Building Confidence, Interest, and Opportunity: A Social Cognitive Career Theory-Based Analysis of the Young Women in Engineering Outreach Program

A diverse Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) workforce plays a critical role in driving national innovation and technological advancement (Bell et al., 2017; Hsieh et al., 2019). Women remain underrepresented in engineering and many STEM fields internationally. According to Engineers Australia’s 2023 report, women comprise approximately 16% of the engineering workforce (Briggs, 2023). This gender gap has persisted, in part, due to lingering stereotypes, lack of role models, and limited early exposure to engineering for girls (Capobianco et al., 2011; Engineers Australia, 2022; Verdugo-Castro et al., 2022). Research by Engineers Australia found that one of the main reasons young women do not choose engineering is simply a lack of familiarity with what engineers do (Engineers Australia, 2022). In other words, if girls do not see engineering as a relatable, rewarding option, they are unlikely pursue engineering as a career later. To bridge this gap, educational institutions and policymakers are increasingly focused on engaging girls in STEM before they reach university, aiming to spark interest and sustain it through those critical high school years (Australian Government & Department of Industry Science and Resources, n.d.; Australian Mathematics Trust & Australian Science Innovations, n.d.; University of Technology Sydney, n.d.).

Research consistently shows that girls’ interest in STEM tends to decline starting in middle school (Brotman & Moore, 2008; Kerr & Kurpius, 2004; Todd & Zvoch, 2019). In 2024, the Minister for Education, Training and Skills of South Australia said that he was “particularly concerned with the drop-off” in girls studying maths and science in high school (Novak & Griffiths, 2024). On the other hand, evidence also suggests that initial interest sparked even in later years, such as during high school, can lead to successful engagement with STEM pathways (Maltese et al., 2014). In fact, Maltese et al. (2014) highlighted that individuals who reported initial interest in STEM in later years “had an increasingly greater likelihood of completing a degree in STEM than those who indicated very early interest triggers.” This highlights the importance of fostering and sustaining interest in STEM throughout adolescence, particularly during the critical high school years when students begin making subject and career decisions.

Sustaining or initiating STEM interest during adolescence is critical for shaping self-efficacy – a key construct in Social Cognitive Career Theory abbreviated as SCCT (Lent et al., 1994). Positive experiences (e.g., hands-on activities) can bolster girls’ belief in their abilities (Liu et al., 2014; Lv et al., 2025), while negative or absent experiences may reinforce stereotypes that undermine confidence (Master et al., 2021). Research indicates that sustained engagement with STEM during secondary education influences students’ decisions to pursue STEM-related studies and careers later in life (Almeda & Baker, 2020; Sahin & Waxman, 2021). For girls in particular, STEM engagement can help counteract pervasive stereotypes and societal messaging that often portray STEM fields as male-dominated or inaccessible (Master et al., 2021; Master & Meltzoff, 2020). By introducing hands-on activities, real-world applications, and visible role models, outreach programs can foster curiosity, build confidence, and create a sense of belonging in STEM environments (Master et al., 2016). Such interventions are essential not only for individual empowerment but also for building a more diverse and innovative future STEM workforce (Interagency Working Group on Inclusion in STEM, 2021; Tai et al., 2006).

At the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Canberra, one such initiative is the Young Women in Engineering (YoWIE) program (School of Engineering & Technology, 2025). Now in its ninth year, YoWIE has grown from 16 students in 2017 to nearly 100 participants annually. The program is designed for female students aged 14 to 17, typically enrolled in Years 9 to 12 of the Australian secondary education system. This age range spans the transition from middle secondary (lower secondary) to senior secondary education, a critical period for career identity formation and STEM subject selection (ACT Government, 2025; Tai et al., 2006). YoWIE engages students through hands-on engineering activities, mentorship, and industry interaction, providing a supportive space to explore engineering in a meaningful and relatable way.

This paper employs Social Cognitive Career Theory (Lent et al., 1994, 2022) as a framework to investigate how YoWIE affects high school girls’ perceptions of engineering and their future career aspirations. SCCT posits that career development is shaped by the interaction of three core constructs: self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interests, which are influenced by personal, behavioural, and environmental factors (Lent et al., 1994, 2022). These constructs are especially relevant when evaluating outreach programs like YoWIE that aim to build students’ confidence, increase awareness of engineering careers, and provide opportunities to envision future STEM pathways.

Through an SCCT lens, this study explores YoWIE’s goals, structure, and impact. Drawing on participant reflections, visual data, and qualitative feedback, we analyse how the program supports the development of engineering self-efficacy, shapes positive outcome expectations, and fosters STEM-related interests. We also highlight the importance of early, sustained intervention and how programs like YoWIE contribute to a more inclusive engineering pipeline by addressing barriers to participation and strengthening students’ sense of belonging.

2.1 Engagement in STEM during secondary education

Research suggests that encouraging interest in STEM during secondary education can significantly influence students’ progression through the STEM pipeline into higher education and careers (Cleaves, 2005; Maltese et al., 2014; Maltese & Tai, 2011; Tai et al., 4 2006). Middle school years have been identified as a critical window when overall student interest in school, and particularly in STEM subjects, tends to decline (Barmby et al., 2008; Brotman & Moore, 2008; Kerr & Kurpius, 2004; Todd & Zvoch, 2019). High school is considered critical to “encourage exposure, build skills and confidence, and initiate identification with STEM fields” in girls (Diekman et al., 2015). It is known to impact efforts to achieve gender equity in STEM fields at the tertiary level and in professional domains (E. Corrigan et al., 2023). Research shows that positive STEM experiences — such as hands-on science activities, informal learning opportunities, and engaging lessons — can spark curiosity, build confidence, and play a crucial role in sustaining interest in STEM pathways (Habig et al., 2020; Hughes et al., 2020; Tedeschi, 2023; Todd & Zvoch, 2019). Effective STEM programs prioritise active engagement (e.g., collaborative projects, real-world applications) over passive learning, fostering both competence and belonging (Paterson, 2019).

High school is also a time when gendered perceptions of STEM tend to become more pronounced. For example, a meta-analysis using the classic “Draw-a-Scientist” test found that at age six, roughly 70% of girls drew a female scientist, yet by age 16, only 25% did (D. I. Miller et al., 2018). According to a recent study (D. I. Miller et al., 2024), girls increasingly endorse the stereotype of the scientist or engineer as male as they grow older. High-quality STEM engagement during secondary education can act as a protective factor against later disinterest by reinforcing girls’ self-efficacy and countering stereotypes (K. Miller et al., 2018). By giving girls tangible successes and positive associations with STEM, we can help to build a pipeline of confident young women equipped to pursue further STEM study.

2.2 Theoretical lens: social cognitive career theory

Social cognitive career theory (Lent et al., 1994) builds on Bandura’s social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), emphasising how personal, behavioural, and environmental factors interact to shape career development. Central to SCCT is the idea that individuals’ career-related choices are influenced by self-beliefs, expectations of success, and contextual supports or barriers – all of which are shaped by prior learning experiences (Lent et al., 1994). SCCT identifies five core constructs that drive career interest and pursuit, particularly relevant to STEM engagement among girls:

1) Self-efficacy – “Can I do this?”: The conviction that one is capable of achieving success in specific tasks (e.g., solving a math problem, coding a robot).

2) Outcome expectations – “What will happen if I do this?”: The perceived consequences of pursuing a STEM path (e.g., “Will engineering lead to meaningful work?”).

3) Interests (attractions to activities): Sustained curiosity or enthusiasm for STEM, which emerges when individuals feel competent (self-efficacy) and anticipate positive outcomes (outcome expectations). Interests then feed into goals and actions.

4) Goals: Intentions to participate in a specific activity or attain a specific result (e.g., selecting STEM electives or pursuing an engineering degree).

5) Contextual influences: These are the environmental factors that can either support or limit career development. They include broader, more distant influences such as cultural background or parental expectations, as well as more immediate influences like access to mentors or participation in outreach programs. Barriers, such as stereotypes or the lack of role models, also play an important role.

