National Academies Press: OpenBook

Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women? (1992)

Chapter: 5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering

« Previous: 4 Promoting Undergraduate Studies in Science and Engineering
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

5
PROMOTING GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

Joan Sherry

Linda Skidmore Dix

Joan Sherry is a free-lance science writer and editor who works in Chevy Chase, Maryland. Linda Skidmore Dix is the study director for the National Research Council's Committee on Women in Science and Engineering (CWSE). They developed this chapter from the formal presentations and discussions at the conference, ''Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?," held by CWSE at the Beckman Center, Irvine, CA, November 4–5, 1991.

Introduction

The graduate level is the bridge between interest and careers in science and engineering, but the percentage of U.S. students pursuing graduate degrees has begun to decline. Thus, interventions at this level are necessary not only to bring U.S. students into the field, but also to shape their view of themselves, their studies, and their professional colleagues. Graduate-and postdoctoral-level interventions aid the process whereby individuals form the networks that lead to job opportunities, shared research and, ultimately, a sense of the possibilities, both personal and professional, in their chosen fields of study. As shown in Figure 5-1, the percentage of women enrolled in graduate S&E programs is on the rise in all fields except computer science and the social sciences. Of some concern, however, is the lengthening time-to-degree of students pursuing doctorates in science and engineering. In all fields except engineering, women tend to have longer registered time-to-degree (RTD) and total time-to-degree (TTD), which is the total number of years elapsed between earning the baccalaureate and the doctorate, including time not enrolled at a university (Table 5-1). However, in most fields these differences are becoming minimal.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

SOURCES: National Science Foundation, Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering (NSF 90–301), Washington, DC: NSF, 1990, p. 138; Science & Engineering Indicators: 1991 (Tenth Edition) (NSF 91-1), Washington, DC: NSF, 1991, p. 239.

Figure 5-1. Women as a percentage of graduate enrollment, by science and engineering field, 1988 and 1990.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-1: Median Years to Degrees for Doctorate Recipients, by Demographic Group and Broad Field, 1990

 

NOTE: Medians are based on the number of individuals who have provided complete information about their postbaccalaureate education. See technical notes in Appendix C for rates of nonresponse to the applicable questions.

* Includes mathematics and computer sciences.

SOURCE: Delores H. Thurgood and Joanne M. Weinman, Summary Report 1990. Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1991.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

Experience indicates that successful programs at the graduate level of education are addressed to specifically identified needs, demonstrate multiple linkages between graduate school and other populations, and are characterized by substantial faculty or mentor commitment. This chapter discusses some model graduate and postdoctoral interventions sponsored by professional societies, universities, private foundations and companies, and federal agencies. The Irvine conference presentations significantly broadened the definition of intervention at the graduate level by suggesting a wide spectrum of programs and outcomes aimed at recruitment and retention of women in S&E (Marrett, 1991). While many of the interventions discussed involve financial aid programs, others go beyond. The spectrum includes:

  • studies of the patterns of participation by women in all activities at the graduate level. The processes by which men and women move through graduate school activities are not necessarily the same; do we know in what ways they are different?

  • initiatives and efforts that are not interventions in a structural sense but nevertheless affect outcomes—for example, student membership in professional societies, caucuses, associations, support groups, and coalitions. Such associations provide intangible as well as tangible benefits and often benefit older, professional members of the group as much as students.

  • systemic approaches that alter institutions or settings. A teaching fellowship training program that includes training on sensitivity to gender issues is an intervention that can change the setting in which teaching and research are done and in which the pursuit of careers takes place.

  • grassroots efforts. All effective programs are not necessarily created centrally and may benefit the creators as much or more than the populations at whom they are directed.

Interventions Sponsored by Professional Societies

Professional societies make a valuable and positive contribution to the promotion of women in science and engineering. According to Kagiwada (1991), such societies provide proof that women scientists and engineers do exist and offer a forum for recognizing outstanding performance by women professionals in S&E fields; serve as points of contact for women who wish to interact with others in their specific disciplines or in science and engineering

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

in general; provide financial aid to undergraduate and graduate students as well as to postdoctoral women who need a boost to continue their work and their careers; offer career advancement training seminars and workshops as well as technical seminars for the presentation of research papers; offer opportunities for leadership and the development of managerial and administrative skills through volunteer participation in the society's organization and work; and offer friendship and camaraderie with fellow members, thus forming a network that cuts across many traditional boundaries.

