences between men and women, whereas feminists attribute it to social factors. The issue, however, is not so easily solved and there is an ongoing debate between biological essentialists and feminists. This article, thus, engages in a comparative analysis of the two approaches, their underlying principles and the empirical evidences they use to substantiate their stance. The analysis of both approaches enables the authors to better decipher the connection between gender and education performance. This article explains that social rather than biological factors influence girls’ performance in STEM subjects. The article concludes that girls’ underperformance in STEM subjects' results from sociocultural factors.