SCCT is a widely used framework for understanding how people develop academic and career interests, make educational and occupational choices, and achieve success and persistence in those paths. Thus, it has been widely used to explain disparities in women’s participation in STEM (Byars-Winston et al., 2010; Lent et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2014; Sun et al., 2019). For example, studies highlight:

• value of social cognitive mechanisms for explaining persistence and marks among engineering undergraduates across genders and racial/ethnic groups (Lent et al.,
  2016);
• influence of gender and background resources (such as socioeconomic status, social connections and cultural factors) on formal and informal pre-tertiary education
  settings in relation to STEM fields (Sun et al., 2019);
• how contextual barriers (e.g., lack of female role models, teacher bias, stereotypes) reduce self-efficacy and interest (Chan, 2022; Lent et al., 2010; Starr & Simpkins, 2021);
• how secondary education interventions that boost self-efficacy (e.g., hands-on projects) can counteract stereotypes (Liu et al., 2014);
• cyclicity of interest development. Namely, positive experiences enhance self-efficacy, which deepens interest, leading to greater persistence and continued
  engagement (Lent et al., 1994).

The SCCT model is relevant for evaluating outreach programs like YoWIE, as it helps explain how and why these experiences can enhance girls’ confidence in pursuing engineering.

2.3 Confidence gap and social cognitive career theory

Confidence is a factor that affects a person’s choices of program of study and career (Pirttinen et al., 2020). Confidence in girls’ mathematical abilities by mid-high school, along with a developing interest in science during high school, are key predictors of girls choosing a STEM-related field (Nix et al., 2015; Sakellariou & Fang, 2021). The confidence gap is often discussed, particularly regarding girls’ propensity to underestimate their STEM capabilities, despite attaining comparable outcomes to boys (Zander et al., 2020). This concept aligns with the SCCT’s self-efficacy construct (Lent et al., 1994).

According to Australia’s 2023-24 Youth in STEM survey by YouthInsight (YouthInsight, 2023), girls/women are least confident when it comes to studying engineering (28%) compared to other STEM subjects. By high school, many girls underestimate their aptitude in STEM subjects, even when their academic performance is on par with or superior to that of boys. This phenomenon is well-documented in educational psychology: adolescent girls tend to report lower self-efficacy in math and science compared to boys, despite earning similar grades and test scores (Barmby et al., 2008; Zander et al., 2020). For instance, a study of over 1,000 ninth-graders found that girls had significantly less confidence in their math ability than boys did, even though there was no gender difference in actual math achievement (Zander et al., 2020). This belief limits their willingness to pursue challenging STEM courses or careers (Sakellariou & Fang, 2021). Interestingly, according to (Sakellariou & Fang, 2021), boys’ decisions to enter STEM programs appear to be largely unaffected by their self-perceptions of academic ability in these subjects.

According to SCCT, the confidence gap is heavily shaped by contextual barriers such as gender stereotypes and a lack of visible female role models. These factors reduce self- efficacy and outcome expectations. When girls internalise stereotypes portraying math, physics, or engineering as “male” domains, they doubt their capability even if girls perform well in STEM (Zander et al., 2020) and no one explicitly tells them they do not belong (Nosek et al., 2009). These messages come from multiple sources, including media, peers, family attitudes, biased teacher expectations, and the relative scarcity of women depicted in STEM roles (Copur-Gencturk et al., 2023; D. Corrigan & Aikens, 2019; D. I. Miller et al., 2024; N. Wang et al., 2023). Furthermore, the traditional gender stereotype that males are more capable in math and science tends to intensify with age (Starr & Simpkins, 2021). According to SCCT, limited representation or exposure to people “like oneself” succeeding in a field can discourage participation. Girls who rarely see women scientists or engineers may conclude, consciously or not, that “people like me” do not succeed in those fields (Australian Government & Department of Industry Science and Resources, n.d.).

Girls might attribute any difficulty in STEM classes to an inherent lack of ability, rather than a normal learning curve, reinforcing a fixed mindset about intelligence (Zander et al., 2020). Meanwhile, boys, who are culturally expected to excel in math/science, often have higher self-assurance in STEM fields even when their performance is average. This imbalance matters because self-confidence influences academic choices. This contrast further highlights the differences in self-efficacy in STEM by gender.

According to Lent et al. (1994), interests play a critical role in guiding future educational and career decisions. These interests emerge when individuals believe in their abilities (self-efficacy) and anticipate positive outcomes. However, when girls lack confidence in their STEM capabilities, they are less likely to develop sustained interest in these fields. This lack of interest, in turn, diminishes the likelihood of setting STEM-related goals or pursuing pathways such as engineering or computer science. Studies have shown that interest and self-concept in STEM fields during adolescence are strong predictors of whether a student will go on to pursue a STEM career (Bahar & Adiguzel, 2016; K. Miller et al., 2018; N. Wang et al., 2023). When girls doubt their capability, they are less likely to enrol in advanced STEM electives, join STEM extracurriculars, or envision themselves in engineering majors. On a broader scale, the internalisation of stereotypes contributes to the attrition of talented girls from the STEM pipeline (Msambwa et al., 2025). Even among students who excel, girls often feel they must be “exceptional” to belong in engineering or physics, whereas boys with similar performance more readily continue in those fields (Ellis et al., 2016). Interestingly, Msambwa et al. (2025) concluded that most of the literature attributed girls’ low participation in STEM to environmental factors (gender stereotypes, role modelling) and behavioural factors (low motivation, low self-efficacy), with the limited literature attributing this to personal factors (interest, poor self-concept). However, personal factors are closely linked with environmental and behavioural ones (Lent et al., 1994).

Together, these findings highlight the need for interventions like YoWIE that enhance self- efficacy through hands-on experiences, counter stereotypes with role models, create a supportive learning environment and foster positive outcome expectations.

2.4 Current gaps in the literature

While SCCT has been widely utilised to understand career development processes, much of the existing literature focuses on younger populations or general career counselling contexts (Betz & Hackett, 1986; Bustamante et al., 2023; Lent & Brown, 2019; D. Wang et al., 2022). Many interventions target younger children (e.g., ages 6–12) (Bustamante et al., 2023; Giorgetti, 2004; Luttenberger et al., 2019; Master et al., 2021; Tellhed et al., 2022). Valuable as they are, they neglect the adolescent transition (14–17 years) when STEM disengagement peaks (Starr & Simpkins, 2021). For instance, Wang and colleagues highlight that although SCCT is a robust framework for career development, there is a lack of qualitative research methods and intervention approaches that systematically apply SCCT, especially for older adolescents (D. Wang et al., 2022). They emphasise the need for more targeted strategies to explore how SCCT can be effectively integrated into career interventions for this age group.

Furthermore, while some studies have applied SCCT to understand career development in adolescents, these often do not focus on structured outreach programs. For example, a study by Rogers et al. utilised SCCT to examine career planning and exploration in adolescents but did not specifically address the context of outreach programs (Rogers et al., 2008). Research by Caspi and Gorsky focused on the effects of demographics and classroom factors on the motivation to learn mathematics among 16-year-old students (Caspi & Gorsky, 2025).

Given this gap, this study on the YoWIE program attempts to provide valuable insights into how SCCT can be applied within outreach initiatives to support career development in older adolescents.

3.1 Background and objectives

The YoWIE program is delivered over three consecutive days during the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) school holidays at UNSW Canberra. It targets female students in Years 9–12, a formative period when teens begin considering senior subjects and career directions. The program’s core goal is to showcase what engineering is about. By doing so, YoWIE aims to demonstrate that engineering is an achievable and exciting option for young women – countering the notion that it is a male-dominated domain. The program offers hands-on workshops, technical sessions, and career-focused activities, discussed in more detail in Section 3.2. This paper considers the 2024 and 2025 YoWIE program runs.

3.2 Program structure

The 2025 YoWIE program schedule is illustrated in Figure 1. Each day began with registration and assembly, followed by rotating sessions across six parallel engineering streams – Aeronautical, Space, Mechanical, Software, Electrical, and Civil Engineering – along with Aviation and Technical skills (YoWIE Tech). From the beginning, participants were grouped into teams named in honour of pioneering female engineers, such as Elizabeth MacGill (the first female aeronautical engineer), Diane Lemaire (an Australian aeronautical engineer), and Florence McKenzie (Australia’s first female electrical engineer). These names served both to inspire and to highlight the historical contributions of women in engineering. The program also included a Career Expo, morning and afternoon tea breaks, a guest speaker session on Day 2, and a group photo and closing ceremony on Day 3. The timetable allowed students to explore various branches of engineering while interacting with academic staff, industry partners, and student mentors.