Graduate Women in Science (GWIS) is an example of such a professional society. It was founded by a group of graduate women students at Cornell in 1921 as a scientific fraternity for women. Membership requires a degree in science or engineering and research or equivalent professional experience. The society has provided financial aid from its earliest days, when members collected and distributed $50 to members needing money for research. Currently, potential award recipients are identified from responses to an annual advertisement in Science magazine. The total annual amount of the awards is derived from endowments made from the estates of members. In the 1990–91 fiscal year, 270 applications were received and 7 awards made, totaling $20,000 (Kagiwada, 1991).1

At the graduate level, the need for mentoring continues with an increased focus on career advice and professional goals. The structure of the graduate mentoring program sponsored by the Association for Women in Science, with funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, remains very similar to the format of its undergraduate program (see Chapter 4). Chapter activities facilitate communication and support among women at all levels who are interested in science, as well as provide mechanisms for women science professionals to share their experience and understanding of the social structure and function of the scientific community with students. An emphasis on career-directing occurs with discussions on career paths, balancing a career and family, dual career families as well as greater exposure to the scientific

1  

In addition to the graduate level aid, several local chapters provide undergraduate scholarships by soliciting donations from local companies. The association also presents recognition awards to outstanding women in science and engineering.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

community through attendance at professional meetings and development of colleagues beyond the institution in which the mentoring program is based.

Other programs sponsored by professional societies are listed in Appendix A. Although most of the programs do not specifically target women, they nevertheless have provided assistance to women.

Interventions Sponsored by Universities

Linkage or interaction at all levels—graduate and undergraduate student bodies, administration, and faculty—was a recurring theme in both the conference presentations and deliberations of successful interventions at the graduate and postdoctoral levels (see, for instance, Sheridan, 1991) and is evident in many of the programs listed in Appendix A. Another recurring theme was the need to identify issues before taking action (Marrett, 1991).

There are many ways to achieve linkages. The programs described below demonstrate three kinds of linkages:

  • administrative/functional, through centralized management of fellowships, access programs, and faculty and teaching assistant (TA) training;

  • institutional, through creation of structures within the university that encourage the interaction of populations and levels; and

  • consortial, through programs implemented at numerous institutional sites and coordinated by an external organization.

A clarification of each of these types of linkages is provided by the illustrative examples given in the text below.

Administrative Linkages

The University of Missouri-Columbia competitive fellowship program for minorities, the Gus T. Ridgel program, initiated in 1989 and targeted mainly but not exclusively toward African-Americans, illustrates administrative linkage. The program provides two-year support for master's students and four-year support for Ph.D. candidates. The $12,000 annual stipend comes from $9,000 in centralized university funds and $3,000 in departmental research or teaching assistantship funds. The commitment of departmental funds encourages faculty participation and helps to assure that minority

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

recipients participate in departmental activities as much as other research (RAs) or teaching assistants (TAs) (Sheridan, 1991). Of the 70 African-American students in the program thus far, 20 are in science and engineering, and 9 of them are women. The program is managed through a single Office of Fellowships and Graduate Student Affairs under an Associate Dean, with responsibility for recruitment of all graduate students, not just minorities. That office also administers the university's graduate access programs. Training of TAs and training and support for excellence in teaching by faculty at Missouri-Columbia are also administered by a single university office, that of the Vice Provost for Minority Affairs and Faculty Development. A number of federal grant programs at the university are both obtained and administered by the same support office, even though the programs may be in different departments.

The present TA training program at Missouri-Columbia includes an intervention that has affected the institutional setting for graduate education. The training program at the university was organized in response to a law passed by the Missouri legislature requiring specialized training or a special exemption for TAs whose native language was not English. The university set up a special program that quickly evolved to a program including most of the American TAs, as well as the foreign-born assistants. The program has been so successful that, over a three-year period, student and parent complaints dropped from repeated to essentially no complaints (Sheridan, 1991). One of the more successful elements in the program, and one that changed gender sensitivity attitudes, has been the videotaping with feedback sessions that are part of the training course. Although the trainers originally assumed gender sensitivity would be more of a problem for foreign trainees than for Americans, this did not turn out to be the case. It was rather a problem of individuals, American as well as foreign, many of whom did not realize what they were doing when addressing women students until they saw themselves on tape. The videotape sessions are now included in training for new faculty, as well as for TAs.

Institutional Linkages

Another example of linkage at Missouri-Columbia is the Graduate Outreach Workshop (G.R.O.W.). The objectives of this student-initiated and student-run program include the following:

to interest all students, especially women and minorities, in science and science careers; to illustrate basic principles of

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

research with real-life examples of graduate research; and to decrease student anxiety about science and science fields (Sheridan, 1991).

