With the rapid shifts in the education of women in the United States, and the underrepresentation of women in fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), an issue generating much controversy is whether women may benefit more from single-sex education or coeducation. The present study surveyed 548 U.S. high-school boys and girls from single-sex and coeducational high-schools from the Midwest. Half of the participants completed a mathematics test under stereotype threat (ST) condition and half under no threat condition. Although girls in single-sex schools had higher achievement motive and self-esteem than those in coeducational schools, they were not more likely to pursue STEM careers. Overall, students in single-sex schools outperformed students from coeducational schools on the math test. Girls’ math performance was significantly higher in the ST condition than in the no threat condition.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Adams, J., Priest, R. F., & Prince, H. T., II. (1985). Achievement motive: Analyzing the validity of the WOFO. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 357–370. doi:10.1037/0022-35220.127.116.110.
Altermatt, E. R., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2003). The development of competence-related and motivational beliefs: An investigation of similarity and influence among friends. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 111–123. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2005.00291.x.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950–967. doi:10.1037/0022-3518.104.22.1680.
Aronson, J., Lustina, M. J., Good, C., Keough, K., Steele, C. M., & Brown, J. (1999). When white men can’t do math: Necessary and sufficient factors in stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 29–46. doi:10.1006/jesp.1998.1371.
Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Bargh, J. A. (1997). The automaticity of everyday life. In R. S. Wyer Jr. (Ed.), Advances in social cognition, (Vol. 10 pp. 1–6). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Belcher, C., Frey, A., & Yankeelov, P. (2006). The effects of single-sex classrooms on classroom environment, self-esteem, and standardized test scores. School Social Work Journal, 31, 61–75.
Ben-Zeev, T., Duncan, S., & Forbes, C. (2005a). Stereotypes and math performance. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 235–249). New York: Psychology.
Ben-Zeev, T., Fein, S., & Inzlicht, M. (2005b). Arousal and stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 174–181. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.11.007.
Brown, R. P., & Josephs, R. A. (1999). A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 76, 246–257. doi:10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.124.
Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (Eds.). (2007). Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11546-000.
Ceci, S. J., Williams, W. M., & Barnett, S. M. (2009). Women’s underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 218–261. doi:10.1037/a001/4412.
Chouinard, R., Vezeau, C., & Bouffard, T. (2008). Coeducational or single-sex school: Does it make a difference on high-school academic motivation? Educational Studies, 34, 129–144. doi:10.1080/03055690701811180.
Collaer, M. L., & Nelson, J. D. (2002). Large visuospatial sex difference in line judgment: Possible role of attentional factors. Brain and Cognition, 41, 1–12. doi:10.1006/breg.2001.1321.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109–134. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6.
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Of men, women, and motivation: A role congruity account. In J. Y. Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 434–447). New York: Guilford.
Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051–1057. doi:10.1177/0956797610377342.
Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.
Eccles, J. S. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), The development of achievement motivation (pp. 283–331). Greenwich: JAI.
Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585–609. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519. doi:10.1O37//OO22-35126.96.36.1991.
Farmer, H. S., Wardrop, J. L., & Rotella, S. C. (1999). Antecedent factors differentiating women and men in science/nonscience careers. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 763–780.
Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 1–51. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x.
Harker, R. (2000). Achievement, gender, and the single-sex/coed debate. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21, 203–218. doi:10.1080/713655349.
Hattie, J. (2002). Classroom composition and peer effects. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 449–481. doi:10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00015-6.
Huguet, P., & Régner, I. (2007). Stereotype threat among schoolgirls in quasi-ordinary classroom circumstances. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 545–560. doi:10.1037/0022-06188.8.131.525.
Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in math performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139–155. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.139.
Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365–371. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00272.
Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2003). Do high-achieving female students underperform in private? The implications of threatening environments on intellectual processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 796–805. doi:10.1037/0022-06184.108.40.2066.
Keller, J. (2007). Stereotype threat in classroom settings: The interactive effect of domain identification, task difficulty and stereotype threat on female students’ math performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 323–338. doi:10.1348/000709906X113662.
Kessels, U., & Hannover, B. (2008). When being a girl matters less: Accessibility of gender-related self-knowledge in single-sex and mixed classes and its impact on students’ physics-related self-concept of ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 273–289. doi:10.1348/000709907X215938.
Kray, L. J., Thompson, L., & Galinsky, A. D. (2001). Battle of the sexes: Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Personality, 80, 942–958. doi:10.1037/0022-35220.127.116.112.
Kurdek, L. A., & Sinclair, R. J. (2000). Psychological, family, and peer predictors of academic outcomes in first- through fifth-grade children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 449–457. doi:10.1037/0022-0618.104.22.1689.
