SCIENCE MAJORS -- APTITUDE, INTEREST, AND COMMITMENT:  
A PROFILE OF 10 YEARS OF FEMALE BIOLOGY, CHEMISTRY, PHYSICS,
AND MATHEMATICS STUDENTS AT A US PRIVATE, LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGE

Barbara Simpson 
Gustavus Adolphus College
USA
ABSTRACT
	Although the case has long been made that science should be accessible to women and that
women make good scientists, many scientists and science educators continue to believe that
males come to college better prepared and more able to complete a science major.  Biology
excepted, more males than females enter baccalaureate level science. Those females who
complete as much as two of the four years usually required to complete a science major,
compete well with and frequently rise to the top of the class.  

	This 10 year study of students at Gustavus Adolphus College shows that female science
majors enter college prepared well (measured by years of secondary study in math and science
and by their achievements on nationally recognized aptitude and ability tests). They are
strongly career oriented, assume without hesitation that they can have a career in science, raise
children, and have a rich and fulfilling family life. Like male science students, they believe
(Rotter's I-E scale), that they can make their own destiny. Finally, they report not only that they
are content in their major, well adjusted, and satisfied with their lot in life (Diener's
Satisfaction With Life Scale) but they report that they are more satisfied in all of these areas
than do their peers not in science.


INTRODUCTION

	Even a brief survey of the current literature on women in science (Lee (1987), Talbott and
Green (1989), Simpson (1989, 1993), Illovsky (1991), Wilkinson (1991), Zuckerman and Cole
(1991), Betz (1992), Eccles (1992), Morgan (1992), Bielby (1991), and Acker and Oatley
(1993), shows that women are still hesitant to enter non-traditional professions and that those
who do so face daunting prejudices and discriminations. In 1994, Betz identified three critical
points at which barriers operated to discourage women from participation in science: choice of
educational programs; application for graduate and other advanced professional training in
science, and in the hostile climate women face in working in the academic and other scientific
workplaces. Trankina (1993) studied 1500 adults (ages 20-79) and found that her females, at
all educational levels, expressed scepticism about science even being able to answer questions
important to them.

	While recognizing that science operated in a way that discouraged many females from
becoming involved, Callahan (1991) suggested that the profession would better attract females
to its ranks if it stopped documenting barriers and focused on those things that did attract
women to science. Ethington and Wolfle (1988) had already argued that early mathematics and
science education were critical. Hackett, Esposito, and O'Halloran (1989) had found that
positive female role models helped; and Livingston, Maxfield, Attebery, and Portis (1990) had
identified that internal locus of control (self-reliance and resolve), low math anxiety, computer
literacy, and positive relationships with fathers and high school teachers encouraged female
interest. Dick and Rallis (1991) had found that parent influence and encouragement were
significant factors in both males or females choosing careers in science. They also found that the
number one reason their females offered for entering science was that they were interested in
and challenged by the problems it considered. By contrast their males cited making more money
as their first reason for doing so; interest in science was their second most frequently cited
reason. Kirkcaldy and Cooper (1992) found that those females who enjoyed and sought out
competitive leisure activities more frequently entered science. Their effect held for males as well,
but was not as strong for them as it was for the females. Finally, Wilson and Milson (1993)
found female interest in science was related to differences that they had experienced in
classroom environment, adult encouragement, and role-appropriate socialization. This paper is
a modest step in this tradition to define those factors that encourage female students to pursue
science.

METHOD
Subjects
	Subjects for the study were 6,205 students (3,489 females; 2,716 males)  who entered
Gustavus Adolphus College from the fall of 1985 through the fall of 1993 and who had either
graduated or had completed two years of a four-year major program by the end of spring term
1995. Of the 6,205 students studied 232 were biology majors, 56 majored in chemistry, and 35
majored in physics. The remainder elected a major outside the sciences. Representation in each
of the three sciences were: biology -- 131 females and 101 males; chemistry -- 21 females and 35
males; and physics -- 8 females and 27 males.

