Gender Differences in the Development of Undergraduate Students' Engineering Identities in the Chinese Context: A Pilot Study

Research Paper Recommended citation: Wang, M., & Tang, X. (2025). Gender Differences in the Development of Undergraduate Students’ Engineering Identities in the Chinese Context: A Pilot Study. In Kangaslampi, R., Langie, G., Järvinen, H.-M., & Nagy, B. (Eds.), SEFI 53rd Annual Conference. European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), Tampere, Finland. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17631444. This Conference Paper is brought to you for open access by the 53rd Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) at Tampere University in Tampere, Finland. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS’ ENGINEERING IDENTITIES IN THE CHINESE CONTEXT: A PILOT STUDY Mengling Wang a , Xiaofeng Tang b, 1 a Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 0009-0007-4893-8048 b Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 0000-0002-6279-9941 Conference Key Areas: Diversity, equity and inclusion in our universities and in our teaching; The attractiveness of engineering Keywords: engineering identity, gender differences, inclusive teaching ABSTRACT This pilot study explores factors influencing male and female engineering undergraduate students’ development of engineering identities in a Chinese institution of higher education. Through life story interviews, this study finds that male students’ engineering identities are more prominently shaped by pre-college experiences, market demands, and interests in engineering, whereas female students’ development of engineering identities is more influenced by academic performance in major courses, perceptions of match between engineering and personal characteristics, and academic support from significant others. We argue that the observed differences stem from entrenched gender stereotypes and norms within the Chinese context, which shape male and female students’ cognitive frameworks, life experiences, and educational engagement in distinct ways. Acknowledging and addressing these differences is crucial for developing inclusive educational practices. 1 Corresponding Author Xiaofeng Tang [email protected] 1 INTRODUCTION Despite wide awareness of the “leaky pipeline” effect for women in engineering, solutions to this issue remain unclear, and the underrepresentation of women continues to haunt engineering education and profession (Beddoes & Borrego, 2011; Goddard et al., 2021). Extensive research in engineering education has noted the critical importance of engineering identity in students’ participation and retention in engineering (Pierrakos et al., 2010; Hamlet et al., 2021). Based on prior work (Tonso, 2006; Beam et al., 2009; Choe et al., 2017), in the current study we understand engineering identity as the product of an engineering student’s identification with engineering, which means the student feels close to the engineering discipline in which one is studying, and the engineering profession one anticipates to engage in after graduation. In this definition, we emphasize students’ psychological feelings and the two aspects of engineering. Though several studies have examined the factors influencing students’ engineering identities, they typically chose to focus on specific factors rather than conduct comprehensive analyses (Fletcher & Shryock, 2024). Systematically reviewing such studies on engineering professional identity published before 2014, Morelock (2017) proposed a triple classification: constructive factors (e.g., engineering knowledge acquisition, collaborative projects), detractive factors (e.g., gender, a lack of engineering experiences), and directional factors (e.g., gender, personal values and life experiences). A prevalent measure adapted from science identity is applied to assess academic factors (performance/competence, interest, and recognition) (Godwin, 2016). However, its extended versions incorporating professional factors (e.g., design, collaboration) and demographic factors (e.g., gender, institution) have not been widely recognized (Patrick et al., 2017; Kendall et al., 2019). Although a number of quantitative studies have examined gender differences in the overall level of students’ identification with engineering, no conclusive consensus has emerged. Some studies found female students displaying a higher level of engineering identity than males (Hamlet et al., 2021), while other studies contended that female students exhibit a lower level of engineering identity (Yu & Ma, 2023; Bahnson et al., 2021); and then, a number of studies reported no significant gender differences between male and female students’ engineering identities (Arnett et al., 2021; Badets, 2019; Patrick et al., 2018). A few scholars further investigated the factors that impact the development of engineering identities, and here some gender differences were reported. Studies have indicated distinct gendered cultures in engineering (Du, 2006; Faulkner, 2007), with varying factors attracting male and female students to the field (Pierrakos et al., 2010). Gender-based disparities emerged in understanding engineering’s nature and valued skills (Chachra et al., 2008), with women prioritizing social consciousness and men emphasizing technological leadership in professional identity (Cech, 2015). Recent studies highlighted the crucial role of recognition for female