Figure 1. Detailed YoWIE 2025 program schedule for April 15-17, 2025

Practical, hands-on exploration is a centrepiece of YoWIE’s structure. Participating in interactive workshops, students get a taste of real engineering tasks: for example, building and launching model rockets, assembling a small gas turbine engine to see how aircraft are powered, practicing flying in the aviation simulation lab, programming robots to solve problems, soldering electronic circuits, disassembling and reassembling a lawnmower engine to learn how engines work, and even designing and testing a miniature dam and flood control system. These workshops are not mere demonstrations; they are immersive activities that let the girls act as engineers, creatively problem-solve, and get their hands dirty (literally) with tools and technology. “They give young women not just a glimpse into the world of engineering, but a chance to be engineers – even if just for a few days,” as one YoWIE team member observed (Wattearachchi, 2025). By demystifying complex concepts through play and experimentation, the program helps participants discover the fun and impact of engineering.

Notably, YoWIE alumni return in mentorship roles dubbed “SuperYoWIEs.” This near-peer mentoring creates a continuum of inspiration – yesterday’s learners become today’s leaders. For example, Cat Macdermott, who first attended YoWIE as a Year 9 student in 2017, later came back to assist with program activities as a SuperYoWIE and even helped redesign the Lawn Mowers (mechanical engineering) activity (Roberts, 2024). This cycle highlights how YoWIE not only recruits girls into engineering but also fosters leadership and persistence among those who continue in STEM.

3.3 Attendees and community

In its nine years of operation, the YoWIE program has evolved from a small pilot to a significant national outreach event. Since its inception in 2017 with approximately 16 participants, the YoWIE program has experienced significant growth, reaching over 98 attendees by 2025. This growth highlights the program’s increasing impact and popularity (see Figure 2a). Demand for spots is high – registrations fill quickly with students from Canberra and beyond – indicating a strong appetite for this kind of experiential STEM learning among girls.

From the distribution of participants by school year, it is evident that Year 10 has the highest number of attendees for 2024-2025 (see Figure 2b). This reflects a strong interest among students at this stage to explore various career pathways, as Year 10 is a pivotal time for making subject and future study decisions (transition into the college system). According to Figure 2b, the Year 11 and 12 group has lower attendance compared to grades 9 and 10. Ad hoc discussions with attendees revealed that those who are attending from grades 11 and 12 are already looking at Engineering as a career path. Due to this, they are currently taking STEM subjects. This means YoWIE is not only attracting interest but also reinforcing existing STEM trajectories, providing older students with a deeper insight into STEM fields and how they relate to future study and career pathways.

Figure 2. (a) YoWIE number of attendees from 2016 to 2025. Note: YoWIE currently operates at a maximum capacity of 100 participants; (b) Participants by school year in 2024 and 2025

Participants are selected through an expression of interest process. While the program welcomes students from across Australia, with attendees representing all states and territories, the majority come from ACT, where the campus is located. This is further evidenced by the distribution of participants by state and territory (see Figure 3). Interestingly, ACT participation increased from 52.6% in 2024 to 79.6% in 2025, demonstrating that YoWIE is having an increasingly strong impact within its immediate community. This suggests that while national interest exists, local engagement is more readily converted into participation.

Figure 3. Distribution of participants by state and territory in 2024 (left) and 2025 (right)

4.1 Post-program shifts in understanding and identity

A formal evaluation showed that participation in the YoWIE program enhances students’ understanding of engineering (Figure 4) – an important factor in building their confidence to pursue it as a potential study or career path. As shown in Figure 4, participants reported a marked increase in self-rated understanding of engineering following the 2025 YoWIE program. This study (Phillips, 2025) used a 10-point Likert scale to measure participants’ self-rated understanding of engineering before and after the YoWIE program. This choice of scale provided adequate sensitivity to detect shifts in participant perceptions. While self-reported measures may introduce individual interpretation bias, the overall trend demonstrates a clear upward shift. Before the program, most students rated their understanding between 3 and 6, and no participant rated their understanding above 7. Following the program, there was a significant peak in ratings at 8 and 9, with 15 out of 24 students placing themselves in this range.

A lack of confidence in pursuing engineering is often linked to a limited understanding of what the field entails (Engineers Australia, 2022). When students lack a clear understanding of the scope, relevance, or real-world applications of engineering, they are less likely to see themselves in such roles or feel capable of succeeding in them. After the three-day YoWIE program, the girls’ self-confidence in their ability to succeed in engineering surged. Seen from Figure 4, ratings from 1 to 6 dropped to zero, indicating an improvement in students’ understanding of engineering. This shift supports the program’s effectiveness in increasing both awareness and confidence in engineering among young female students. Interestingly, the intensity of change reported in Figure 4 appears larger than that observed in an earlier cohort that took part in YoWIE 2018 or 2019 (Dennis et al., 2019). Both current and previous studies (Dennis et al., 2019) highlight positive change in understanding of engineering and confidence in girls’ ability to succeed in engineering post-program.

Figure 4 is a crucial outcome, given that low self-confidence and “I do not belong” feelings often deter girls from STEM (YouthInsight, 2023). By the end of YoWIE, participants also had a much clearer idea of the education pathway required for an engineering career (for example, which subjects to take in Years 11–12). The program equipped them with both the motivation and the practical roadmap to continue in STEM. This is aligned with the previous findings that analysed the YoWIE program runs in 2018 and 2019 (Boyson et al., 2018; Dennis et al., 2019).

Figure 4. Self-rated understanding of engineering before and after attending the 2025 YoWIE program. Data for analysis were obtained from (Phillips, 2025)

After three days of participation, the young women were in a better position to make decisions about their potential future as engineers, having gained a clearer understanding of what engineering involves, along with increased interest and confidence in their abilities. This positive impact was supported by the 2024 and 2025 post-YoWIE survey results, where the majority of respondents (81% or 26 out of 32 in 2024, and 86% or 18 out of 21 in 2025) answered “Yes” to the question “Will you look into pursuing a university degree in engineering after attending YoWIE?”, while only 19% in 2024 (6 participants) and 14% in 2025 (3 participants) answered “No” (Figure 5). This strong positive response highlights the program’s effectiveness in encouraging young women to consider engineering as a future career path.

Figure 5. Participant responses to the question: “Will you look into pursuing a university degree in engineering after attending YoWIE?”, post-YoWIE surveys 2024 and 2025 (Phillips, 2025)

4.2 Insights from participants

Personal testimonials from participants further illustrate YoWIE’s effectiveness. For example, Cat Macdermott credits her YoWIE experience at the age of 14 with setting her on a path to earning an engineering degree. “I was heading into Year 9 when I first participated in YoWIE, and taking part in the different activities helped me decide that electrical engineering was the path I wanted to take,” she says (Roberts, 2024). Cat graduated in 2024 and is currently enrolled in a Master of Philosophy (MPhil) program at UNSW Canberra. Exposure to various fields helped her discover her passion. “This also helped me pick subjects like electronics and mechatronics in my last two years of school before university,” Cat adds (Roberts, 2024). This is a vital point: by intervening in Year 9 or 10, the program provides actionable guidance on subject selection – e.g., taking physics, intermediate or higher mathematics (Finkel et al., 2020) so that the participants can keep the door open for an engineering degree. Many girls in Australia do not choose these subjects (Novak & Griffiths, 2024). According to Australia-wide monitoring, females comprised 36.5% of students in higher mathematics in 2023 (Marchant & Kennedy, 2025). While Bachelor of Engineering entry requirements vary across Australian universities (Finkel et al., 2020), taking senior-secondary physics and at least intermediate mathematics better prepares girls who later choose to pursue the field. YoWIE alumni who chose to study engineering at UNSW Canberra noted that YoWIE helped them understand the type of engineering they wanted to do (Roberts, 2024).

The lack of self-belief and imposter syndrome are other issues often highlighted by females in STEM, from girls who want to pursue a career in STEM to female engineers and STEM leaders (Hamon, 2025; McCullough, 2020; Oliveira et al., 2024; Reid et al., 2016). YoWIE addresses such feelings by providing a cohort of peers and mentors so girls are supported and not isolated. For many participants, successfully completing the practical activity builds confidence. That sense of “I did this” empowers them to believe they can also solve bigger challenges, which is supported by the literature (Baker, 2013). According to Dr Qiao, co-chair of YoWIE, discussions with attendees revealed that many participants no longer perceived engineering as an intimidating or ‘male’ profession, but rather as a welcoming community where they could thrive. In fact, in a follow-up survey, participants said they would recommend it to friends, stating they came away with a much better understanding of what engineering is (Figure 4). Equally telling is the cascade of mentorship the program creates. The existence of SuperYoWIEs – often multiple generations of them now – shows that YoWIE not only recruits girls into engineering, but helps retain them by fostering leadership and camaraderie.