The program is directed at junior and senior high school students, and Dean Sheridan reports it started in reaction to an article written by Carl Sagan lamenting the problem of scientific literacy and the decreasing number of younger students going into science. The graduate students said, ''You know, what we are doing is exciting; how come kids in junior high school and high school don't understand it? Maybe we can do something about it." They wrote to a number of high school teachers but received no response. Rather than be dissuaded, the students organized themselves in order to go through the process of obtaining a $2,000 Kellogg grant through the university's extension division. By late 1991, G.R.O.W. had made five presentations and had six more scheduled, all on the original $2,000 grant. A high proportion of the participants are women. There are 20 active G.R.O.W. students, of whom 13 are women, and more are being recruited (by G.R.O.W. students) from several departments in the biomedical sciences.

The importance of the G.R.O.W. example lies as much, or perhaps more, in its effect on the graduate student initiators as on the secondary school students at whom the program is aimed. The example of graduate students endeavoring to communicate to others their own excitement about science while still in graduate school bodes well for the future of the professoriate as well as for research. Furthermore, that concept is endorsed by both students and faculty. For instance, at the Presidential Young Investigator (PYI) Colloquium on U.S. Engineering, Mathematics, and Science Education for the Year 2010 and Beyond, held on November 4–6, 1990, participants noted that:

Students must be active contributors in their own education and in the education of their fellow students.... Prerequisites should not necessarily impede a student's progress; for example, we suggest student tutoring teams be formed in classes with prerequisites in which students will help fellow team members with prerequisite material they know best, and vice versa (NSF, 1992).

Furthermore, the PYIs recommended that higher education

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

develop prestigious teaching internships for engineering, mathematics, and science graduate students aspiring to faculty careers in higher education. The internships would be to recruit and better prepare graduate students for their full responsibilities as future members of academe, and especially to improve their abilities in effective teaching and instructional scholarship (NSF, 1992).

Another institutional linkage program is the University of Maryland's program in toxicology. At that university, retention rather than recruitment of graduate students in the field of toxicology was identified as the real need. To enhance retention, Fowler (1991) points out there must be an environment that permits students to develop confidence in themselves and their work, substantial commitment on the part of faculty, and money to fund the interventions.

The Maryland program, which included 20 women and 10 men in 1991, establishes a confidence-building environment by inviting student-run seminars and including student evaluations of the seminars; encouraging student participation in scientific meetings; and bringing in a series of outside speakers who act as role models or mentors. Another important feature is an open management style that gives the students access to the program director in his/her office at any time. The program gives students up to two years to select an adviser and includes rotating laboratory assignments with faculty during this initial period.

Faculty interest and funding are both aided by the program's focus on multidisciplinary research projects. Grants for multidisciplinary investigations are often easier to obtain than those for narrower projects, but the key factor, according to Director Fowler, is diversity of funding sources, since nothing works all the time.

Even though the program has been overwhelmingly successful, certain problems have not been overcome—for example, self-limiting behavior by students because of prior life experience and funding cutbacks by the state because of unfavorable economic conditions. The program has been evaluated by the NIH Training Grant Review process and the University of Maryland self-study review.

A third example of institutional linkage can be found at the University of California at Berkeley. From 1985 to 1990, women at Berkeley earned

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

SOURCE: Maresi Nerad, Using Time, Money, and Human Resources Efficiently and Effectively in the Case of Women Graduate Students, paper prepared for conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?," Irvine, CA, November 4–5, 1991.

Figure 5-2. Mean time to doctoral degree, University of California-Berkeley, 1986–1991, by sex.

approximately half of all undergraduate degrees but only 30 percent of all graduate degrees. In many fields, there is a 50 percent reduction in women's participation rate from undergraduate to graduate studies (Nerad, 1991). In light of these statistics and the need to identify the specific situations that give rise to them, the Graduate Research section of the Graduate Division at Berkeley has begun systematic and continuous analysis of graduate admissions and programs and has institutionalized programs through which faculty, students, and graduate department secretaries can apply the results of the Graduate Division's data collection and analyses. These programs are discussed in greater detail below.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

SOURCE: Maresi Nerad, Using Time, Money, and Human Resources Efficiently and Effectively in the Case of Women Graduate Students, paper prepared for conference on ''Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?," Irvine, CA, November 4–5, 1991.

