Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:30:06 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
33 SES 06 A: Gendered Leadership and Organisational Structures in Education: Gendered Lenses
Paper Session
| ||
    | ||
33. Gender and Education
Paper Balancing Tradition and Leadership: The Struggles and Triumphs of Rural Female Principals Eurasian Technological University, Kazakhstan Presenting Author:Despite the global feminisation of the teaching profession, women remain underrepresented in school leadership, particularly in rural contexts where leadership is shaped by intensified socio-cultural expectations, limited resources, and heightened community visibility (UN, 2023). International and European research shows that rural school leadership is often characterised by increased workloads, role overload, and blurred professional–private boundaries, conditions that disproportionately affect women (Clarke & Knights, 2015; Oplatka, 2016). In post-Soviet settings such as Kazakhstan, these challenges are further complicated by historical governance legacies, ongoing education reforms, and deeply embedded gender norms. Yet, rural women’s leadership experiences in Central Asia remain largely absent from international scholarship. This qualitative study explores the experiences of female rural school principals in Kazakhstan, focusing on how they access and sustain leadership roles within intersecting gendered, institutional, and socio-historical constraints. The study is guided by the overarching research question: How do female rural school principals in Kazakhstan navigate the intersecting gendered, institutional, and socio-historical barriers that shape their accession to and persistence in school leadership? This question is examined through three interrelated lines of inquiry: (1) how rural women principals narrate their pathways into leadership and the discourses shaping these trajectories; (2) the challenges they encounter in sustaining leadership roles within rural institutional, bureaucratic, and community contexts; and (3) how they perform and negotiate leadership identities within prevailing rural gender norms. The primary objective of the study is to centre the lived experiences of rural women principals in order to deepen understanding of how leadership is constructed and enacted at the intersection of gender and rurality. Specifically, the research aims to examine gendered processes of accession to leadership in rural schools, analyse the institutional and socio-cultural challenges affecting leadership sustainability, and explore how women principals exercise agency within constrained rural environments. The study is informed by poststructuralist and postcolonial feminist theoretical perspectives on gender, power, and leadership. Poststructuralist theory conceptualises leadership as a socially constructed and discursively produced practice rather than a neutral or universally transferable set of skills (Foucault, 1980; Blackmore & Sachs, 2012). This lens enables analysis of how gendered leadership norms particularly expectations of moral authority, care, and self-sacrifice are intensified in rural school contexts where principals are highly visible and embedded within local communities. Postcolonial feminist theory provides a critical framework for situating rural women’s leadership within Kazakhstan’s post-Soviet socio-historical context, shaped by Soviet administrative traditions, nation-building processes, and contemporary reforms influenced by global and European policy agendas (Milligan & Tikly, 2016). This approach challenges Western-centric models of leadership that often overlook rurality and context, and foregrounds how global governance reforms are reinterpreted in rural, resource-constrained settings. By contributing insights from rural Kazakhstan, the study enriches European and international debates on gender, rural education, and leadership equity. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Given the limited empirical research on rural women’s school leadership in Kazakhstan, the study adopts a basic qualitative research design (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This approach is appropriate for exploring participants’ perspectives in depth and capturing the complex interplay of gender, rurality, institutional structures, and personal biographies shaping leadership experiences. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews with female principals from rural mainstream (state-funded) schools across two socio-culturally distinct regions of Kazakhstan: a predominantly Kazakh-speaking Western region and a more ethnically and linguistically diverse Central region (Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on statistics, 2025). Purposive sampling was used to ensure variation in ethnicity, language of instruction, school size, and local economic conditions. Eligibility was limited to principals with between two and six years of leadership experience, allowing participants to reflect on both their accession to leadership and the challenges of sustaining their roles in rural contexts. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The study is expected to demonstrate that leadership trajectories of female rural school principals in Kazakhstan are shaped by heightened responsibility, intensified emotional labour, and strong moral accountability to local communities. Accession to leadership is likely to be characterised by gradual, negotiated processes rather than linear career progression, often influenced by local needs rather than formal ambition. Findings are expected to show that rural principals face distinctive challenges, including resistance to educational change from teaching staff, staffing shortages, and financial inequities arising from salary structures that sometimes disadvantage principals relative to teachers. At the same time, rural women principals are anticipated to report strong commitment to students from socially vulnerable backgrounds, positioning care and relational labour as central to their leadership practice. Despite structural and gendered constraints, the study is expected to highlight women principals’ agency and resilience, particularly through relational leadership, community engagement, and the strategic reworking of gendered expectations into sources of moral authority. Rather than viewing care as a limitation, participants are likely to frame it as a leadership resource that enables trust, legitimacy, and sustainability in rural contexts. By foregrounding rural women’s leadership experiences in a post-Soviet setting, the study contributes to European and international debates on gender equity, rural education, and leadership reform. It challenges universalised leadership models and underscores the need for context-sensitive, gender-responsive rural leadership policies that recognise relational labour and address the structural realities of rural schooling. References Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on statistics. (2025). Retrieved June 22, 2025, from https://www.stat.gov.kz/ Blackmore, J., & Sachs, J. (2012). Performing and reforming leaders: Gender, educational restructuring, and organizational change. Suny Press. Clarke, C. A., & Knights, D. (2015). Careering through academia: Securing identities or engaging ethical subjectivities?. Human relations, 68(12), 1865-1888. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715570978 Foucault, M. (1980). The history of sexuality: Interview. Oxford Literary Review, 4(2), 3-14. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons. Milligan, L. O., & Tikly, L. (2016). English as a medium of instruction in postcolonial contexts: Moving the debate forward. Comparative Education, 52(3), 277-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2016.1185251 Oplatka, I. (2016). “Irresponsible leadership” and unethical practices in schools: A conceptual framework of the “dark side” of educational leadership. In The dark side of leadership: Identifying and overcoming unethical practice in organizations. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. UN. (2023). Gender equality and the global goals: A report on the state of play. United Nations Publishing. https://www.un.org/publications/genderequality2023 33. Gender and Education
Paper Gender Beliefs and Gender-Related Practices: Insights From Teachers and Leaders of One Estonian School 1: Tallinn University, Estonia; 2: University of Vienna; 3: University of Helsinki; 4: Åbo Akademi University Presenting Author:Teachers’ and leaders’ gendered beliefs and practices shape students’ learning experiences, yet Estonian schools lack systematic approaches to address these dynamics. This study aimed to explore teachers’ and school leadership team members’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘leaders’) gender beliefs and gender-related practices. The research questions were formulated as follows: How are gender beliefs manifested by teachers and school leadership team members? What kinds of gender-related practices in schools are mentioned by teachers and school leadership team members? The conceptual framework draws on Deaux’s (1985) theory of the gender belief system, characterized as mental schemas shaped and reinforced through socialization (Whitley & Kite, 2010). This system integrates components such as gender stereotypes, gender role attitudes, personal beliefs about gender roles, the perceptions of individuals who violate these norms, gender identity and sexual orientation (Kite et al., 2023). Gender stereotypes are central to this framework, reflecting culturally shared assumptions (Whitley & Kite, 2010) that help determine perceived violations of gender norms (Kite et al., 2023). The study adopts Hyde et al.’s (2019) approach, defining gender as a flexible, multidimensional, and socially constructed concept extending beyond binary categories. Focus group interviews with four teachers and four leadership team members from one school were conducted using a qualitative abductive research strategy and thematic analysis. The findings revealed themes on gender stereotypes, roles, transgender and gender-diverse students, sexual orientation, students’ interests, and gender-related practices in schools. Teachers and leaders held varying and sometimes contradictory gender beliefs, exhibiting both stereotypical views and awareness of biases. Moreover, they were open to dialogue, with some willing to adjust their views. While perceiving their schools as gender-supportive, they acknowledged broader gender inequality issues and practices. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Participants The study was conducted in one relatively large Estonian general education school located in an urban area catering to 7–18-year-old students. The authors employed convenience sampling in selecting the school (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A total of eight members of the school staff showed interest in participating. Focus groups of teachers and leaders were formed. Data collection To ensure balanced discussions, the focus groups were conducted separately for the teachers and leaders in February 2024, ensuring balanced discussion and strict data confidentiality, adhering to the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA, 2023). The study used the Qualitative Attitude Approach (QAA) and vignettes to explore gender attitudes and beliefs. Within the QAA framework, attitudes are understood as internalized personal constructs relating individuals to social and cultural contexts (Autonen-Vaaraniemi, 2022; Vesala & Rantanen, 2007), and the vignettes were specifically designed using the Skilling and Stylianides (2020) framework. The interview plan consisted of background questions, eight QAA statements and three vignettes based on previous research on teachers’ gender beliefs, attitudes and practices (Gajda et al., 2022; Hyde, 2005; Meece et al., 2006), and some questions related to them. The interview plan was piloted with a group of master’s students (ed. sciences) who also worked in education, after which the interview plan was slightly improved. The focus group interviews were divided into two sessions: a QAA session where participants discussed individual written statements and a vignette session where participants read and discussed short stories based on guiding questions.The interviews, totaling 240 minutes, were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. Data analysis The study used a qualitative abductive strategy (integrating inductive and deductive analysis) to identify discrepancies and knowledge gaps. Thematic analysis with the codebook approach was chosen for its flexibility. Data coding utilized QCAmap (Mayring & Fenzl, 2022). Initial codes emerged inductively from the data, grounded in participant perspectives. To ensure reliability, investigator triangulation involved two authors independently coding and developing the codebook through discussion. Deductive coding later refined the codebook using theoretical perspectives. Themes that emerged inductively included beliefs about students’ interests and gender-related practices in schools. Themes derived from deductive coding included gender stereotypes, gender roles, transgender and gender-diverse students and sexual orientation. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The aim of this study was to explore the gender beliefs and gender-related practices exhibited by teachers and members of school leadership teams. Regarding gender beliefs, the teachers held mixed views on cognitive and behavioral differences that ranged from beliefs in inherent biological distinctions to questioning the validity of such claims. Stereotypes about boys being inherently better at maths and girls at languages were widely recognized. The participants expressed a commitment to equal treatment yet described distinct behavioral patterns where boys externalized conflict and girls internalized it, while they emphasized their responsibility to support transgender and gender-diverse students despite potential parental opposition. Beliefs about sexual orientation revealed that gender nonconformity was frequently matched with homosexuality. Finally, while the teachers advocated for supporting individual student interests regardless of gender norms, they expressed uncertainty about how to effectively challenge stereotypes. Regarding gender-related practices, when talking about gendered learning opportunities, the participants described efforts to challenge outdated subject divides, although they acknowledged that peer pressure often causes students to hide their non-conforming interests. Teachers reported striving for equal engagement and welcoming feedback on biases, yet school leaders noted that boys still frequently receive more attention than girls. Co-education was the standard for them, but there are still instances of informal segregation in the classroom. Support for transgender and gender-diverse students included structural measures like gender-neutral facilities and the use of chosen names, yet challenges remained, illustrated by administrative conflicts over staff members refusing to use preferred names. While educators advocated for fair assessment, everyday practices continued to reinforce gender norms through the use of gendered language, behavioral expectations for girls, and school uniform policies. The findings highlight the need for school-wide coherence to address mixed beliefs, revealing knowledge gaps that hinder action and a persistent gap between inclusive intentions and everyday gendered practices. References ALLEA. (2023). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (Revised ed.). Berlin: ALLEA. https://doi.org/10.26356/ECOC Autonen-Vaaraniemi, L. (2022). Family professionals attitudes and stance-taking on post-divorce fatherhood: a qualitative attitude approach. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 13(1), 56-81. https://doi.org/10.18357/ijcyfs131202220658 Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. Deaux, K. (1985). The construction of gender stereotypes: A social-cognitive perspective. In A. H. Eagly (Ed.), Social psychology of gender (pp. 45-78). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gajda, A., Bójko, A., & Stoecker, E. (2022). The vicious circle of stereotypes: Teachers’ awareness of and responses to students’ gender-stereotypical behaviour. PloS one, 17(6), e0269007. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269007 Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307 Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American psychologist, 60(6), 581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581 Kite, M. E., Whitley Jr, B. E., & Wagner, L. S. (2023). Psychology of prejudice and discrimination: Fourth Edition. Routledge. Mayring, P., & Fenzl, T. (2022). QCAmap (Version 2020) [Web application]. Verein zur Förderung Qualitativer Forschung – Association for Supporting Qualitative Research (ASQ). https://www.qcamap.org Meece, J. L., Glinke, B. & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 351-373. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.7 Skilling, K., & Stylianides, G. J. (2020). Using vignettes in educational research: a framework for vignette construction. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 541-556. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1704243 Vesala, K. M., & Rantanen, T. (Eds.). (2007). Argumentaatio ja tulkinta: Laadullisen asennetutkimuksen lähestymistapa. Gaudeamus. Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Kite, M. E. (2010). The psychology of prejudice and discrimination (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. 33. Gender and Education