In summary, the YoWIE program has demonstrated success in inspiring girls about engineering, equipping them with knowledge and confidence, and ultimately contributing to a greater number of young women entering the engineering talent pipeline. It aligns closely with known best practices for diversity in STEM outreach – as we explore next.

5.1 Why social cognitive career theory fits the YoWIE program

The design and impact of the YoWIE program can be effectively understood through the lens of SCCT (Lent et al., 1994) as YoWIE’s design aligns with SCCT’s levers for change. The program addresses the confidence gap among young women in STEM by engaging the five core components of SCCT: self-efficacy, outcome expectations, interests, choice goals, and contextual supports (Lent et al., 1994).

Building self-efficacy. SCCT identifies self-efficacy as a core determinant of career choice (Lent et al., 1994; D. Wang et al., 2022). YoWIE directly fosters self-efficacy through mastery experiences in hands-on engineering workshops. A mastery experience happens when girls successfully take on a new challenge or accomplish something difficult – and, according to Bandura (1997), is the strongest source of efficacy. By actively doing engineering, participants experience success in technical tasks. Each success, even small ones, boosts confidence and reinforces the belief “I can do this” (Bandura, 1997).

Shaping outcome expectations. Positive expectations (e.g., that engineering work is fulfilling, leads to good jobs) motivate interest and goal-setting. Surveys by Engineers Australia have found that many students perceive engineering as uninteresting, not socially impactful, or “only for men” (Engineers Australia, 2022). YoWIE shapes students’ outcome expectations by exposing them to realistic and rewarding aspects of engineering through both activities and role models. During YoWIE’s hands-on workshops, girls get a taste of what engineers actually do – designing solutions, working in teams, and solving problems – which helps them form realistic expectations that engineering is creative and impactful work. In parallel, the program offers a lot of vicarious learning opportunities through exposure to female engineers, university lecturers, and current engineering students. The YoWIE team includes female Higher Degree by Research (HDR) engineering students and academics who interact closely with the participants. In the Career Exploration, girls can talk to female engineering professionals from various industries. In the Day 2 panel (Figure 1), several female HDR students and UNSW Canberra alumni share their journeys in STEM. These encounters allow the girls to see successful women in engineering who enjoy their careers, thereby conveying that an engineering path can be satisfying and attainable and demonstrating that “people like me” can and do thrive in STEM. Through these experiences, YoWIE enables students to develop positive outcome expectations, a key construct in SCCT that influences motivation and career choice (Lent et al., 1994).

The importance of relatable role models is repeatedly stressed by diversity experts (Fox et al., 2024; Fuesting & Diekman, 2017; Tal et al., 2024). Research shows that girls often lack visible female engineers to look up to, leading to a phenomenon summed up as “you can’t be what you can’t see.”(Vila-Concejo et al., 2018). Recent Engineers Australia’s reports emphasise that familiarity is key: girls need to actually encounter and engage with real engineers to normalise the profession and dismantle stereotypes (Briggs, 2023; Engineers Australia, 2023a). YoWIE addresses this by introducing participants to many women engineers of different backgrounds and specialties. This diversity of representation – seeing women who design bridges, build satellites, or teach engineering – helps girls imagine a place for themselves in the field and perceive the field as accessible, rewarding, and personally meaningful.

Studies have found that women (and young people generally) are more drawn to STEM careers when they see how those careers contribute to helping others and solving real-world problems (Diekman et al., 2015; Milgrom-Elcott, 2023). Engineers play a critical role in transitioning to a net-zero future, building a secure and resilient nation and addressing society’s pressing challenges such as climate change, disaster relief and emergency response. The YoWIE curriculum emphasises exactly that aspect thereby strengthening students’ outcome expectations. Participants learn how engineering addresses sustainability through repair and reuse (Lawn Mowers activity – Mechanical Engineering), resilient infrastructure (Earthen Dam activity – Civil Engineering), technological innovation (Flight Dynamics & Gas Turbines – Aerospace Engineering, Lost in Space – Space, Robotics – Software Engineering), etc. They hear from professionals how important their jobs are for supporting and improving communities and solving society’s challenges, which underscores the high societal impact of the profession. By highlighting the purpose behind the math and coding, YoWIE taps into the “communal goals” motivation that is known to increase women’s interest in STEM (Diekman et al., 2015; Milgrom-Elcott, 2023). Participants can see engineering not just as abstract equations but as a way to make a difference – whether it is designing technology to help people or inventing solutions for global issues. This perspective is reinforced through activities that link theory to tangible outcomes (e.g., assembling an engine and seeing it work) and through discussions of how engineering improves lives.

Contextual supports. SCCT highlights the role of contextual supports (and barriers) in shaping career development (Lent et al., 1994). Even if a student has strong self-efficacy and positive expectations, a supportive environment is often needed to translate those internal beliefs into action. The YoWIE program functions as a proximal environmental support, offering participants structured, supportive experiences that enhance their self-efficacy, broaden their outcome expectations, and encourage interest in engineering. By providing hands-on activities, access to role models, and direct engagement with industry professionals, YoWIE creates an enabling context for participants to feel welcomed, encouraged, and capable of envisioning themselves in engineering pathways. This kind of supportive context aligns with SCCT’s assertion that environmental factors can facilitate or hinder one’s career/future studies choices (Lent et al., 1994; Lent & Brown, 2008).

YoWIE functions as a powerful contextual support system. It actively counters societal stereotypes and environmental barriers by fostering an inclusive, encouraging community. As Hardtke et al. (2022) note, community and relatable role models strongly influence young people’s “feelings of fit” – a sense of belonging in a particular field. YoWIE cultivates this by enabling attendees to connect with peers who share a curiosity for STEM, while also interacting with professionals who model what success in engineering looks like. Whether it is a keynote speaker describing her aerospace career or an undergraduate mentor assisting with a workshop, these role models help students visualise themselves in engineering roles and challenge the stereotype that STEM is a male-only domain.

As one YoWIE alumna, Alberta Redgrove, reflected, “Talking to senior women in engineering and lecturers in STEM can subtly challenge our own beliefs, especially those shaped by implicit gender bias” (Hamon, 2025). The presence of authentic, passionate role models reinforces the message that girls do belong in engineering – and helps them believe it for themselves.

Crucially, supportive men matter too. Evidence from experimental and field research shows that equality-supportive male allies can reduce anticipated isolation and hostility for women in male-dominated STEM settings and increase identity safety, respect, and perceived equality norms (Moser & Branscombe, 2022). Related research tracking working engineers finds that identity-safe cultures (e.g., clear gender-inclusive norms) lower women’s day-to-day identity threat via more positive interactions with male (not female) colleagues, underscoring why men’s supportive behaviour is pivotal for girls’ and women’s experiences in engineering contexts (Hall et al., 2018). According to Cheryan et al., 2013, counter-stereotypical male role models can be more effective in increasing women’s interest than female role models who reflect current stereotypes. More broadly, role models can be effective when they foster a sense of belonging, even without demographic similarity (Ensher et al., 2002). Accordingly, YoWIE’s inclusion of supportive male engineers alongside women engineers signals an inclusive norm and models collaborative, respectful mixed-gender engineering – both of which are consistent with SCCT’s emphasis on contextual supports that enable interest to translate into choice actions (Lent et al., 1994).

By framing YoWIE through SCCT, this study illuminates how the program works, not just whether it works, offering actionable insights for future interventions.

