[Paper Review] A Leaky Pipe Dream? A Study of Gender Differences in Undergraduate Physics

Steven Martin Turnbull, Dion O’Neale+3 more|arXiv (Cornell University)|Feb 21, 2017

Social and Cultural Dynamics3 citations

TL;DR

This study analyzes gender disparities in undergraduate physics at the University of Auckland using course records of 9,000+ students over six years. It finds that while academic performance differences are small and context-dependent, female students are significantly less likely to pursue advanced physics, instead opting for life sciences, suggesting confidence gaps and gendered science capital shape career trajectories.

ABSTRACT

Students face diverse pathways as they journey through undergraduate study. The analysis of student course records can untangle common patterns in course progression, and identify group trends in student outcomes. The current work examines the relationship between gender and undergraduate physics study, using course records from over nine thousand students who enrolled in physics at the University of Auckland, spanning a six year period. Physics students' demographic and course records were analyzed to find out whether there were gender differences in subject selection, course performance, and confidence. Subsequent to taking a first year physics course, female students were more likely to take further courses in life science subjects, while male students were more likely to take physical science subjects. In first year courses, gender differences were not present among highly academically prepared students, for whom school type (single-sex or coeducational) was a better predictor of course outcome. However, of those students who were less academically prepared in their first year, male students tended to outperform female students. Female students were also more likely to take an introductory physics course before an advancing course, compared to male students, after controlling for academic preparation. Science capital, a concept related to Pierre Bourdieu's notions of capital and habitus, was employed as an interpretive research framework. Habitus, the system of dispositions one uses to interpret the world, is largely influenced by the socio-cultural context in which an individual builds their identity. The following study explains how an interaction between science capital and an individual's habitus may lead to gender disparities in student outcomes in the field of physics.

Motivation & Objective

• To investigate gender differences in subject selection, course performance, and confidence among undergraduate physics students.
• To explore how science capital and habitus—shaped by socio-cultural context—contribute to gender disparities in physics education.
• To challenge the 'leaky pipeline' metaphor by analyzing complex, non-linear student pathways in physics progression.
• To assess whether academic preparation or school type (single-sex vs. coeducational) better predicts outcomes than gender.
• To examine how confidence, as reflected in course enrollment patterns, influences long-term physics participation among women.

Proposed method

• Quantitative analysis of anonymized student course records from the University of Auckland (2010–2016), including demographics, subject enrollment, and grades.
• Use of hierarchical linear modeling to control for academic preparedness and school type when analyzing performance in first-year physics (AP1).
• Application of the science capital framework (Archer et al., 2014) to interpret gendered differences in subject choice and confidence.
• Comparison of enrollment patterns between male and female students in introductory (Basic Concepts for Physics) and advanced (AP1) physics courses.
• Use of logistic regression to assess odds ratios for subject selection and course progression, adjusting for academic preparation.
• Interpretation of findings through Bourdieu’s theory of habitus and capital, emphasizing how socio-cultural dispositions shape educational choices.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 Are there significant gender differences in subject selection patterns among undergraduate physics students after first-year enrollment?
• RQ2 How do gender and academic preparedness interact to predict performance in first-year physics courses?
• RQ3 To what extent do school type (single-sex vs. coeducational) and gender predict performance in AP1 physics?
• RQ4 Do female students exhibit lower confidence in physics, as indicated by their course enrollment behavior, compared to male students with similar academic preparation?
• RQ5 How does the science capital framework explain persistent gender disparities in physics education pathways?

Key findings

• After taking a first-year physics course, female students were approximately 2.5 times more likely than male students to pursue life science subjects (e.g., biology, medicine), while male students were about twice as likely to enroll in physical sciences.
• Among less academically prepared students, male students outperformed female students in first-year physics (AP1), though this gap disappeared among highly prepared students.
• For highly academically prepared students, school type (single-sex vs. coeducational) was a stronger predictor of AP1 performance than gender, with single-sex schools showing higher performance.
• Female students with high academic preparation were around five times more likely than comparable male students to take an introductory physics course (Basic Concepts for Physics) before advancing to AP1, suggesting lower confidence in physics.
• In second-year physics courses, the performance gap between genders reversed, with female students outperforming male students, indicating that gender differences in performance are course- and context-specific.
• The science capital framework suggests that life sciences may better value the science capital typically held by female students, while physics may culturally reproduce itself as a male domain through gendered habitus.