Figure 5-3. Doctoral completion rates, University of California-Berkeley, 1978–79 cohort, by sex.

Berkeley's analysis of institutional data revealed the following.

  • The average time-to-degree for all doctoral recipients (3,917) from 1986-1991 was 6.5 years, with the average time for women 7.7 years. However, women took slightly less time than men in the physical sciences (5.6 versus 5.9 years), and only slightly longer than men in the biological sciences (6.2 versus 5.9 years) and engineering (6.1 versus 5.7 years) (see Figure 5-2).

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
  • In science and engineering Ph.D. programs, the completion rates of women were about 15 percent lower than those of men. Women were found to have a higher attrition rate than men both before and after advancement to candidacy, with the exception of the biological sciences (see Figure 5-3).

  • However, if all kinds of financial support, particularly RAs, are distributed equally between men and women and if campus child-care is provided, then women tend to finish the doctorate as quickly as men do (Nerad and Cerny, 1991).

  • A higher proportion of women were dissatisfied with the departmental advising and the professional help they received from their dissertation adviser. In the biological sciences, 21 percent of the women were dissatisfied versus 9 percent of the men; in physical sciences, 15 percent versus 10 percent; and in engineering, 12 percent versus 8 percent. There appear to be at least three explanations for women's greater dissatisfaction: (a) faculty behave differently toward women and men; (b) faculty behave similarly to women and men but the two sexes interpret the behavior differently; and (c) women suffer more in the "chilly" departmental climate than men do.2

Nerad reports that the absence of positive feedback seems to affect women and men students differently. An "I don't have any real problems with it" reaction from faculty tends to be interpreted by women as "What did I do wrong? What could I have done better?" Men tend to accept the comment as, "Go ahead! You're doing fine.'' Women students begin doubting their intellectual capability and tend to become demoralized; men may be disappointed but remain sure of their intellectual capacity. These differential interpretations may result from the tendency of women to apply the same set of rules to faculty as they might apply to themselves in a similar situation. Nerad gives an example of a graduate woman TA's reaction to two Biology 1 undergraduate students:

If I have a Biology I student who writes a lousy paper, I couldn't imagine not saying, "You have some very good ideas

2  

Bernice Sandler coined this term. See publications of the Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges, 1982, 1984, 1986.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

here, but let's think about your organization." On the other end of the scale is the Biology 1 student who writes a really good paper, and the TA hands it back, saying, "Well, Fred, I don't have any major problems with this."

This TA could not imagine giving such feedback to her student.

The departmental climate also affects women differently. Women students at Berkeley tend to believe that lack of departmental attention and caring means they don't deserve to keep going or that they must not be good enough. Most male doctoral students, conversely, are more self-confident and consider themselves entitled to an advanced degree, so the absence of departmental caring does not seem to bother them as much as it does women.

Berkeley accepts the premise that departmental climate and culture play an important part in the progress of doctoral students, particularly women and minorities. To improve this climate and reduce overall attrition rates in graduate school, the Graduate Division at Berkeley has institutionalized a number of programs that bring together the faculty, students, and departmental graduate secretaries. This approach includes:

  • data collection through studies of the graduate school population, including recruitment, retention, and performance indicators (data are disaggregated by sex, ethnicity, and field of study at each stage of the doctoral program);

  • questionnaire surveys of doctoral students at the time dissertations are filed, eliciting their views on how their needs have been met by departments, faculty, and advisers (the results are summarized and sent to departments with a letter from the Dean pointing out positive developments and asking for responses to students' comments on their level of satisfaction with the department);

  • monthly student focus groups, usually made up of one or two students selected from each department in a major field of study each semester, that discuss the students' concerns regarding their programs and the Division's research findings and suggest programmatic activities;

  • development of a guide to the kinds of help available to students during the various stages of the doctoral program;

  • monthly faculty invitational seminars as a forum to develop policy (a different group of faculty is selected each semester);

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
  • a Graduate Division requirement that every student meet with two or three faculty members at least once a year to discuss his or her past year's accomplishments and projected following year program in order to get feedback; and

  • visits by the graduate dean to five or six departments each semester to talk separately with faculty, students, and affirmative action advisers (visits are preceded by a letter or other material suggesting issues that might be on the agenda).

By focusing on the different stages of a doctoral program, on specific needs of the student during these stages, and on the departmental learning climate, the Berkeley approach seems to have been particularly helpful to women (Nerad, 1991).