5.2 Implications for broader outreach initiatives

The YoWIE program is part of a broader movement across Australia (and globally) to encourage underrepresented students into science and engineering. In recent years, the Australian Government and professional bodies have launched various Women in STEM initiatives – from the national Women in STEM Decadal Plan (Australian Academy of Science, 2019) to local outreach like university summer schools, mentoring schemes, and toolkits for teachers such as, for example, the University of Technology Sydney’s STEM × Holiday Workshops, Curious Minds delivered by Australian Mathematics Trust and Australian Science Innovations and Australia’s Girls in STEM Toolkit funded by the Australian Government, respectively (Australian Government & Department of Industry Science and Resources, n.d.; Australian Mathematics Trust & Australian Science Innovations, n.d.; University of Technology Sydney, n.d.). While some high-profile efforts have faced setbacks (for instance, the Australian Government’s Women in STEM Ambassador role was discontinued in 2022 despite evidence of progress in women’s STEM employment), programs like YoWIE are stepping up to sustain momentum. Each year, YoWIE “encourages young women to consider careers in male-dominated STEM industries” (Hamon, 2025), helping to counteract the negative perceptions that still surround engineering.

YoWIE is not an isolated effort, but rather part of a network of similar initiatives aimed at improving the STEM pipeline. Universities around Australia have launched outreach camps and workshops for schoolgirls, often with support from professional organisations. For example, Engineers Australia’s Girls+ Engineering Tomorrow program in Western Australia runs weekly sessions for female Year 11 and 12 students, connecting them with industry role models and showcasing engineering (Engineers Australia, 2023b). On a national scale, the Women in STEM Decadal Plan (Australian Academy of Science, 2019) calls for early exposure and role model-based interventions in primary and secondary school as a key action to shift the gender balance. The consistency of these efforts and their reported success suggest that the YoWIE model can be adapted and expanded elsewhere. In fact, outreach programs – from the U.S. to Europe – have shown that week-long engineering camps or “Introduce a Girl to Engineering” days can significantly improve girls’ attitudes and enrollment in engineering courses (Boyson et al., 2018; Dennis et al., 2019; Reitz, 2005; Sinkele & Mupinga, 2011). YoWIE stands as a compelling example of this approach in action, aligning with global best practices to inspire the next generation of women engineers. Namely, YoWIE operationalises evidence-based practices flagged in international guidance such as hands-on exposure, authentic interactions with diverse role models/mentors, and pathway advice. These design elements align with UNESCO’s recommendations on mentoring/role models (Global Education Monitoring Report Team, 2024), Australia’s Women in STEM Decadal Plan (Australian Academy of Science, 2019), the U.S. National Academies’ Promising Practices report (National Academies of Sciences et al., 2020), and EngineeringUK’s 2023 Rapid Evidence Review of effective interventions (Engineering UK, 2023). Australia’s Women in STEM Decadal plan also highlights the importance of STEM education and outreach programs for girls as a suggested solution against stereotypes, lack of role models/mentors, socio-economic status, lack of understanding of career options and disengagement from education (Australian Academy of Science, 2019).

5.3 Contribution to long-term diversity in STEM

Rigorous longitudinal studies of girls-only STEM outreach are scarce, but available research suggests positive signals for persistence. For example, a randomised evaluation of WPI’s Camp Reach (a 7th‐grade engineering camp for girls) found that 15.0% of alumnae pursued engineering majors/degrees versus only 9.1% of the control group (Demetry & Sontgerath, 2020). Likewise, a 10-year evaluation of Australia’s Science and Engineering Challenge (a mixed‐gender secondary school outreach) reported that roughly 52% of participating physics students and 31% of first-year university students said the program influenced their decision to pursue STEM studies (Reed et al., 2021). In smaller- scale interventions, positive short-term effects are reported: a New South Wales 10-week in-school program for girls (13–16 years) significantly increased STEM career awareness, enjoyment of science, and self-efficacy, as reflected in pre/post surveys (Prieto-Rodriguez et al., 2022). Similarly, involvement in the Scientella program (a US high-school mentorship and project-based initiative) yielded gains in STEM career exploration and skills, and its alumni were subsequently admitted to selective STEM majors (Ford et al., 2024). In the YoWIE case, participants reported increased understanding of engineering and willingness to pursue a university degree in engineering after attending YoWIE (Section 4.1). They also highlighted that sampling hands-on engineering projects helped them choose relevant subjects (e.g. electronics, mechatronics) and narrow their career focus (Lansdown, 2024; Roberts, 2024). Together, these findings imply that well-designed mid-secondary interventions can boost girls’ STEM interest and choices.

Another broader impact of programs like YoWIE is how they contribute to a culture shift around STEM in schools and communities. Many girls enter YoWIE somewhat unsure – they may be one of only a few girls in their physics class, or they have been told (implicitly or explicitly) that engineering is “too hard” or “not feminine.” Studies find that boys typically receive more encouragement and informal STEM experiences than girls – for example, boys have greater access to science activities and parental support – while girls often lack equal access to such opportunities (N. Wang et al., 2023). “There aren’t many opportunities like this just for girls”, YoWIE alumnus, Cat Macdermott, highlighted. “Whereas there are a lot more opportunities that I found over the years for boys. Like going to sports competitions … you hear about them not being in class because they went to a maths competition or something like that, and you’re like, ‘Was I offered the same opportunity?’” (Lansdown, 2024). After the YoWIE program, girls return to their schools not only with new confidence, but often as ambassadors who can inspire classmates. They might start a STEM club, or simply share their excitement, gradually chipping away at bias among their peers and teachers. For example, one of YoWIE alumni created a Women in STEM wall in her school with a particular focus on Australian women and their achievements. Two other YoWIE alumni decided to undertake their School Work Experience at the School of Engineering and Technology, UNSW Canberra, i.e. five full days focused on different engineering activities such as observing CNC milling and impact testing, 3D printing their designs, and exploring materials under a scanning electron microscope. Perceived personal and social relevance fuels curiosity and engagement – essential for developing long-term STEM interests. Each year, YoWIE “encourages young women to consider careers in male-dominated STEM industries” (Hamon, 2025), helping to counteract the negative perceptions that still surround engineering.

In the context of engineering, secondary school intervention is especially important for maintaining subject continuity. Research reports minimal gender differences in science and only a small average gap in mathematics through early secondary school. For example, in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022, boys were ahead by ~9 score points in maths (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development average), while science showed no significant gender difference (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2023). However, many capable girls begin dropping math and physics in upper secondary school due to a lack of interest or confidence. For instance, around a quarter of girls do not take any maths in their final year of high school, according to Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute data (Barrington & Evans, 2014), and nearly a third of girls in New South Wales do not take any maths in Year 11 and 12 (Cassidy, 2024), cutting off engineering pathways. Programs like YoWIE, which target Year 9–10, help counter this by igniting passion at the right moment. After attending YoWIE in Year 9, some participants were motivated to enrol in advanced STEM courses in Years 11–12 (Lansdown, 2024; Roberts, 2024).

This kind of intervention before subject selection deadlines can literally change the trajectory of a student’s career. It keeps doors open that might have closed had the student not developed an interest in engineering early on. In essence, the timing of encouragement matters as much as the content of the encouragement.

What do expert perspectives and policy recommendations suggest to attract more diverse students into STEM at younger ages? A few key strategies emerge:

• Hands-on learning and informal STEM opportunities: Research consistently finds that informal STEM programs (like camps, clubs, museum workshops, coding clubs, etc.) are highly effective at engaging girls and underrepresented youth (Habig et al., 2020; Tedeschi, 2023; Todd & Zvoch, 2019). These environments enable creativity, allow for failure without high stakes, and foster peer collaboration. They complement the formal curriculum by adding fun and real-world context. Experts recommend increasing access to such opportunities – e.g., after-school robotics clubs, hackathons for girls, maker spaces – especially in the early secondary years, when interest can wane. Hands-on projects that relate to everyday life or social good are particularly impactful in retaining girls’ interest (Diekman et al., 2015). YoWIE’s success with hands-on learning is a case in point, and scaling similar approaches into more schools could further normalise girls doing engineering tasks.
• Provide visible role models and mentors: Seeing women succeed in STEM is crucial at every stage of a girl’s development. Schools and programs should invite female engineers, scientists, and students to speak, demonstrate, or lead activities, so that girls have multiple “data points” that women belong in these fields. Mentorship programs – pairing girls with women professionals or university students – can build lasting support relationships. Role models should be diverse (in background, ethnicity, etc.) so that a wide range of students can identify with them (Gladstone & Cimpian, 2021; Ong et al., 2020). Even in media and curriculum, including stories of female inventors and engineers can counter stereotypes. The goal is to normalise women’s presence in STEM to the point that a young girl does not question whether she can be an engineer, only what kind of engineer she wants to be.
• Emphasise the purpose and social impact of STEM: Many girls (and boys) are drawn to careers that they perceive as meaningful and aligned with their values. Framing STEM in terms of solving real problems, helping people, and improving the world can make these fields more attractive. Educators are encouraged to connect classroom STEM content to real-life applications and community issues. For example, demonstrating how learning coding can lead to developing an app for disaster relief, or how understanding physics enables innovations in renewable energy. This communal framing has been shown to increase women’s interest and persistence in STEM (Diekman et al., 2015; Milgrom-Elcott, 2023). Programs aimed at girls often explicitly incorporate a “make the world better” narrative (e.g. designing assistive devices or eco-friendly technology in competitions) to tap into this motivation. Such messaging can be reinforced by female role models who talk about the positive impacts of their work.