 Measures
On college admission, each subject completed the Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control
survey (I-E scale). The I-E scale measures the extent to which individuals locate responsibility
for what happens to them to themselves in contrast to the occurrence of some external factor.
They also completed the Diener et. al. Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). The SWLS
produces a global score based on an analysis of five specific aspects of life satisfaction. 
Subjects answered questions about the number of semesters of high school math and science
they had completed, and the number of semesters of college math, biology, chemistry, and
physics they intended to complete. They rated their interest and ability in, and high school
preparation for, a college science major. They estimated their interest in completing an
undergraduate degree and in going on for advanced work. A subset of the total population
(those who entered Gustavus between the years 1988 and 1992; N=1811) additionally rated
their interest in having a career, marrying, and having children. These subset subjects were also
asked whether or not they believed a career would interfere with their ability to raise a family or
pursue personal pleasures, whether they believed that women faced barriers in entering the
work place, and about the extent to which their mothers and/or fathers had been important
historical sources of psychological support. Standardized math (PSATM, and ACTM) and
verbal (PSATV and ACTE) aptitude scores were identified for each student from institutional
records.

Data Analysis
	The responses of female science (biology, chemistry and physics) majors were compared
with those of male science majors and with those of males and of females who were not science
majors. The relative mean scores were calculated and Anova tests were made of the differences
found in subjects' SWLS, Rotter I-E scales, PSATV, ACTE, PSATM, and ACTM scores. Chi
square with a Pearson test was used to measure the relevant differences between the female
science and other students in science interest, ability, and estimates of science readiness and
real background in high school math and science. Comparative responses to questions on career
interest, intended terminal degree, marriage and child rearing plans, expected income compared
with that of a spouse or other if paired, estimates of the extent to which females experienced
discrimination in the workplace, and the extent to which career would interfere with having a
quality personal and family life were also calculated.

RESULTS
	The female science majors entered science majors with a strong high school background in
math and science. It surpassed that of those students who did not elect a major in science
(.001) and compared favourably with those of their male peers in science. In no measure did the
differences between male and female science scores reach the .01 confidence level. Median
completion rates and the Chi Square and Pearson analysis of the differences between female
science majors and the other groups are reported in Table 1.

Table 1.  High School Background In Math And Science
Median Number of Semesters Completed
	Confidence Levels for Differences Found of Female Science With Other
	Students

	Science 	Female	 Other Female	Science Male	Other Male
				N	Sig		N	Sig			N	Sig		  N	Sig
	Math		6	-		5	p>.001		6	p<.58		5	p>.001
	Science		6	-		5	p>.001		6	p<.29		5	p>.001


	The female science majors also scored well on the nationally standardized PSAT, and ACT
verbal and math tests. The differences between female science and other majors were significant
beyond the p>.001 level for the mathematics test scores.  Female and male science majors
scores did not differ at the p>.01 level. Both female and male science majors scored
significantly higher p<.01 than the male science majors and both they and the male science
majors scored higher than the non-science majors.  

	Table 2.  Mean Aptitude Scores
	Female Science and Other Majors

			Female					    	Male
			Science	 		Other 			Science			Other	
			Mean 	SD		Mean	SD		Mean	SD
	PSATV	48.61	9.43	46.69	8.35	48.46	8.83	47.33	9.01
	ACTE	24.57	3.60	23.51	3.62	22.83	3.52	22.47	4.00
	PSATM	56.73	8.90	52.21	8.35	59.02	9.90	55.52	9.05
	ACTM	26.42	4.36	23.71	4.63	26.29	4.31	25.28	4.41


The relevant confidence levels for distinguishing among these groups are found in Table 3.

	Table 3.  Confidence Levels for Differences
	In Aptitude Scores

			Male--Female Science	Science--	Not Science
			F		df	Sig		F		df		Sig
	PSATV	1.600	1	p<.128	8.599	1	p<.003
	ACTE	14.370	1	p<.001	14.370	1	p<.001
	PSATM	3.841	1	p<.04	60.387	1	p<.001
	ACTM	0.052	1	p<.82	42.559	1	p<.001


	The numbers of semesters of biology, chemistry, math, and physics that science oriented
females planned to take at college entry also surpassed that of those students who did not elect
science majors. These differences were significant at the .001 level. They were close to that of
the males who entered science majors. 
	Table 4. Median Semesters Science and Math Anticipated
	Female Science Majors Compared with Other Females, 
	Male Science Majors and Other Males

				Females			Males
				Science	Other	Science		Other	
				Sem	Sem	Sig		Sem	Sig		Sem	Sig
	Math		3	1	p<.001	3	p<.02	1	p<.001
	Biology		4	1	p<.001	4	p<.03	1	p<.001
	Chemistry	3	1	p<.001	3	p<.60	1	p<.001
	Physics		1	0	p<.001	1	p<.02	0	p<.001

	Females science majors also said they were very interested in science, were well prepared to
enter a college science major, and had the ability to handle a career in science. Their confidence
ratings on each of the target variables, interest, high school preparation, and ability did not
differ significantly from that expressed by their male peers. Chi Square and Pearson estimates
of the differences were p<.271, p<.275, and p<.109. Differences between the female estimates
of confidence and those made by non-science males and females were all significant at the
p<.001 level.


