This topic area focuses on programs, courses, and other interventions designed to foster interest and success among girls and women in STEM fields. CLEAR identified causal research that examined the effectiveness of these interventions and reviewed the studies against the causal guidelines.
Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, & Math (STEM)
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1994 - 2014.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 41 - 50 of 95
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to assess the long-term impact of Camp Reach, a summer engineering enrichment program for middle school girls, on enrollment in STEM courses in high school and college.…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) on participants’ education and career outcomes. The FRC was a six-week competition in which teams of high…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Accelerate New Mexico Math Camp on outcomes for community college students, including women and minority students traditionally…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Inquiry-based Science and Technology Enrichment Program (InSTEP)—a week-long, half-day summer science curriculum for female 8th-grade students—…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of reading a passage featuring a pro-social context on careers in physics on female students’ interest in science. The authors randomly assigned 88…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine how participating in a study-designed program called the Jornada Intervention affected undergraduate female engineering students’ attitudes toward and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of participating in the Pennsylvania Governor’s School for the Sciences’ (PGSS) five-week residential program in summer 2013 on high school seniors…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
In a study performed over the course of a summer engineering program for 4th- through 8th-grade girls, the authors sought to determine whether participants’ attitudes toward engineering changed from…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study’s objective was to review the evidence of the effects of living-learning programs (LLPs)—shared residences at postsecondary institutions designed to bridge in- and out-of-class learning…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The authors described the Stevenson University School of the Sciences in Maryland as an example of an academic institution that deviated widely from the norm of female under-representation in STEM…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.