students (Hughes et al., 2021), while Atwood et al. (2022) revealed women’s higher interpersonal recognition but lower competence beliefs and career interests. Despite extensive international research on engineering identity factors and gender differences, limited attention has been given to the development of engineering identity in the Chinese context. Prior studies have predominantly relied on quantitative measures derived from international scales to examine the relationships between engineering identity and certain types of experiences in college and high school (Chen et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022; Ju & Zhu, 2023; Yu & Ma, 2023), with a lack of qualitative exploration in the local contexts to understand what constitutes engineering identity and how it develops. In sum, further research is needed to more comprehensively examine the factors influencing engineering identity development, to explore the gender-specific variations in these factors, and to more effectively understand the distinct paths through which students of different origins develop identities in engineering, specifically within the Chinese context. This pilot study, conducted in a Chinese institution of higher education, seeks to answer two research questions: within the Chinese context, what factors influencing the development of engineering identity have a more pronounced impact on (1) male undergraduate students; and (2) female undergraduate students? 2 METHODOLOGY This study adopted a descriptive qualitative approach. Grounded in constructivism, a descriptive qualitative study seeks to understand the meanings of individuals’ experiences, and to describe the meanings to the readers by making use of quotes from participants or other forms of data (Tisdell et al., 2025). The research design has been approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the researchers’ institution. 2.1 Participants Participants for this study were undergraduate engineering students at the end of the third year in a research-oriented university in China. We chose juniors because in undergraduate engineering programs in China, the third year of the curriculum best represents the major courses in the engineering disciplines, and students in the third year are faced with the choices of whether to pursue graduate studies or enter the workforce, and whether to stay in the current field or switch to a different field, choices that are indicative of their engineering identities. The development of engineering identities differs significantly between students who plan to persist in engineering and those who plan to switch to other fields. To capture the key experiences that shape student choices at this pivotal moment, we adopted the concept “persister/switcher” (Pierrakos et al., 2009) as another category in our sample recruitment, in addition to the “male/female” categorization. We envisioned that this qualitative study focuses on exploring individual experiences rather than establishing universally applicable theories, and the current study was designed as a pilot to identify key research questions and critical themes for subsequent inquiry. Due to these considerations, we intentionally chose a limited number of participants who were able to provide rich information on their educational experiences and future plans. Through friend recommendations and purposive searches on social media (WeChat groups), we selected four participants with whom we had no prior acquaintance, but whom we believed might have interesting stories related to our research topic (Table 1). The interviewer, the first author, intentionally began by interviewing male participants, attempting to minimize the influence of her own gendered experiences and potential biases. Table 1. Participants (pseudonyms) and their majors Male Female Persister Heng (computer) Ren (chemical engineering) Switcher Quan (chemical engineering) Xiu (microelectronics) 2.2 Data Collection and Analysis Data for this study were collected in May 2024 through in-person semi-structured interviews. The life story interview (Atkinson, 1998), which is well-suited for research on education, gender, and identity development, was employed to explore the interviewees’ experiences, feelings, and meanings, as well as their commonalities and differences. Interviews were conducted in Mandarin Chinese and each lasted one to two hours. All sessions were audio-recorded with consent and supplemented by the researcher’s field notes. The interview protocol was primarily structured in chronological order, covering six topics: personal characteristics, pre-college relations to engineering, major selection, college experiences, career plans, and engineering identity. We placed particular emphasis on the key turning points in engineering identity development. The storytelling questions were framed using the “5W1H” model: when, where, what, who, why, and how it felt. The questions were informed by prior studies and refined based on earlier interviews (see Appendix) (Ross et al., 2021; Ndodana et al., 2020; Peters & Pears, 2013; Hatmaker, 2012). Immediately after the interviews, the recordings were transcribed and edited to ensure accuracy, followed by written case summaries and memos. Guided by the research questions, we first attempted to delineate the key factors impacting male and female students’ engineering identity development, respectively, using coding techniques: open coding by conceptualization, axial coding via categorization, and selective coding through comparison (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). We then compared the results to find the commonalities and differences between the gender groups. 