	Table  5.  Science Interest, Preparation, and Ability
	Female Science and Other Students

				Female		Other		Male		Other 
				Science  	Female	 	Science 	Male
				%Yes		%Yes		%Yes		%Yes
	Interest	85.7		23.8		92.2		35.4
	Preparation	84.5		46.0		91.4		66.4
	Ability		95.2		52.8		98.6		70.2

	The science oriented females entered college expecting to pursue a major through a four year
program and on to graduate school. They expressed a greater interest in pursuing professional
preparation in medicine and law than did their female peers. They expressed less initial interest
than their male peers in pursuing the Ph.D.

	Table 6. Highest Degree Planned
					Female 		Other Female	Male Science	Other Male
					Science			
					N	%		N	  	%		N		%		N	%
	BA				4	7.4		246		25.3	2	 	4.4		157	21.1
	MA, MS			25	46.3	454		46.6	15		33.3	373	50.8
	Phd, EdD		8	14.8	183		18.8	15		33.3	140	19.1
	MD, Law, Etc	17	31.5	91		9.4		13		28.9	64	 6.4


	Of the 1811 students (1035 females, 776 males;  56 science females and 45 science males)
asked about family and child-rearing plans and about their beliefs about and attitudes toward
working women, 92 percent of the science major females and 86.7 percent of the other females
said that it was very important (4 point scale from Very Unimportant to Very Important) for a
woman to have a career. The males were also asked how important it was for a male to have a
career. Ninety point nine (90.9) percent of the science males and 80.3 percent of the others
answered that it was very important for a male to have a career.  

	Female science majors planned to marry (77.8 % Yes, 19.6 % Maybe Yes, and 1.8 % Maybe
No on a four point scale) and have two or more children (76.8%). These numbers not noticeably
different from any of the other groups. The science females also said that they did not believe
(74.5% on a yes-no scale) that having a career would interfere with their ability to marry and
have a family.   Sixty two point 5 (62.5) percent recognized that barriers existed, but believed
that they could be successful anyway: a perception closely mirrored by their male and female
peers. The only significant difference between the female science and male science students on
these questions was that the male science students expected to earn either substantially more
(30.2 %) or a little more (27.9%) than their spouses. Only 5.5 percent of the female science
majors said that they expected to earn substantially more than their spouses if they married.
An additional 10.9 percent said that they expected to earn a little more. Responses were
reported on a five point scale, choices being from earning substantially less to earning about the
same to earning substantially more.
	Like male science students, and their peers outside science, the female science subjects
scores ranged widely around the middle range of the Rotter's I-E scale. The average of the
female science major I-E scores was 10.47 on a scale of 1-23. That of the female non-science
majors was 10.56. For the male science students it was 10.40. For the non-science males it was
10.28. Differences between the female science and other females (F = .038;  df = 1;  p<.845),
male science students (F= .026;  df = 1;  p<.872), and male non-science students (F = .044   df
= 1  (p<.835) were not significant.

	Table  7.  Internal-External Locus of Control
		Science 		Other Females	Science Males	Other Males Females				
		Mean	SD		Mean	SD		Mean	SD		Mean	SD
		10.47	3.80	10.56	3.89	10.40	3.99	10.28	4.23

	Finally, the female science majors reported (Diener et. alÕs Satisfaction With Life Scale) that
they were content in their major, well adjusted, and satisfied with their lot in life. Their mean
Satisfaction With Life score was 20.26 (SD = 5.76) on a scale of 7 to 35. Scores for the other
groups were female non-science majors 18.84 (SD = 5.45); male science majors, 19.16 (SD =
5.92); and male non-science majors 18.58 (SD = 6.05). Male and female science majors both
reported themselves being more satisfied with life (F=5.355 df = 1 p<.021) than were their non-
science peers. It may be worth noting that, while the differences between Satisfaction With Life
scores for male and female science majors did not reach significance (F=1.653   df = 1   p<.20),
the female science majors reported themselves more satisfied than did their male peers.