Paper Organizational Structure of Schools and Sexism: A Modeling Study with The Variables of Organizational Justice, Self-Efficacy, Work-Family Conflict and Organizational Silence Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Turkey (Türkiye) Presenting Author:Purpose: Although it is generally claimed that organisational structures possess a gender-neutral characteristic (Acker, 1990; Martin, 2000), there are also studies showing that masculine characteristics are embedded within organisational structures. The most striking of these are the ‘gender-neutral organisational employee model’ and ‘hierarchical organisational structure’ characteristics. The ‘genderless organisational employee model,’ which requires employees to dedicate themselves and all their time to the organisation they work for, prevents women living in traditional societies from dedicating themselves to their organisations like men do, due to their responsibilities at home (Acker, 1990; Acker, 2012; Hoy and Miskel, 2015; Martin, 2000; Van Echtelt et al., 2009). Furthermore, in Weber's ideal bureaucracy, the requirement for the ideal organisational employee to be devoid of emotions and possess the ability to make decisions objectively requirement (Hoy and Miskel, 2015; Martin, 2000) leads to the negative perception of feminine traits (emotional, caring, subjective, personal, maternal, egalitarian, etc.), which are mostly attributed to women (Martin, 2000). This ideal bureaucracy, particularly in societies where sexism is internalised, prevents women from having advantages such as increasing their educational level as much as men or being employed under intense working conditions (Hoy and Miskel, 2015; Martin, 2000). This ideal bureaucracy, particularly in societies where sexism is internalised, prevents women from having advantages such as increasing their educational level as much as men or being employed under intense working conditions (Hoy and Miskel, 2015; Martin, 2000). This study aims to investigate the opinions of school administrators and teachers regarding organizational structure and sexism, and to analyze the correlation between these concepts. To examine this relationship, a structural equation model with the mediating effect of the variables "organizational justice", "self-efficacy", "organizational silence" and "work-family conflict" will be developed and tested. This study sought answers to the following questions. 1. Are organisational structure, organisational justice, self-efficacy, organisational silence and work-family conflict in schools meaningful predictors of gender discrimination in school management? 2. Do organisational justice, self-efficacy, organisational silence, and work-family conflict have a mediating effect on the relationship between organisational structure and gender discrimination in school management? 3. Does gender discrimination in school management have a significant effect on organisational structure, organisational justice, self-efficacy, organisational silence, and work-family conflict? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Since this study aims to test a model created to reveal the relationships between the variables of “organizational structure”, “sexism”, “organizational justice”, "self-efficacy”, “work-family conflict” and “organizational silence”, the relational design, one of the quantitative research designs, was utilized. The study sample consists of 400 participants, including 18 kindergarten teachers and administrators, 94 elementary school teachers and administrators, 121 middle school teachers and administrators, and 167 high school teachers and administrators from both private and public schools affiliated with the Ministry of National Education in the central district of Kütahya. In this study, data was collected using the “self-efficacy”, “organizational silence”, “work-family conflict”, and “organizational justice” measurement tools, along with an “organizational structure in schools” measurement tool (adapted by the researcher) and a “sexism in school management” measurement tool (developed by the researcher). Frequency, percentage, arithmetic mean, t-test, ANOVA, and correlation analyses were used to analyze the data obtained for the study. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis were used to ensure the construct validity of the measurement tools and path analysis was used to test the structural equation model. IBM SPSS Statictics 20, Lisrel 8.51 and IBM SPSS AMOS 22.0 programs were used for these analyses. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Participants' perceptions of the “Sexism in School Administration” were calculated as neutral, with an average of 2.82. When the participants' perceptions were examined according to the sub-dimensions of the measurement tool, the mean values were calculated as 2.43 for "Management Skills", 3.36 for "Preference" and 2.66 for "Human Relations". It can be seen that the mean value of the “Preference” dimension is higher than the other dimensions. Another striking finding is that 70.2% of the participants had an implicit perception of sexism or a sexist perception. It was found that the perceptions of teachers and administrators about the organizational structure of the school were at the "agree" level with an average of 3.76. It was observed that the participants' perceptions for the sub-dimensions of "Division of Labor", "Technical Competence", "Hierarchy", "Formatting", and "Objectivity" were at the "agree" level with mean values of 3.79, 4.12, 3.66, 3.84, and 3.38, respectively. It was seen that the participants perceive both the bureaucratic structure (X = 3.63) and the professional structure (X = 3.96) at the "agree" level. Considering these findings, the schools located in the central district of Kütahya are perceived by the participants as "Weberian school type". In the path analysis, it was found that the variable "Organizational Structure in Schools" had an indirect effect on "Sexism in School Administration" through the mediating variables "Organizational Justice", "Self-Efficacy", "Organizational Silence", and "Work-Family Conflict". References Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & society, 4(2), 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124390004002002 Acker, J. (2012). Gendered organizations and intersectionality: Problems and possibilities. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(3), 214-224. https://doi.org/10.1108/02610151211209072Babic, A., & Hansez, I. (2021). The glass ceiling for women managers: antecedents and consequences for work-family interface and well-being at work.Frontiers in psychology,12, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.618250Bearman, S., & Amrhein, M. (2014). Girls, women, and internalized sexism.Internalized oppression: The psychology of marginalized groups, EJR David, (ed.), New York, NY: Springer Publishing, 191-225. Becker, J. C., & Sibley, C. G. (2016). Sexism. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.),Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination(pp. 315–336). Psychology Press. Bombuwela, P. M., & De Alwis, A. C. (2013). Effects of glass ceiling on women career development in private sector organizations–Case of Sri Lanka. Journal of Competitiveness 5(2), 3-19. Bowen, F., & Blackmon, K. (2003). Spirals of silence: The dynamic effects of diversity on organizational voice.Journal of management Studies,40(6), 1393-1417. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00385Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict.Journal of Vocational behavior,56(2), 249-276. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713Cheung, F. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2010). Women at the top: Powerful leaders define success as work+ family in a culture of gender.American psychologist,65(3), 182. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017309Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory and Practice. The Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.2307/258093 Cudd, Ann E. & Jones, Leslie E. (2005). Sexism. In R. G. Frey & Christopher Gibson, J. L. (2000). Organizations: behavior, structure, processes. Irwin. Greenberg, J. & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behaviour in organizations. Pearson Prentice Hall Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J. A. (2005). Handbook of organizational justice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Wellman (eds.), A Companion to Applied Ethics(pp. 102–117). Blackwell. Hall, R.H. (1968). Professionalization and Bureaucratization.American Sociological Review, 33(1), 92-104. https://doi.org/10.2307/2092242 Herr, R. M., Li, J., Bosch, J. A., Schmidt, B., DeJoy, D. M., Fischer, J. E., & Loerbroks, A. (2014). Psychometric properties of a German organizational justice questionnaire (G- OJQ) and its association with self-rated health: findings from the Mannheim Industrial Cohort Studies (MICS). International archives of occupational and environmental health, 87(1), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-012-0839-4Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307- 0919.1014Huang, L., & Huang, W. (2016). Interactional justice and employee silence: The roles of procedural justice and affect.Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal,44(5), 837-852. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2016.44.5.837 33. Gender and Education
Paper Gender, School Tracks and Competencies in University Field Choices: Evidence from Italy INVALSI, Italy Presenting Author:Gender equality in education remains a global policy priority, as gendered patterns of participation persist despite overall improvements in educational attainment (UNESCO, 2023). In Italy, females are more likely to enrol in university (Tocchioni, 2025) and have a lower propensity to drop out (Atzeni et al., 2022) than males. However, marked horizontal segregation across fields of study persists: females remain underrepresented in most STEM fields and overrepresented in the humanities, nursing, and social sciences (Priulla et al., 2021). The choice of the field of study represents a crucial life-course moment with long consequences. Indeed, gender inequalities in career prospects are largely due to the underrepresentation of women in engineering and computing and to their overrepresentation in the humanities and the social sciences (Barone & Assirelli, 2020).
