56 percent probability of all-male pools) and mathematics (13 percent actual pools compared to 33 percent probable pools).
For tenured positions, there were significant differences, again, in electrical engineering (42 percent actual all-male interview pools compared to 62 percent probability of all-male pools); mathematics (39 percent actual compared to 44 percent probable); and physics (32 percent actual compared to 35 percent probable). This was not the case for the remaining disciplines, including biology (25 percent actual compared to 18 percent probable; civil engineering (46 percent actual compared to 35 percent probable); and chemistry, which had the greatest difference (50 percent actual compared to 24 percent probable). (Table 3-4)
Finding 3-13: For all disciplines the percentage of tenure-track women who received the first job offer was greater than the percentage in the interview pool. Women received the first offer in 29 percent of the tenure-track and 31 percent of the tenured positions surveyed. Tenure-track women in all these disciplines received a percentage of first offers that was greater than than their percentage in the interview pool. For example, women were 21 percent of the interview pool for tenure-track electrical engineering positions and received 32 percent of the first offers. This finding is also true for tenured positions, with the notable exception of biology, where the interview pool was 33 percent female and women received 22 percent of the first offers. (Tables 3-5 and 3-6)
Finding 3-14: In 95 percent of the tenure-track and 100 percent of the tenured positions where a man was the first choice for a position, a man was ultimately hired. In contrast, in cases where a woman was the first choice, a woman was ultimately hired in only 70 percent of the tenure-track and 77 percent of the tenured positions. When faculty were asked what factors they considered when selecting their current position, the effect of gender was statistically significantly for only one factor—“family-related reasons.” (Figure 3-2; Tables 3-7 and 3-8)
As several of these findings suggest, many women fare well in the hiring process at research-intensive institutions. If women apply for positions at research-intensive institutions, they have better-than-expected chances of being interviewed and receiving offers compared to male job candidates. The likelihood of receiving an interview and ultimately an offer was particularly high, relative to application rates, in fields where women were less well represented, such as engineering and physics. These findings suggest that many departments at research-intensive institutions, both public and private, are making an effort to increase the numbers and percentages of female faculty in the sciences, engineering, and mathematics. At the same time, women continue to be underrepresented in the applicant pool relative to their representation among the pool of recent Ph.D.s.