Implementing these strategies supports creating a continuous pipeline that nurtures girls’ interest from a young age and carries them through to tertiary education. Continuity is key: it is not enough to excite girls at one workshop and then leave them adrift. Effective programs provide follow-up and next-step engagements – for example, a girl who attends a Year 7 coding camp might next join a Year 9 engineering challenge, then a Year 11 work experience placement, each step reinforcing the last. In YoWIE, this is reflected through the SuperYoWIE mentorship. Similarly, national efforts like the STEM Girl Power Initiative run by the Queensland Government (Queensland Government & Department of Education, 2025) create alumni networks of schoolgirl STEM ambassadors, so the inspiration does not fade. The end goal is a self-sustaining ecosystem where girls continuously see STEM as inviting, achievable, and fulfilling, all the way into their careers.

UNSW Canberra’s YoWIE program demonstrates how a well-designed outreach initiative can ignite passion for engineering among young women and give them the tools to pursue it. By combining hands-on projects, female mentorship, and early-career guidance, YoWIE is helping to disrupt the gender imbalance in engineering – one cohort of high schoolers at a time. The program’s success is evident in both qualitative and quantitative outcomes: participants emerge more confident, informed, and motivated (pronouncedly increased self-rated understanding of engineering, the willingness to pursue a university degree in engineering), with girls continuing into engineering studies and even returning to “pay it forward” to the next generation (Roberts, 2024). Importantly, YoWIE does not exist in a vacuum. It aligns closely with broader diversity and education strategies that emphasise early intervention, active learning, and community support as levers to attract more girls into STEM. As seen in YoWIE and other outreach programs across Australia, when girls are given real experience in engineering and a chance to visualise themselves in the field, their interest often soars – and so does their likelihood of choosing STEM courses and careers (Boyson et al., 2018; Dennis et al., 2019; Engineers Australia, 2023b). The ripple effects can be profound: more women in the pipeline means more women in the profession down the line. This in turn means a more inclusive workforce bringing diverse perspectives to engineering problems. This is a practical advantage, as diverse teams have been shown to spur greater innovation and better engineering solutions (Díaz-García et al., 2013).

The YoWIE experience embodies the core Social Cognitive Career Theory constructs. Girls gained self-efficacy through successful hands-on projects (mastery experiences) and formed positive outcome expectations by seeing real engineering work and meeting professionals. SCCT predicts that this combination generates stronger interests and goals (Lent et al., 1994; Yamani & Almazroa, 2024). Crucially, YoWIE created a supportive environment – a cohort of peers and near-peer mentors and senior female and male mentors.

However, sustaining these gains requires continued commitment. Early inspiration must be followed by structural support (scholarships, internships, inclusive university environments, etc.) to retain women through to graduation and beyond. Outreach programs like YoWIE are a critical first step – lighting the spark – but stakeholders must also tend the flame. The positive findings from YoWIE’s impact studies give us reason to be optimistic: they show that young women will embrace engineering when given a chance and that their self-belief can be strengthened with just a few days of the right experience. Imagine if that experience is reinforced year after year, across all schools – the effect could be transformational.

In conclusion, improving diversity in engineering requires a pipeline that begins in childhood and remains uninterrupted through tertiary education. By investing in early outreach and creating programs that allow girls to experience engineering in a supportive atmosphere, we can challenge biases and open up new possibilities. UNSW Canberra’s YoWIE has provided a blueprint of what works: practical skills, relatable mentors, peer connections, and an emphasis on the idea that engineering is for everyone. As one student wisely noted, “Getting the exposure to different types of engineering and seeing if you like it at a young age is key to getting more females in STEM….” (Roberts, 2024). The task now is to scale up this exposure. With concerted effort from educational institutions, industry, and policymakers, we can ensure that many more girls across the country get that early spark – and that they have the encouragement to keep it alive. The result will be not only more female engineers, but a richer and more innovative engineering sector that truly reflects the diverse society it serves.

The authors extend their sincere gratitude to the students who participated in UNSW Canberra’s YoWIE Program, as well as to the dedicated team whose collective efforts have sustained and grown the initiative since its inception. In 2025, the 3-day event was made possible through the support of 39 academics and HDR students, 26 professional staff, and the invaluable contributions of 9 SuperYoWIEs. SuperYoWIE refers to the girls who previously attended YoWIE and return in later years to act as peer leaders.

The authors also acknowledge the involvement of 18 industry partners, who supported the career exploration component, offering participants meaningful insights into real-world engineering pathways. A special thanks is extended to Ms. Grace Phillips, the program lead, whose oversight of all logistics and unwavering commitment were instrumental to the event’s success.

The work was conducted in accordance with the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2023), with UNSW Human Research Ethics approval iRECS9475.

ACT Government. (2025, June 16). What we teach (curriculum). https://www.act.gov.au/education-and-training/teaching-and-assessment/what-we-teach-curriculum Almeda, M. V. Q., & Baker, R. S. (2020). Predicting student participation in STEM careers: The role of affect and engagement during middle school . Journal of Educational Data Mining, 12(2).

Australian Academy of Science. (2019). Women in STEM Decadal Plan. Australian Government, & Department of Industry Science and Resources. (n.d.). The Girls in STEM Toolkit. https://www.Thegist.Edu.Au/.

Australian Mathematics Trust, & Australian Science Innovations. (n.d.). Curious Minds. https://Curiousminds.Edu.Au/.

Bahar, A., & Adiguzel, T. (2016). Analysis of factors influencing interest in STEM career: Comparison between high ability and motivated American and Turkish high school students. Journal of STEM Education, 17(3).

Baker, D. (2013). What works: Using curriculum and pedagogy to increase girls’ interest and participation in science. Theory Into Practice, 52(1), 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/07351690.2013.743760

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Barmby, P., Kind, P. M., & Jones, K. (2008). Examining changing attitudes in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(8), 1075–1093. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701344966

Barrington, F., & Evans, M. (2014, July). Participation in Year 12 mathematics 2004- 2013. Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute. https://amsi.org.au/?publications=participation-year-12-mathematics-2004-2013

Bell, A., Chetty, R., Jaravel, X., Petkova, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2017). Who becomes an inventor in America? The importance of exposure to innovation. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24062

Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1986). Applications of self-efficacy theory to understanding career choice behavior. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.279

Boyson, T., Kasmarik, K., & Wilson, K. (2018). Evaluating the impact of the YoWIE summer school on girls’ perception of engineering. Proceedings of the 29th Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference. https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/18aaee/proceedings/AAEE18_Proceedings_5Dec.pdf

Briggs, P. (2023). The Engineering Profession: a statistical overview. Fifteenth edition. https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/2023-11/engineering-profession-statistical-overview-fifteenth-edition.pdf

Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971– 1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20241

Bustamante, A. S., Bermudez, V. N., Ochoa, K. D., Belgrave, A. B., & Vandell, D. L. (2023). Quality of early childcare and education predicts high school STEM achievement for students from low-income backgrounds. Developmental Psychology, 59(8), 1440–1451. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001546

Byars-Winston, A., Estrada, Y., Howard, C., Davis, D., & Zalapa, J. (2010). Influence of social cognitive and ethnic variables on academic goals of underrepresented students in science and engineering: A multiple-groups analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018608

Capobianco, B. M., Diefes‐dux, H. A., Mena, I., & Weller, J. (2011). What is an engineer? Implications of elementary school student conceptions for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 304–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00015.x

Caspi, A., & Gorsky, P. (2025). Students’ motivation to learn mathematics predicts their STEM career expectations and mediates the effects of gender, parental occupations and math classroom environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-025-10581-8

Cassidy, C. (2024, December 8). ‘Alarm bells’: why are Australian boys doing better than girls in maths and science? The Guardian.