Consortial Linkages

An example of such an intervention to retain scientists and engineers in graduate study is the GEM Engineering/Science Fellowship Program, established in 1976 by the National Consortium for Graduate Degrees for Minorities in Engineering and Science, Inc. (GEM). Each year, GEM awards fellowships to American Indian, black American, Mexican American, and Puerto Rican students pursuing master's degrees in engineering and Ph.D.s in either science or engineering. Master's degree students are expected to complete their degrees in no more than three semesters or four quarters, while length of awards to Ph.D. students varies with the S&E discipline and university requirements. The overall graduation rate for participants in this program has been 86 percent since its inception.

None of the GEM programs operate independently. Rather, sponsorship is broad, with coordination handled by the offices in Notre Dame, Indiana. The GEM M.S. in Engineering Program is sponsored by 62 university members and 77 research laboratory members. The GEM Ph.D. in Engineering Program is sponsored by 53 university members; and 41 universities and 14 research laboratories sponsor the GEM Ph.D. in Science Program. Among the participating universities are the following. Georgia Institute of Technology, Hampton University (Virginia), Howard University (Washington, DC), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Morgan State University (Maryland), New Mexico State University, North Carolina A&T State University, Prairie View A&M University, Southern University (Louisiana), Stanford University (California), Tuskegee University, University of California-Los Angeles, University of Michigan, University of Puerto Rico-

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-2: Numbers of Students Holding GEM Fellowships, 1991

GEM Program

Race/Ethnicity and Sex

Total

 

American Indian

Black American

Mexican American

Puerto Rican

 

M

F

M

F

M

F

M

F

M

F

M.S., Engineering

5

1

95

70

31

6

12

6

143

83

Ph.D., Engineering

1

1

11

5

2

2

3

2

17

10

Ph.D., Science

0

1

6

19

1

4

1

0

8

24

Total Numbers

6

3

112

94

34

12

16

8

168

117

 

SOURCE: Data from the National Consortium for Graduate Degrees for Minorities in Engineering and Science, Inc., 1992.

Mayaguez, University of Tennessee, and University of Texas-El Paso. Table 5-2 gives the profile of students holding GEM fellowships in 1991.

Interventions Sponsored by the Private Sector

Numerous private organizations support programs that encourage U.S. students to pursue advanced education and careers in the sciences and engineering. Highlighted below are some programs supported by the Ford Foundation, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and Alfred P. Sloan Foundation as well as others in the private sector.

Ford Foundation

The Ford Foundation sponsors two programs administered by the National Research Council's Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel (OSEP): (1) Predoctoral and Dissertation Fellowships for Minorities and (2) Postdoctoral Fellowships for Minorities. In both programs, fellowships are offered on a competitive basis to individuals who are citizens or nationals of the United States and members of the following groups: Alaskan Natives

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-3: Participation in the Ford Foundation Predoctoral and Dissertation Fellowships for Minorities Program, FY 1992, by Sex

 

Applications

Awards

 

M

F

T

M

F

T

Biological Sciences

73

93

166

6

4

10

 

 

(56%)

 

 

(40%)

 

Engineering, Mathematics, & Physical Sciences

186

134

320

16

1

17

 

 

(41.9%)

 

 

(5.9%)

 

Behavioral & Social Sciences Psychology

43

172

215

2

10

12

 

 

(80%)

 

 

(83.3%)

 

Social Sciences

129

189

318

5

13

18

 

 

(59.4%)

 

 

(72.2%)

 

Total, Behavioral & Social

172

361

533

7

23

30

 

 

(67.7%)

 

 

(76.7%)

 

TOTAL, ALL FIELDS

431

588

1,019

29

28

57

 

 

(57.7%)

 

 

(49.1%)

 

 

SOURCE: National Research Council, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, Fellowship Office.

(Eskimo or Aleut), black/African Americans, Mexican Americans/Chicanos, Native American Indians, Native Pacific Islanders (Polynesian or Micronesian), and Puerto Ricans. The goals of the programs are to identify individuals of demonstrated ability who are members of these minority groups traditionally underrepresented in the behavioral and social sciences, engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, and life sciences and to encourage awardees "to achieve their full potential as scholars who will inspire others to follow an academic career in teaching and research" (1992 program announcement). As shown in Tables 5-3 and 5-4, in general, greater numbers

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-4: Participation in the Ford Postdoctoral Fellowships for Minorities Program, FY 1992, by Sex

 

Applicants

Awards

 

M

F

T

M

F

T

Biological Sciences

11

6

17

4

1

5

 

 