Within this framework, numerous studies have investigated gender differences in enrolment, focusing often on STEM degrees and examining the role of prior educational pathways, concentrating on a specific upper-secondary school track (Priulla et al., 2024; Giannantoni & Falzetti,2025), as well as other individual and contextual factors shaping students’ entry choices. Some contributions rely on administrative data for the Italian university context (Contini et al., 2018; De Angelis et al., 2016), while others rely on surveys or large-scale experiments such as information campaigns that can improve both university enrolment and the quality of students’ educational choices, as demonstrated by Ballarino et al. (2022).
The aim of this contribution is to analyse how gender interacts with other potentially relevant factors—such as socio-economic background, migration background, and local labour market characteristics—in shaping students’ choices of university fields of study and how these factors operate within different tracks of upper secondary education (academic, technical, and vocational). By integrating administrative data on university enrolment with INVALSI assessment data, the analysis also examines the potential interaction between the choice of university field and students’ competencies in Italian language and mathematics. This allows us to assess, for instance, whether within each gender the propensity to enrol in scientific or humanities-related university programmes is associated with differential skill profiles, or whether gender stereotypes persist in directing students towards specific fields of study regardless of their acquired competencies during secondary education. A key aspect of our approach lies in extending the analysis of gender-related issues beyond the well-documented under-representation of women in STEM disciplines. We symmetrically address patterns of both over- and under-representation of male and female students across a broad range of university fields. This is made possible by a more fine-grained classification of fields of study, which distinguishes, among other dimensions, between technological STEM disciplines and more abstract or bio-mathematical STEM fields, as well as between different subdomains within the humanities (e.g. literary versus socio-economic areas). This study highlights how gender-based selection mechanisms already operate at the point of university entry, shaping differentiated academic trajectories within the Italian higher education system. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The analysis is conducted on a cohort of students graduated in the 2018-2019 school year and enrolled in university in the academic year 2019-2020. The focus is on students enrolled in Italian Bachelor’s degrees, as recorded in the University Register with the exclusion of students enrolled abroad or in online universities. The dataset is constructed through the integration of multiple data sources: Italian Ministry of Education, National University Register and the National Institute for the Evaluation of the Education System (INVALSI). The data include detailed information on individual characteristics and prior educational pathways, such as parental education, school regularity and the Socio-Economic and Cultural Status of Families (ESCS) indicator (Campodifiori et al., 2010), upper-secondary school track as well as INVALSI scores in grade 13. At the university level, degree programmes are grouped into the following disciplinary areas: Arts and Literature, Economics, Law and Social Sciences, Health Studies, and STEM. For this analysis STEM area is further disaggregated into two distinct categories, core (e.g., bio-mathematical sciences) and technological STEM, based on the specific degree programmes included in each field. This distinction is motivated by the markedly different composition of these subfields. The analysis relies on a sequence of multinomial logistic regression models of increasing complexity. The models estimate the probability of enrolling in each disciplinary area as a function of gender and pre-university characteristics. The set of control variables includes geographical macro-area, origin, upper-secondary school track and student regularity, INVALSI scores in Italian and Mathematics and additional contextual controls. This sequential modelling strategy allows us to control the conceptual and interpretative complexity arising from the simultaneous consideration of a wide range of individual and contextual determinants of students’ educational choices and outcomes. The large-scale nature of the dataset—covering a cohort of several tens of thousands of students enrolled in university—makes it possible to estimate not only main effects but also interactions between key covariates, including higher-order interactions. In particular, this approach enables us to assess whether the relationship between gender and university field choice varies systematically according to the type of secondary school attended. Model selection is supported by AIC and BIC comparisons, which indicate a better fit for the more complex specification with interaction terms. Additionally, predicted probabilities and conditional marginal effects are computed. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The distribution of university field choices within the cohort summarises enrolment patterns across disciplines. Socio-economic fields are the most frequently chosen (30.5%), followed by technological STEM (24.3%), humanities (19.0%), core STEM (14.2%), and health-related fields (11.9%). Consistent with existing literature, from model results men are more likely to enrol in STEM, while women are more concentrated in humanities-related fields. However, this pattern masks substantial heterogeneity within STEM: gender differences are largely confined to technological disciplines and do not extend to core scientific or bio-medical fields. These patterns underscore the importance of distinguishing between core and technological STEM. Predicted probabilities indicate that upper secondary school type plays a key role in structuring gendered enrolment patterns. Among scientific high school graduates, women are more likely to enrol in core STEM, while men are predominantly oriented towards technological STEM; in technical tracks, the gender gap in technological STEM is particularly pronounced in favour of men. By contrast, graduates from classical and other academic tracks mainly enrol in humanities and socio-economic fields, with more balanced gender distributions. Focusing on student competencies, marginal effects based on INVALSI mathematics scores show a positive gradient in enrolment in technological STEM fields, particularly among male students. By contrast, mathematics performance is only weakly associated with enrolment in core STEM fields and corresponds to lower probabilities of enrolling in literary programmes among graduates from classical upper secondary schools. Beyond additional analyses of interactions between gender, school type, socio-economic background, and student competencies—which are omitted here for reasons of space—a promising avenue for future research consists in extending the analysis to students who do not enrol in university. This would allow for a more comprehensive assessment of the mechanisms shaping post-secondary educational choices, while addressing potential selection issues inherent in analyses restricted to university entrants. References ALMALAUREA (2024). Rapporto 2024 sul profilo e sulla condizione occupazionale dei laureati, https://www.almalaurea.it ANVUR. (2023). Rapporto biennale sullo stato del sistema universitario e della ricerca. https://www.anvur.it/it/dati-e-pubblicazioni/rapporto-biennale. Atzeni, G., et al. (2022). Drop-Out Decisions in a Cohort of Italian Universities. In: Teaching, Research and Academic Careers: An Analysis of the Interrelations and Impacts. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 71-103. Ballarino, G., Filippin, A., Abbiati, G., Argentin, G., Barone, C., & Schizzerotto, A. (2022). The effects of an information campaign beyond university enrolment: A large-scale field experiment on the choices of high school students. Economics of Education Review, 91, 102308. Barone, C., & Assirelli, G. (2020). Gender segregation in higher education: an empirical test of seven explanations. Higher Education, 79(1), 55–78. Campodifiori, E., Figura, E., Papini, M., & Ricci, R. (2010). Un indicatore di status socioeconomico-culturale degli allievi della quinta primaria in Italia (Working Paper No. 2). INVALSI. http://www.invalsi.it/download/wp/wp02_Ricci.pdf. Contini, D., Cugnata, F., & Scagni, A. (2018). Social selection in higher education. Enrolment, dropout and timely degree attainment in Italy. Higher Education, 75(5), 785-808. Correll, S.J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1691–1730. De Angelis, I., Mariani, V., Modena, F., & Montanaro, P. (2016). Immatricolazioni, percorsi accademici e mobilità degli studenti italiani. Questioni di economia e finanza (Occasional Papers) n. 354 della Banca d’Italia. Giannantoni, P., & Falzetti, P. (2025). EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES TO “COUNT”? A LONGITUDINAL POPULATION STUDY ABOUT CHOICE OF STEM AT UNIVERSITY BY GENDER. Italian Journal of Applied Statistics. Priulla,A., Albano, A., D'Angelo, N., & Attanasio, M. (2024). A machine learning approach to predict university enrolment choices through students' high school background in Italy. ArXiv abs/2403.13819. Priulla, A., D’Angelo, N., & Attanasio, M. (2021). An analysis of Italian university students’ performance through segmented regression models: gender differences in STEM courses. Genus, 77(1), 11. Tocchioni, V., Milone, S., & Lombardi, G. (2025). Gender disparities in school-to-university transition in Italy: the role played by the socio-economic condition and the type of high school. RIVISTA ITALIANA DI ECONOMIA, DEMOGRAFIA E STATISTICA, 67-78. UNESCO. (2023). UNESCO in action for gender equality: 2022–2023. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387300. | ||