3 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS As illustrated in Fig. 1, while the factors influencing the development of Chinese students’ engineering identities, such as engagement in engineering practices, are shared, several factors exhibit greater impacts on specific gender. This section reports these gender-specific variations identified in this pilot study. Fig. 1. Factors Influencing the Development of Undergraduate Students' Engineering Identities in the Chinese Educational Contexts 3.1 Factors With More Pronounced Impacts on Male Students Positive pre-college experiences, including engineering-related exposure and excellence in STEM subjects, contributed to the relatively high levels of engineering identity of both male interviewees early in their undergraduate studies, particularly in terms of their motivation and confidence in choosing engineering majors. Heng “developed an interest in programming when practicing for information technology competitions in junior high school, and then naturally chose computer as the major in college.” Quan showed particular strength in chemistry and “won prizes in chemistry academic competitions at a national level in senior high school,” which is the fundamental reason for him to major in chemical engineering. However, both female interviewees lacked such exposure. Despite the presence of STEM academic competitions in Chinese high schools, neither of the female interviewees participated, even though they were excellent in STEM subjects. Hence, the female students “knew little about engineering in senior high school,” (Ren) which delayed the formation of their engineering interests and identities. As many interviewees observed, gender stereotypes—entrenched beliefs about gender-specific characteristics, competencies, and suitable roles—have significantly influenced students’ experiences since childhood. Quan acknowledged that “parents design different upbringing methods for sons and daughters.” Xiu further explained: “Girls have much less access to resources like competitions and intellect-developing activities from an early age. Parents sign daughters up for art instead of Lego and robotics which are for sons. This is due to an inertia mindset and stereotypes.” Interests in engineering play an important part in male interviewees’ engineering identity development, particularly in their decisions of whether to study engineering, and later, whether to persist in engineering. As we note in the previous paragraph, both male interviewees had developed some interests in their respective disciplines of study prior to college. However, after spending more than two years studying engineering, their interests changed in distinct ways, leading to their changed perceptions of engineering identities and disparate plans for the future. A clear and strong interest in computer, though “diminished slightly compared to the start of college,” was sufficient to convince Heng to continue in the field. Heng stated: “I enjoy this major, even though it is highly competitive in GPA and exhausting...If I had to choose a major again, I’d still make the same decision.” In contrast, Quan discovered his “interest in chemical engineering stems from a passion for chemistry rather than engineering itself.” As a result, his “strong interest in chemistry-focused courses in the first two years of college” encountered a rapid decline once “engineering-oriented core courses were offered in the junior year curriculum.” In contrast, neither of the female interviewees cited a strong interest as a key factor in their engineering identity development. Both female students prioritized university prestige when selecting majors, despite interests in other fields. Xiu reflected: “I was interested in painting and considered majoring in architecture, but I couldn’t find an architecture program that matched my Gaokao score, and I didn’t want to ‘waste’ it.” Market demands significantly influence engineering students’ perceptions of the value of engineering and their motivation to enter and stay in the field. While all the interviewees acknowledged considering job availability, salary prospects, and social prestige in major selection, these factors appeared to exert a greater impact on male students’ career planning. The desirability of engineering careers is widely recognized in China. As Quan noted: “Although I don't plan to continue in chemical engineering, I still appreciate that engineering offers more job opportunities.” Meanwhile, market requirements on graduates, such as educational background (e.g., institutional prestige, degree level), professional competencies, and career commitment, serve as external motivators, driving students to advance in their academic and professional pursuits while preventing them from exploring other fields or stagnating in their engineering identity development. For example, though already in a major whose graduates “can earn a high salary,” Heng planned to pursue a graduate study in the same major right after graduation since “a bachelor’s degree is insufficient in this field.” Heng resignedly said: “I have ever considered a gap year to explore what specific area I want to pursue, but others told me it is a field evolving so quickly that a gap year in a resume will bring many concerns.” Xiu, a female interviewee, also noticed that “Men are generally expected to earn more money and possess a greater financial capacity.” 