Do Single‐Sex STEM Programs Have Merit? If So, for Whom, on What Measures

Bibliographic Data

ID21392891
AuthorsChen Chen (0000-0002-9786-8003, Faculty of Education The University of Hong Kong Pok Fu Lam Hong Kong, corresponding author), Tomihiro Ono (0000-0001-8187-4946, Harvard Graduate School of Education Cambridge Massachusetts USA), Gerhard Sonnert (0000-0003-4138-2044, Harvard College Observatory Harvard University Cambridge Massachusetts USA), Susan Sunbury (0000-0003-0931-3399, Science Education Department Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian Cambridge Massachusetts USA), Philip M Sadler (0000-0001-7578-4047, Center for Astrophysics Harvard & Smithsonian), Philip Sadler (Science Education Department Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian Cambridge Massachusetts USA)
Year2026
Publication date2026-03-27
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueScience Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0036-8326 • E-ISSN: 1098-237X
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/sce.70067
OpenAlexW7141037131
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited69

Single‐sex STEM programs—defined here as voluntary, gender‐segregated extracurricular or supplemental activities (e.g., summer camps, workshops, robotics clubs, internships, or citizen science initiatives)—have experienced heightened popularity and scrutiny amid efforts to increase diversity in STEM fields. Empirical evidence regarding their efficacy has been inconsistent. Using a nationally representative dataset of 15,725 US undergraduates, we employed rigorous Propensity Score Weighting (PSW) to estimate the effects of attending single‐sex STEM programs during high school on STEM affinity outcomes (i.e., STEM interest, identity, and career intentions). Our findings demonstrated that attending single‐sex STEM programs was associated with a closing of gender gaps. After PSW adjustment, the interaction between being female and attending a single‐sex program was strongly positive for STEM interest ( β = 0.465, p β = 0.496, p β = 1.778, p E ‐values up to 6.03). Conversely, boys attending all‐boys programs exhibited significantly lower STEM affinity in all three outcomes, compared with boys in coed programs or girls in single‐sex programs. Overall, single‐sex STEM programs provided substantial gains for girls while having mixed‐to‐negative implications for boys. We suggest expanding access to all‐girls STEM programs and critically investigating the pedagogical features driving these differential effects

Confounding · Odds · Popularity · Propensity score matching · Science education · Scrutiny · Stem cell · Career Development and Diversity · Education, Achievement, and Giftedness · Science Education and Perceptions