National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$48.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty (2010)
Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine (CWSEM)
Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT)

Citation Manager

. "1 Introduction." Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
25
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty

about research universities will also likely serve as a useful starting point for the examination of other types of higher education institutions.

Third, this study will focus primarily on full-time, regularly appointed, professorial faculty. Due to the committee’s interest in what has traditionally been the typical academic career path within Research I institutions, the target population is limited to assistant, associate, and full professors. By and large, these are the faculty who are tenure eligible, who both teach and conduct research, who supervise most of the graduate students who will be the next generation of scholars, and who are most likely to receive the widest range of institutional support. Instructors, lecturers, postdocs, adjunct faculty, clinical faculty, and research faculty are not included. While these faculty are important, they have very different career paths and warrant separate study.

Fourth, although data are provided for many natural science and engineering disciplines in assessing historical gender differences in academia, the new data collected for this report by the two surveys of department chairs and faculty focus on six fields: the biological sciences, chemistry, civil engineering, electrical engineering, mathematics, and physics.14 The purpose of the primary data collection on a subset of fields was to allow for an examination of the career paths for men and women facing similar expectations and constraints. Although the findings may identify male/female differences prevalent throughout science and

at both the graduate and undergraduate levels. In 1998, the nation’s 127 research universities awarded more than 42 percent of all S&E bachelor’s degrees and 52 percent of all S&E master’s degrees.” For example, of the 8,350 Ph.D.s granted in the life sciences in 2002, 2,608 Ph.D.s (31 percent) were granted by just 20 Research I institutions (Hoffer et al., 2003). These institutions “are also the most conducive organizational contexts for a prestigious research career” (NRC, 2001a:124). On federal academic S&E support, see Richard J. Bennof, Federal Science and Engineering Obligations to Academic and Nonprofit Institutions Reached Record Highs in FY 2002, NSF InfoBrief, June 2004, (NSF 04-324).

14

The four science fields were chosen, partly because they represent the “standard” or well-known science fields. In addition, professional associations in the areas of chemistry, mathematics, and physics collect data on their fields. Readers should note that “biological sciences” is a broad term, and may include agricultural or health sciences. Likewise, mathematics data sometimes include data for statistics or computer science. Finally, physics data may include astronomy.

Civil engineering was chosen as a middle ground among the various engineering fields. According to Gibbons (2004), during the 2002-2003 academic year, more than 8,000 students received civil engineering baccalaureate degrees—the fourth largest amount—and women received 23.4 percent of those degrees. This lies between a high for environmental engineering (42.1 percent of degrees went to women) and a low of 11.7 percent for engineering technology. About 3,600 students received master’s degrees—the fifth largest amount—and women received 25.2 percent of them, between 42.2 percent for environmental engineering and 9.0 percent for petroleum. The third largest amount—631 doctoral degrees were awarded and women received 18.4 percent of them, between 33.3 percent for engineering management and zero percent in mining and in architectural engineering. Finally, for faculty, civil engineering had the third highest number of faculty members: 3,320, and 10.9 percent of tenured/tenure-track teaching faculty were women. Fields with the lowest percentage of women were aerospace, petroleum, and mining (all at 5.0 percent); while the highest were biomedical (16.6 percent), industrial/manufacturing (15.4 percent), and environmental (14.7).