Lawrie, L., & Brown, R. (1992). Sex stereotypes, school subject preferences and career aspirations as a function of single/mixed-sex schooling and presence/absence of an opposite sex sibling. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 132–138.
Lee, V. E., & Bryk, A. S. (1986). Effects of single-sex secondary schools on student achievement and attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 381–395. doi:10.1037/0022-0622.214.171.1241.
Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 289–309. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0504_3.
Lepper, M. R., Corpus, J. H., & Iyengar, S. S. (2005). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 184–196. doi:10.1037/0022-06126.96.36.199.
Lubinski, D. S., & Benbow, C. P. (2007). Sex differences in personal attributes for the development of scientific expertise. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren’t there more women in science: Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 79–100). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11546-007.
Ma, X. (1999). A meta-analysis of the relationship between anxiety toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 520–540. doi:10.2307/749772.
Mael, F. A., Alonso, A. D., Rogers, K., & Smith, M. (2005). Single-sex versus coeducational schooling: A systematic review. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
Marini, M. M., & Greenberger, E. (1978). Sex differences in educational aspirations and expectations. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 67–79. doi:10.2307/1162688.
Marx, D. M., & Roman, J. S. (2002). Female role models: Protecting women’s math test performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1183–1193. doi:10.1177/01461672022812004.
McIntyre, R. B., Paulson, R. M., & Lord, C. G. (2003). Alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat through salience of group achievement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 83–90. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00513-9.
Monaco, N. M., & Gaier, E. L. (1992). Single-sex versus coeducational environment and achievement in adolescent females. Adolescence, 27, 579–594.
National Science Foundation. (2008, Feburary). Science and Engineering indicators. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/?govDel=USNSF_124
O’Brian, E. (1985). Global self-esteem scales: Unidimensional or multidimensional? Psychological Reports, 57, 383–389.
Quinn, D. N., & Spencer, S. J. (2001). The interference of stereotype threat with women’s generation of mathematical problem-solving strategies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 55–72. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00201.
Riordan, C. (1990). Girls and boys in school: Together or separate? New York: Teachers College.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. G. (1998). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol 3. Social, emotional, and personality development, (5th ed., pp. 610–700). New York: Wiley.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Journal, 25, 54–67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.
Ryan, K. E., & Ryan, A. M. (2005). Psychological processes underlying stereotype threat and standardized math test performance. Educational Psychologist, 40, 53–63. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4001_4.
Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). “I don’t feel like it”: The function of interest in self-regulation. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals, affect, and self regulation (pp. 203–228). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Schoon, I. (2001). Teenage job aspirations and career attainment in adulthood: A 17-year follow-up study of teenagers who aspired to become scientists, health professionals, or engineers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 124–132. doi:10.1080/01650250042000186.
Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80–83. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00111.
Snyder, T. D., Dillow, S. A., & Hoffman, C. M. (2009). Digest of education statistics, 2008 (NCES 2009-020). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1983). Achievement-related motives and behavior. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28. doi:10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811. doi:10.1037/0022-35188.8.131.527.
Su, R., Rounds, J., & Armstrong, P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex difference in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 859–884. doi:10.1037/a0017364.
Tauer, J. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2004). The effects of cooperation and competition on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 849–861. doi:10.1037/0022-35184.108.40.2069.
Tidball, M. (1973). Perspective on academic women and affirmative action. Educational Record, 54, 130–135.
Watson, C., Quatman, T., & Edler, E. (2002). Career aspirations of adolescent girls: Effects of achievement level, grade, and single-sex school environment. Sex Roles, 46, 323–335. doi:10.1023/A:1020228613796.
Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Wiegfield, A., Battle, A., Keller, L. B., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). Sex differences in motivation, self-concept, career aspiration, and career choice: Implications for cognitive development. In A. V. McGillicuddy-De Lisi & R. De Lisi (Eds.), Biology, society, and behavior: The development of sex differences in cognition (pp. 93–124). Westport: Greenwood.
This study was in part supported by a summer grant from Creighton University’s Graduate School to the first author. We thank Samuel Pierre, Kunal Sualy, Kristin Jones, Maren Hankey, Katerina Anastasiou, Samantha Lewis, Samantha Brown, Hannah Grawe, Jack Kostal, and Nicolas Villanueva for their assistance with data collection and coding. We also thank the various high-schools for their participation. Preliminary data were presented at the Gender Development Conference in San Francisco, 2010, and at the International Congress of Psychology in Berlin, 2008.
About this article
Cite this article
Cherney, I.D., Campbell, K.L. A League of Their Own: Do Single-Sex Schools Increase Girls’ Participation in the Physical Sciences?. Sex Roles 65, 712 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0013-6
- Single-sex schools
- Coeducational schools
- Gender differences
- Stereotype threat
- Occupational choices