Chan, R. C. H. (2022). A social cognitive perspective on gender disparities in self- efficacy, interest, and aspirations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): the influence of cultural and gender norms. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00352-0

Cheryan, S., Drury, B. J., & Vichayapai, M. (2013). Enduring influence of stereotypical computer science role models on women’s academic aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(1), 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684312459328

Cleaves, A. (2005). The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 27(4), 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000323746

Copur-Gencturk, Y., Thacker, I., & Cimpian, J. R. (2023). Teachers’ race and gender biases and the moderating effects of their beliefs and dispositions. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00420-z

Corrigan, D., & Aikens, K. (2019). Barriers to participation in engineering and the value of interventions to improve diversity.

Corrigan, E., Williams, M., & Wells, M. A. (2023). High school enrolment choices – understanding the STEM gender gap. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 23(3), 403–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-023-00285-y

Demetry, C., & Sontgerath, S. (2020). Longitudinal evaluation of a university-based outreach program for middle school girls yields evidence of positive engineering recruitment outcomes. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 26(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2020028747

Dennis, Z. R., Wilson, K., Boyson, T., & Kasmarik, K. (2019). Building girls’ confidence in themselves as future engineers. Teaching Science, 65(3), 10–18.

Díaz-García, C., González-Moreno, A., & Jose Sáez-Martínez, F. (2013). Gender diversity within R&D teams: Its impact on radicalness of innovation. Innovation, 15(2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.5172/impp.2013.15.2.149

Diekman, A. B., Weisgram, E. S., & Belanger, A. L. (2015). New routes to recruiting and retaining women in STEM: policy implications of a communal goal congruity perspective. Social Issues and Policy Review, 9(1), 52–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12010

Ellis, J., Fosdick, B. K., & Rasmussen, C. (2016). Women 1.5 times more likely to leave STEM pipeline after calculus compared to men: lack of mathematical confidence a potential culprit. PLOS ONE, 11(7), e0157447. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157447

Engineering UK. (2023). Rapid evidence review. Interventions to increase girls’ aspirations for engineering and technology careers. www.engineeringuk.com/rer-girls

Engineers Australia. (2022). Women in Engineering.

Engineers Australia. (2023a). Strengthening diversity in STEM. https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/2023-09/Strengthening-diversity-in-STEM.pdf

Engineers Australia. (2023b, April). Bridging the gap with university outreach program.

Engineers Australia. https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/news-and-media/2023/04/bridging-gap-university-outreach-program

Ensher, E. A., Grant‐Vallone, E. J., & Marelich, W. D. (2002). Effects of perceived attitudinal and demographic similarity on protégés’ support and satisfaction gained from their mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(7), 1407–1430. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb01444.x

Finkel, A., Brown, T., Wright, J., & Wienk, M. (2020). Mapping university prerequisites in Australia.

Ford, S. J., dos Santos, R., & dos Santos, R. (2024). Empowering female high school students for STEM futures: Career exploration and leadership development at Scientella. Education Sciences, 14(9), 955. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090955

Fox, A., Tran, B., Woodmass, I., & Donald, C. (2024). Women in engineering: Inspiring school students to pursue the “E” in STEM. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AAEE 2024), 434–442.

Fuesting, M. A., & Diekman, A. B. (2017). Not by success alone: role models provide pathways to communal opportunities in STEM. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(2), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216678857

Giorgetti, K. (2004). The development and validation of a math and science career survey for elementary and middle school students [PhD thesis]. Purdue University.

Gladstone, J. R., & Cimpian, A. (2021). Which role models are effective for which students? A systematic review and four recommendations for maximizing the effectiveness of role models in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00315-x

Global Education Monitoring Report Team. (2024). Support girls and women to pursue STEM subjects and careers: advocacy brief. https://doi.org/10.54676/BPSL3344

Habig, B., Gupta, P., Levine, B., & Adams, J. (2020). An informal science education program’s impact on STEM major and STEM career outcomes. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 1051–1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9722-y

Hall, W., Schmader, T., Aday, A., Inness, M., & Croft, E. (2018). Climate control: The relationship between social identity threat and cues to an identity-safe culture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(3), 446–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000137

Hamon, G. (2025, April 14). Challenging bias and paving the way for women in STEM. UNSW. https://www.unsw.edu.au/news/2025/04/challenging-bias-and-paving-the-way-for-women-in-stem

Hardtke, M., Khanjaninejad, L., Lang, C., & Nasiri, N. (2022). Gender complexity and experience of women undergraduate students within the engineering domain. Sustainability, 15(1), 467. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010467

Hsieh, C.-T., Hurst, E., Jones, C. I., & Klenow, P. J. (2019). The allocation of talent and U.S. economic growth. Econometrica, 87(5), 1439–1474. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA11427

Hughes, R., Schellinger, J., Billington, B., Britsch, B., & Santiago, A. (2020). A summary of effective gender equitable teaching practices in informal STEM education spaces. Journal of STEM Outreach, 3(1).

Interagency Working Group on Inclusion in STEM. (2021). Best practices for diversity and inclusion in STEM education and research: A guide by and for federal agencies. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp.

Kerr, B., & Kurpius, S. E. R. (2004). Encouraging talented girls in math and science: effects of a guidance intervention. High Ability Studies, 15(1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813042000225357

Lansdown, S. (2024, April 17). As a young woman in engineering, Cat is often told “you don’t belong here.” Canberra Times.

Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2008). Social cognitive career theory and subjective well- being in the context of work. Journal of Career Assessment, 16(1), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072707305769

Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2019). Social cognitive career theory at 25: Empirical status of the interest, choice, and performance models. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, 103316. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVB.2019.06.004

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2022). Social cognitive career theory (S. D. Brown, Ed.; Fourth Edition, pp. 255–311). Jossey-Bass.

Lent, R. W., Miller, M. J., Smith, P. E., Watford, B. A., Lim, R. H., & Hui, K. (2016). Social cognitive predictors of academic persistence and performance in engineering: Applicability across gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 94, 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVB.2016.02.012

Lent, R. W., Sheu, H. Bin, Gloster, C. S., & Wilkins, G. (2010). Longitudinal test of the social cognitive model of choice in engineering students at historically Black universities. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 387–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVB.2009.09.002

Liu, Y., Lou, S., & Shih, R. (2014). The investigation of STEM self-efficacy and professional commitment to engineering among female high school students. South African Journal of Education, 34(2), 01–15. https://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0256-01002014000200024&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en

Luttenberger, S., Steinlechner, P., Ertl, B., & Paechter, M. (2019). It takes more than one swallow to make a summer: measures to foster girls’ and women’s pathways into STEM. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01844

Lv, B., Zhao, F., & Zhang, D. (2025). Understanding the complex formation of female students’ STEM career aspirations: configurational pathways and predictive analysis of STEM beliefs and social support. International Journal of Science Education, 1– 20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2515622

Maltese, A. V., Melki, C. S., & Wiebke, H. L. (2014). The nature of experiences responsible for the generation and maintenance of Interest in STEM. Science Education, 98(6), 937–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21132

Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education, 95(5), 877–907. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20441

Marchant, T., & Kennedy, S. (2025). Year 12 Mathematics participation report card. https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-statistics/student-data

Master, A., Cheryan, S., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2016). Computing whether she belongs: Stereotypes undermine girls’ interest and sense of belonging in computer science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 424–437. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000061

Master, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2020). Cultural stereotypes and sense of belonging contribute to gender gaps in STEM. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 12(1).