Page
25
Front Matter (R1-R18)
Summary (1-14)
1 Introduction (15-30)
2 Status of Women in Academic Science and Engineering in 2004 and 2005 (31-38)
3 Gender Differences in Academic Hiring (39-69)
4 Professional Activities, Institutional Resources, Climate, and Outcomes (70-115)
5 Gender Differences in Tenure and Promotion (116-152)
6 Key Findings and Recommendations (153-168)
Appendixes (169-170)
Appendix 1-1: Biographical Information on Committee Members (171-177)
Appendix 1-2: List of Research I Institutions (178-178)
Appendix 1-3: Committee Meeting Agenda (179-180)
Appendix 1-4: The Surveys (181-188)
Appendix 1-5: Survey Instruments (189-215)
Appendix 1-6: Departments in Survey (216-248)
Appendix 2-1: Review of Literature and Relevant Research (249-266)
Appendix 2-2: Previous Research on Factors Contributing to Gender Differences Among Faculty (267-274)
Appendix 3-1: Review of Literature and Research on Factors Associated with a Higher Proportion of Female Applicants (275-283)
Appendix 3-2: Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences for the Probability That There Are No Female Applicants (284-284)
Appendix 3-3: Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences Based on the Modeled Probability of the Percentage of Applicants That Are Female (285-286)
Appendix 3-4: Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences Based on the Modeled Probability of at Least One Female Candidate Interviewed (287-288)
Appendix 3-5: Doctoral Degrees Awarded by All Doctoral-Granting Institutions, by Field, Gender, and Year (289-289)
Appendix 3-6: Doctoral Degrees Awarded by Discipline and Gender for Research I Institutions, 1999-2003 (290-290)
Appendix 3-7: Marginal Mean and Variance of Transformed Response Variables (291-294)
Appendix 3-8: Main Considerations for Taking a Position by Number of Respondents Saying "Yes" (295-295)
Appendix 4-1: Distribution of Undergraduate Course Load for Faculty by Gender and Discipline (296-297)
Appendix 4-2: Percentage of Faculty Members Who Do No Graduate Teaching (298-298)
Appendix 4-3: Percentage of Faculty Members Receiving a Reduced Teaching Load When Hired (299-299)
Appendix 4-4: Percentage of Faculty Members Who Served on an Undergraduate Thesis or Honors Committee (300-300)
Appendix 4-5: Percentage of Faculty Members Who Served on and Chaired an Undergraduate Thesis or Honors Committee (301-301)
Appendix 4-6: Distribution of Number of Graduate Thesis or Honors Committees for Research I Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty: Men/Women (302-302)
Appendix 4-7: Percentage of Time Spent in Administration or Committee Work on Campus and Service to the Profession Outside the University for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions: Men/Women (303-303)
Appendix 4-8: Distribution of Number of Service Committees for Research I Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty: Men/Women (304-304)
Appendix 4-9: Mean Salary by Gender and Professorial Rank for Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (305-305)
Appendix 4-10: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Summer Support (306-306)
Appendix 4-11: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Travel Funds (307-307)
Appendix 4-12: Median Square Footage of Lab Space of Faculty Who Report Doing Experimental Work (308-308)
Appendix 4-13: Faculty Who Have Received More Lab Space Since Hire (Values Are Percentages) (309-309)
Appendix 4-14: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Sufficient Equipment (310-310)
Appendix 4-15: Number of Postdoctorate Students for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (presented by Men and Women) (311-311)
Appendix 4-16: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Sufficient Clerical Support (312-312)
Appendix 4-17: Percentage of Faculty Members Stating That They Had a Mentor (313-313)
Appendix 4-18: Distribution of the Number of Graduate Students for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (presented by Men and Women) (314-314)
Appendix 4-19: Mean Number of Articles Published in Refereed Journals (sole and co-authored) Over the Past 3 Years for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (315-315)
Appendix 4-20a: Estimated Probability of Having Grant Funding by Discipline, Gender, and Whether the Faculty Member Has an Assigned Mentor - Assistant Professors Only (316-316)
Appendix 4-20b: Estimated Probability of Having Grant Funding by Discipline, Gender, and Whether the Faculty Member Has an Assigned Mentor - Associate Professors Only (317-317)
Appendix 4-21: Percentage of Faculty Missing Salary Data by Gender and Discipline (318-318)
Appendix 4-22: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions That Were Nominated for at Least One Award (319-319)
Appendix 4-23: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Research I Faculty with Offers to Leave (320-320)
Appendix 4-24: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions Planning to Leave or Retire (321-321)
Appendix 5-1: Knowledge of Tenure Procedures by Gender, Rank, and Presence of a Mentor (322-323)
Appendix 5-2: Detailed Tenure Information from Departmental Survey (324-324)
Appendix 5-3: Time Spent in Both Assistant and Associate Professorships (325-325)
Appendix 5-4: Years Between Starting Employment and Achieving Associate Professor Status, by Gender (326-326)
Appendix 5-5: Years Between Starting Employment and Achieving Full Professor Status, by Gender (327-327)
Appendix 5-6: Patterns of Nonresponse for Tenure Decisions (328-328)
Appendix 5-7: Patterns of Nonresponse for Promotion Decisions (329-329)
Bibliography (330-352)
Index (353-366)