3.2 Factors With More Pronounced Impacts on Female Students While all the interviewees were influenced by their academic performance in major courses, its impact appeared to be more pronounced for female students. Positive experiences in academic performance enhance self-efficacy and confidence in engineering studies, while poor performance often leads to “learned helplessness” (Xiu) that undermines female students’ confidence in engineering. Ren’s case exemplifies the positive effect. She frequently mentioned her academic achievements: “The satisfying academic achievements make me feel confident... even though it might not have been the most suitable major at the beginning, it is still good if I can persist.” In contrast, Xiu experienced the negative effects. Struggling academically in a small cohort of students, she held a fixed ranking position for five semesters, leading to her “experiencing a seemingly unchanging ranking and an absence of positive academic feedback.” This challenging environment resulted in her “extremely low self-efficacy and a daily experience of learned helplessness.” A perceived match between engineering and personal characteristics can boost confidence and a sense of fitting in engineering, while perceptions of mismatch can undermine engineering identity, particularly for female students. Xiu’s experiences revealed a pronounced mismatch. Due to female students’ advantages of “focus, carefulness, and hands-on competencies”, Xiu felt fit for engineering at the start of college. However, upon entering major studies, she observed: “Those teachers and students who are excellent in this field often emphasize economic efficiency, treat people as tools, and mistake apathy for rationality. Their personalities and values strongly conflict with mine. Given these conditions for excellence, it’s better for me to leave as soon as possible.” This fundamental mismatch became the primary reason for her decreased enthusiasm and her decision to leave. What is more, the stereotypical image of engineering, associated with masculinity, reinforces its maledominated status. For this reason, men naturally feel fit for engineering while women were pushed to adopt the masculine norms for better integration, as Xiu remarked: “Female professors in this field are becoming more masculine.” Ren remained ambivalent about her “fitness” in engineering. On the one hand, Ren has developed “a mindset suitable for studying engineering and a competency preference to solve practical problems for application rather than to delve into uncharted theoretical inquiries,” which aligned well with “the hands-on feature of engineering.” Nevertheless, as a female student, Ren perceived the nature of engineering more male-friendly as “it seems female students have little advantage in studying engineering... males may be better at logical thinking... more courageous to innovate... more suitable to conduct experiments, especially those require physical strengths... and they are always confident.” Furthermore, a self-described “impatient” personality trait and the high tolerance for failure required in engineering practice made Ren feel challenged to maintain focus in prolonged and monotonous tasks, which led her to question the meaning and the value of studying engineering. Ren narrated the occasions when she felt dissatisfied with her studies and wanted to leave the field: “I was disappointed when I met obstacles in the lab. I felt meaningless when conducting experiments with repetitive tasks, and doubted whether I was suitable for studying engineering... I’ve heard from the graduate students in the same lab that they repeatedly spend entire days in the lab—from 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. Such a routine is too boring and exhausting. What’s more, the experiments frequently fail, which is incredibly frustrating when you don’t know how to proceed. If I were to pursue such a graduate study, I doubt I could endure it.” Moreover, Ren encountered a conflict between the work culture in her research team and her own preference for work-life balance. Despite these complications, Ren had not been put off from pursuing an advanced degree in engineering. She started to “search for an international research team for a more suitable environment.” Adequate academic support from significant others, especially from mentors and peers, could improve female students’ confidence and motivation, whereas the lack of support may adversely affect their engagement. Ren benefited from peer interactions facilitated by a romantic relationship with a classmate, and from effective mentorship. When she felt disoriented by her failures in engineering practice, she turned to her mentor where she received recognition, regained confidence, and reflected on her career fitness. Ren recounted: “My mentor told me that failure is very common, so I just need to get used to it. Every time after talking with my mentor, I felt more confident because my mentor shared similar experiences... When I was uncertain about my future and doubted whether I was fit for engineering, I sought advice from my mentor. Those conversations prompted me to consider what