Master, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Cheryan, S. (2021). Gender stereotypes about interests start early and cause gender disparities in computer science and engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(48). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100030118

McCullough, L. (2020). Barriers and assistance for female leaders in academic STEM in the US. Education Sciences, 10(10), 264. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100264

Milgrom-Elcott, T. (2023, October 11). Workplaces do it, so can schools: real-world relevance keeps girls in STEM. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/taliamilgromelcott/2023/10/11/workplaces-do-it-so- can-schools-real-world-relevance-keeps-girls-in-stem

Miller, D. I., Lauer, J. E., Tanenbaum, C., & Burr, L. (2024). The development of children’s gender stereotypes about STEM and verbal abilities: A preregistered meta-analytic review of 98 studies. Psychological Bulletin, 150(12), 1363–1396. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000456

Miller, D. I., Nolla, K. M., Eagly, A. H., & Uttal, D. H. (2018). The development of children’s gender‐science stereotypes: a meta‐analysis of 5 decades of U.S. Draw‐a‐ Scientist studies. Child Development, 89(6), 1943–1955. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13039

Miller, K., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. (2018). The influence of students’ participation in STEM competitions on their interest in STEM careers. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 8(2), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2017.1397298

Moser, C. E., & Branscombe, N. R. (2022). Male allies at work: Gender-equality supportive men reduce negative underrepresentation effects among women. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(2), 372–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211033748

Msambwa, M. M., Daniel, K., Lianyu, C., & Antony, F. (2025). A systematic review using feminist perspectives on the factors affecting girls’ participation in STEM subjects. Science & Education, 34(3), 1619–1650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191- 024-00524-0

National Academies of Sciences, E. and M., Policy and Global Affairs, Committee on Women in Science, E. and M., Committee on Increasing the Number of Women in Science, T. E. M. and M. (STEMM), Colwell, R., Bear, A., & Helman, A. (2020). Promising practices for addressing the underrepresentation of women in science, engineering, and medicine.

Nix, S., Perez-Felkner, L., & Thomas, K. (2015). Perceived mathematical ability under challenge: a longitudinal perspective on sex segregation among STEM degree fields. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00530

Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., Bar-Anan, Y., Bergh, R., Cai, H., Gonsalkorale, K., Kesebir, S., Maliszewski, N., Neto, F., Olli, E., Park, J., Schnabel, K., Shiomura, K., Tulbure, B. T., Wiers, R. W., …

Greenwald, A. G. (2009). National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26), 10593–10597. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809921106

Novak, L., & Griffiths, E. (2024, November). Final exams putting gender gap to the test. Advertiser, The/Sunday Mail (Adelaide, Australia), 19–19.

Oliveira, T., Barcomb, A., Santos, R. D. S., Barros, H., Baldassarre, M. T., & França, C. (2024). Navigating the path of women in software engineering: from academia to industry. Proceedings of the 46th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society, 154–165. https://doi.org/10.1145/3639475.3640100

Ong, M., Jaumot‐Pascual, N., & Ko, L. T. (2020). Research literature on women of color in undergraduate engineering education: A systematic thematic synthesis. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(3), 581–615. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20345

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 Results: The State of Learning and Equity in Education: Vol. I. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en

Paterson, J. (2019). Engaging girls in STEM. National Association of Secondary School Principals, 20. https://www.nassp.org/publication/principal-leadership/volume- 20/principal-leadership-october-2019/engaging-girls-in-stem

Phillips, G. (2025). YoWIE 2025: Final Event Report (Internal).

Pirttinen, N., Hellas, A., Haaranen, L., & Duran, R. (2020). Study major, gender, and confidence gap: effects on experience, performance, and self-efficacy in introductory programming. 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1– 7. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273884

Prieto-Rodriguez, E., Blackmore, K., Berretta, R., Wanless, E., Giacomini, A., Todd, J.,

Sincock, K., Johnson, S., & Gibson, L. (2022). Design and evaluation in STEM outreach: a case study of a high school program to increase female participation. Proceedings of Australasian Association for Engineering Education 2022.

Queensland Government, & Department of Education. (2025). STEM Girl Power initiative. STEM Girl Power Initiative. https://education.qld.gov.au/about- us/budgets-funding-grants/grants/state-schools/targeted/stem-girl-power

Reed, S., Prieto, E., Burns, T., & O’Connor, J. (2021). STEM Outreach: Are we making a difference? A case study evaluating the Science and Engineering Challenge program. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 25(2), 59–77.

Reid, J., Smith, E., Iamsuk, N., & Miller, J. (2016). Balancing the equation: mentoring first year female STEM students at a regional university. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 24(4), 18–30.

Reitz, V. (2005). Introduce a girl to engineering day. Machine Design, 77(4), 96.

Roberts, L. (2024, April 15). UNSW Canberra’s YoWIE program inspires next generation of STEM leaders. UNSW. https://www.unsw.edu.au/news/2024/04/unsw-canberra-s-yowie-program-inspires- next-generation-of-stem-leaders

Rogers, M. E., Creed, P. A., & Ian Glendon, A. (2008). The role of personality in adolescent career planning and exploration: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(1), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.02.002

Sahin, A., & Waxman, H. C. (2021). Factors affecting high school students’ STEM career interest: findings from a 4-year study. Journal of STEM Education: Innovation and Research , 22(3), 5–19.

Sakellariou, C., & Fang, Z. (2021). Self-efficacy and interest in STEM subjects as predictors of the STEM gender gap in the US: The role of unobserved heterogeneity.

International Journal of Educational Research, 109, 101821. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJER.2021.101821

School of Engineering & Technology. (2025). Young Women In Engineering (YoWIE) 2025. https://www.unsw.edu.au/canberra/about-us/our-schools/engineering-technology/engage-with-us/young-women-engineering

Sinkele, C. N., & Mupinga, D. M. (2011). The effectiveness of engineering workshops in attracting females into engineering fields: a review of the literature. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(1), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2010.496812

Starr, C. R., & Simpkins, S. D. (2021). High school students’ math and science gender stereotypes: relations with their STEM outcomes and socializers’ stereotypes. Social Psychology of Education, 24(1), 273–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-021- 09611-4

Sun, Y., Jidesjo, A., & Rundgren, S.-N. C. (2019). Examining gender differences in students’ entrance into and persistence in STEM programs in Swedish higher education. The European Journal of Educational Sciences, 06(01). https://doi.org/10.19044/ejes.v6no1a5

Tai, R. H., Qi Liu, C., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312(5777), 1143–1144. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1128690

Tal, M., Lavi, R., Reiss, S., & Dori, Y. J. (2024). Gender perspectives on role models: insights from STEM Sstudents and professionals. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33(5), 699–717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10114-y

Tedeschi, B. D. (2023). Effects of informal STEM education on underrepresented students. Purdue University Graduate School.

Tellhed, U., Björklund, F., & Kallio Strand, K. (2022). Sure I can code (but do I want to?). Why boys’ and girls’ programming beliefs differ and the effects of mandatory programming education. Computers in Human Behavior, 135, 107370. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2022.107370

Todd, B. L., & Zvoch, K. (2019). The effect of an informal science intervention on middle school girls’ science affinities. International Journal of Science Education, 41(1), 102–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1534022

University of Technology Sydney. (n.d.). STEM × Holiday Workshops. https://Www.Uts.Edu.Au/about/Faculties/Engineering-and-Information- Technology/Women-Engineering-and-It/Primary-and-High-School-Programs/Stem- x-Holiday-Workshops.

Verdugo-Castro, S., García-Holgado, A., & Sánchez-Gómez, M. C. (2022). The gender gap in higher STEM studies: A systematic literature review. Heliyon, 8(8), e10300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10300

Vila-Concejo, A., Gallop, S. L., Hamylton, S. M., Esteves, L. S., Bryan, K. R., Delgado- Fernandez, I., Guisado-Pintado, E., Joshi, S., da Silva, G. M., Ruiz de Alegria- Arzaburu, A., Power, H. E., Senechal, N., & Splinter, K. (2018). Steps to improve gender diversity in coastal geoscience and engineering. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), 103. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0154-0

Wang, D., Liu, X., & Deng, H. (2022). The perspectives of social cognitive career theory approach in current times. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1023994

Wang, N., Tan, A.-L., Zhou, X., Liu, K., Zeng, F., & Xiang, J. (2023). Gender differences in high school students’ interest in STEM careers: a multi-group comparison based on structural equation model. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00443-6

Wattearachchi, W. (2025, April 28). Experience with Young Women In Engineering (YoWIE) 2025. Medium. https://wasuradananjith.medium.com/inspiring-the-next- generation-my-experience-with-young-women-in-engineering-yowie-2025- db6524595164

Yamani, N., & Almazroa, H. (2024). Exploring career interest and STEM self-efficacy: implications for promoting gender equity. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1402933

YouthInsight. (2023). 2023 Youth in STEM report. https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/youth-stem-research-project/youth-stem- report-2023-24

Zander, L., Höhne, E., Harms, S., Pfost, M., & Hornsey, M. J. (2020). When grades are high but self-efficacy is low: Unpacking the confidence gap between girls and boys in mathematics. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.552355