	Table 8.  Satisfaction With Life Scores
	Science 		Other Females	Science Males	Other Males	Females				
	Mean	SD		Mean	SD		Mean	SD		Mean	SD
	20.2	65.76	18.84	5.45	19.16	5.92	18.59	6.05



DISCUSSION

	The data argue that those women who persevere to at least the third year of a four year
undergraduate college program in science were happy, able, believed they would be able to
combine a career with a rewarding home life and were optimistic about their chances to achieve
and attain recognition in the scientific community. The data here contradict the often offered
stereotype of the science inerested female isolated, lonely and separated from the normal joys
and satisfactions of everyday life.
	
REFERENCES
	Acker, S., & Oatley, K. (1993). Gender issues in education for science and technology:
Current situation and prospects for change. Special Issue: Against the grain: Narratives of
resistance. Canadian Journal of Education, 18(3), 255-272.
	
	Betz, N. E. (1992). The invisible woman: Effect of the educational environment on womenÔs
vocational identity. In N. J. Smith & S. K. Leduc (Eds.). Woman's work: Choice, chance or
socialization? Insights from psychologists and other researchers (pp.  ) Calgary, Alberta:
Detselig Enterprises Ltd.

	Betz, N. E. (1994). Career counseling for women in the sciences and engineering. In W. B.
Walsh and S. H. Oispow (Eds.), Career counseling for women. Contemporary topics in
vocational psychology (pp. 237-261). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.

	Bielby, W. T. (1991). Sex differences in careers: Is science a special case? In H. Zuckerman, J.
R. Cole and  J. T. Bruer (Eds.). The outer circle: Women in the scientific community (pp. 171-
178).  New York: W. W. Norton.

	Callahan, C. M. (1991).  An update on gifted females. Special issue: Update: Underserved
gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14(3), 284-311.

	Dick, T. P., & Rallis, S. F. (1991). Factors and influences on high school students' career
choices. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(4), 281-292.

	Eccles, J. (1992). Why so few in math and science? In N. J. Smith & S. K. Leduc (Eds.). 
Woman's work: Choice, chance or socialization? Insights from psychologists and other
researchers (pp.  ) Calgary, Alberta: Detselig Enterprises Ltd.

	Ethington, C. A. & Wolfle, L. M. (1988). Women's selection of quantitative undergraduate
fields of study: Direct and indirect influences. American Educational Research Journal, 25(2),
157-175.

	Hackett, F., Esposito, D., & O'Halloran, M. S. (1989). The relationship of role model
influences to the career salience and educational and career plans of college women. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 35(2), 164-180.

	Illovsky, M. E. (1991). A comparison of the physical and mental health doctoral level 
women scientists. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 5(3), 99-110.

	Kirkcaldy, B., & Cooper, C. L. (1992). Work attitudes and leisure preferences: Sex
differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(3), 329-334.

	Lee, L. (1987). Des epouvantails qui effraient les femmes: Les mythes en science. [The
scarecrows that frighten women: The myths in science.] Revue-Quebecoise-de-Psychologie, 8
(3), 154-164.

	Livingston, M. M., Maxfield, M. W., Attebery, B. J.,  & Portis, T. R. (1990). Who takes
science: Preliminary findings regarding changing perceptions of computers. Psychological-
Reports, 67(3, Pt 1), 1057-1058.	

	Morgan, C. S. (1992). College students' perceptions of barriers to women in science and
engineering, Youth and Society, 24(2), 228-236.

	Simpson, B. E. (1989). The Association of Myers Briggs types to female persistence in
science. In Contributions to the Fifth GASAT Conference, The Technion-Israel Institute of
Technology, Haifa, Israel.

	Simpson, B. E. (1993). 13.  Competition as a marker for success in science.  In Contributions
to the Sixth GASAT Conference, University of Waterloo, Toronto, Ontario.

	Trankina, M. L. (1993). Gender differences in attitudes toward science. Psychological
Reports, 73(1), 123-130.

	Wilson, J. S., & Milson, J. L. (1993). Factors which contribute to shaping females' attitudes
toward the study of science and strategies which may attract females to the study of science.
Journal of Instructional Psychology, 201) 78-86.

	Wilkinson, C. W. (1991). Women working in nontraditional fields: References and resources,
1963-1988. Boston, MA: G. K. Hall.

	Zuckerman, H., Cole, J. R., & Bruer, J. T.(Eds.). (1991). The outer circle: Women in the
scientific community. New York: W. W. Norton.