I'll confirm this anecdotally. My sister was extremely good at math and science... until the end of middle school, when she started hanging out in earnest with her friends. Her friends thought that any intellectual interest was nerdy and stupid, and my sister acted accordingly. Now, the girl who was easily learning algebra in elementary school "just can't do math."
I think that the big difference in STEM is that nerdy boys exist in such a number that they can still get acceptance and support. It's not as normal as, say, being a football player, but male nerds aren't exactly rare.
In contrast, because there are much fewer female nerds, their awkwardness is even more exaggerated, and this feeds back on itself to heighten the pressure to conform. Boys find some support in numbers, and their interest in the subjects smooths over any discomfort. Girls don't have any of that support, so if they aren't absolute fanatics about the subjects, they're going to conform.
It's very sad how many people (both male and female) I knew growing up were "extremely good at math and science" until they ran headlong into anti-intellectual American high school culture. I saw people who loved science fiction spiral into useless party culture and end up with unfulfilling low-value service jobs. That's a tremendous waste of talent, and I don't think it's very much a gender issue.
I favor an approach where we separate kids who've shown some aptitude for the sciences and concentrate them in schools full of their peers. We can't do anything for the anti-intellectual types, but we can at least stop their ruining perfectly good raw talent.
> I favor an approach where we separate kids who've shown some aptitude for the sciences and concentrate them in schools full of their peers.
They tried that on us ("gifted schools"). The two things it got us were hours less sleep each day because of the longer commute, and worse college admissions because of GPA deflation. I would've rather stayed in the normal pipeline and gotten scholarships instead.
There are hundreds of thousands of boys who excel at math and science until their bodies mature to the point where they become competitive at track or football.
Unlike "hanging out with friends", a universal activity, extracurricular sports actually do conflict with early computer science exploration (they're a huge time sink, as any parent of a kid in a sport will attest).
Meanwhile, sports draws in more boys than girls.
Why are we so quick to accept the notion that after-school activities that girls participate in isolate them from STEM, but after-school activities dominated by boys don't?
As a nerdy teenager, I never had a problem with any girl in any clique or social group at my school. But I sure as shit had problems with the boys in sports.
I'm not sure sports are more of a time sink than a lot of kids would otherwise spend doing something mindless like watching TV or gaming. It's a couple of hours a day after school for practice and half a day on the weekend for a game (yes I have three kids in sports).
There are kids (and parents) who get totally invested in a sport with often unrealistic expectations of college scholarships or professional careers, but there are a lot who are also remain very academically focused and balanced. I know that many of the kids on my oldest son's high school teams went on to college in STEM fields so it's not an either/or.
According to the anecdote, "Her friends thought that any intellectual interest was nerdy and stupid, and my sister acted accordingly" had an impact, not that it took time to hang out with them.
Huh? I lettered in three sports, plus played in multiple musical groups and was on the quiz bowl team, and still found plenty of time to learn to program in assembly language and Forth.
I think that the big difference in STEM is that nerdy boys exist in such a number that they can still get acceptance and support. It's not as normal as, say, being a football player, but male nerds aren't exactly rare.
In contrast, because there are much fewer female nerds, their awkwardness is even more exaggerated, and this feeds back on itself to heighten the pressure to conform. Boys find some support in numbers, and their interest in the subjects smooths over any discomfort. Girls don't have any of that support, so if they aren't absolute fanatics about the subjects, they're going to conform.