I am particularly well-suited to do in this field. So, I think talking to my mentor is quite helpful.” These positive experiences and feelings then strengthened Ren’s selfefficacy and deepened her commitment to the field. Conversely, Xiu underwent many negative experiences that weakened her engineering identity. When she shared her pride in independently completing a task with exceptional quality—a task that, despite taking more hours than expected, had sparked her curiosity and passion—her mentor criticized her approach as “inefficient.” Xiu asserted: “This experience made me more convinced I was not fit for this field. But I don't attribute this situation solely to the individual mentor who has generally been supportive as an academic mentor. Rather, it reflected a fundamental difference in the values between the field and myself.” Moreover, gender stereotypes unconsciously influence the ways educators treat male and female students, providing less support to female students. Xiu indignantly told another story: “When a male classmate and I both withdrew from the same course, the teacher blamed him but encouraged me, saying, ‘Don’t be too stressed. You can do better next time’. I believe the teacher’s underlying assumption was that the male student’s struggle resulted from insufficient effort—reflecting the stereotype that males are smarter.” What is more, Xiu critically remarked: “There is a deep gender discrimination in engineering. Sometimes, the protection for female students is because females are underrepresented... and is driven by the sympathy for the so-called ‘weak’ from those who are privileged, particularly men, rather than genuine efforts for equity.” This observation exemplifies how female students are often treated as rare specimens in engineering. In addition, the scarcity of female peers and the lack of peer interaction led Xiu to feel “isolated and helpless” and a situation she described as “information isolation”. She explicitly linked these feelings to the gender imbalance, stating: “If I had more female peers, I could meet more girls with diverse characteristics, develop friendships, and engage in academic discussions.” 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This pilot study investigates how undergraduate students develop or fail to develop engineering identities in a Chinese university, with a particular focus on gender differences. Preliminary findings indicate that female students’ engineering identities are strongly impacted by interpersonal and field-based environments, whereas male students are more influenced by their own strengths and profits. Consistent with previous studies, female students appear to have limited pre-college exposure to engineering (Du, 2006), place high value on interpersonal recognition (Atwood et al., 2022; Hughes et al., 2021), and experience unequal treatment due to their underrepresentation (Chachra et al., 2008). Meanwhile, male students emphasize job security and benefit from greater “engineering capital” (Pierrakos et al., 2010; Cannaerts et al., 2023). Notably, the interviewees recognized female students’ strengths in hands-on engineering practices, a competency previously perceived as masculine (Faulkner, 2007). This distinction underlines the need for further research across various engineering disciplines, task types, and cultural contexts. Gender stereotypes and institutional conditions in the Chinese context help interpret our findings. The gendered socialization produces distinct patterns of cognition, competencies, and experiences. Before college, male students often receive greater STEM exposure, nurturing their interests in engineering. Thus, China’s score-driven Gaokao policy, which limits early engineering exposure, seems to primarily delay engineering identity formation among female students. The policy, along with China’s hierarchical higher education system, incentivizes students and parents to prioritize institutional prestige over major fit, exacerbating students’ major mismatches in college. Moreover, the masculine culture of engineering creates a better fit for men than for women. Therefore, women tend to exhibit stronger emotional responses to the match or mismatch with the chosen field, to the support or discouragement from others, and to academic success or failure. Meanwhile, program restrictions on minoring or major changing, coupled with Chinese social pressures against leaving higher education, contribute to students’ persistence, despite academic struggles, inadvertently reinforcing their engineering identities. Furthermore, the societal expectations of men’s financial and social power drive male students to focus on market demands and stick to engineering, a field with strong career prospects. While limited by its exploratory scope and a small sample size, this pilot study identifies critical themes for further inquiry. Future work will expand the participant pool and delve into gendered key experiences and emotions in their engineering identity development, and subsequent changes in their perceptions, learning behaviours, and future plans, to better understand gender effects on undergraduate students’ engineering identity development in the Chinese context. 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Generative AI tools were used in language refinement for parts of this manuscript. The final texts have been thoroughly edited by the authors before submission.