(35.3%)

 

 

(20%)

 

Physical Sciences, Mathematics & Engineering

6

4

10

2

1

3

 

 

(40%)

 

 

(33.3%)

 

Psychology

3

4

7

1

1

2

 

 

(57.1%)

 

 

(50%)

 

Social Sciences

7

17

24

1

5

6

 

 

(70.8%)

 

 

(20%)

 

TOTAL, ALL FIELDS

41

49

90

12

13

25

 

 

(54.4%)

 

 

(52%)

 

 

SOURCE: National Research Council, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, Fellowship Office.

of women than men apply for Ford Fellowships, but women receive about half of the total awards. As in similar programs, the distribution by specific fields varies. In addition, the percentage of awards to women more closely parallels their percentage of applicants in the postdoctoral program than in the predoctoral/dissertation fellowship program.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)

HHMI, a nonprofit "philanthropic organization dedicated to basic biomedical research and education" (1992 program announcement), sponsors a program of financial support for graduate work in research-based doctoral programs (Ph.D. or Sc.D) in the biological sciences—specifically, biochemistry, biophysics, biostatistics, cell biology and regulation, develop

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-5: Participation, by Sex, in the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Predoctoral Fellowship Program in the Biological Sciences, FY 1988–1992

 

 

Applicants

Awards

 

 

No.

%

No.

%

FY 1992

Female

Male

697

696

50.0

50.0

35

35

50.0

50.0

FY 1991

Female

Male

719

713

50.2

49.8

25

44

36.2

63.7

FY 1990

Female

Male

586

608

49.1

50.9

28

40

41.2

58.8

FY 1989

Female

Male

520

524

49.8

50.2

19

42

31.1

68.9

FY 1988

Female

Male

506

580

46.6

53.4

20

40

33.3

66.7

 

SOURCE: National Research Council, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, Fellowship Office.

mental biology, epidemiology, genetics, immunology, mathematical biology, microbiology, molecular biology, neuroscience, pharmacology, physiology, structural biology, and virology. The goals of the HHMI Predoctoral Fellowships in Biological Sciences, launched in 1987, are ''the advancement of fundamental knowledge in the biomedical sciences and the application of new scientific knowledge to the alleviation of disease and the promotion of health." For the first time, in 1992, the program achieved gender parity in the awarding of fellowships to women and men (Table 5-5), while in its earlier years, men had a much greater likelihood of success.

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

The Sloan Foundation for some time has supported programs to enhance women's education and to improve science and engineering education

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

in general. The Sloan Foundation gives money for intervention implementation as well as for model studies. Program support can be quite long-term for foundations, but it does not go on indefinitely. Two programs dealing with general graduate education and currently supported by this Foundation are found at Arizona State University (ASU) and Cornell University. ASU's Project 1000 is "a cooperative effort among 72 selective public and private comprehensive doctoral-granting institutions, over 155 colleges and universities with significant U.S. Hispanic undergraduate enrollment, concerned corporations, and various related national and community-based Hispanic organizations" (Sloan, 1991). Begun in 1991, its performance goals are to increase the number of U.S. Hispanic students applying and admitted to graduate school in mathematics, the physical sciences, engineering, and technology-related fields. A study, "Econometric Estimation of Doctoral Student Time-to-Degree and Completion Probability Models," is being undertaken by Professor Ronald G. Ehrenberg in Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations. A major aim of the study is to determine how different variables influence non-completion rates of graduate students and to ''provide evidence on how improved support for graduate students and improved job market conditions would likely affect doctoral students' time-to-degree and completion rates in the future'' (Sloan, 1991). Although both of these activities focus on broad groups—U.S. Hispanic graduate students in the first case and all graduate students in the second example—the descriptive literature does not specify efforts that focus on women. One Sloan-supported initiative that does focus on women is the mentoring project of the Association for Women in Science, which attempts to recruit and retain both highly capable undergraduates and graduate students in scientific careers (see Chapter 4). According to Stephanie Bird, former AWIS president, "The AWIS Mentoring Project focuses on graduate students as much as it does undergraduates" (Bird, 1992).

Private Corporations

Similarly, a number of private corporations, as well as many of the privately-funded national laboratories, provide scholarships, fellowships, and temporary employment programs aimed at identifying and developing potential scientists and engineers. Some of these are targeted to women and minorities (see Appendix Tables A-2 through A-6). Corporate sponsorship is provided either by the firm individually, or as part of a consortium such as the National Physical Science Consortium. Among programs sponsored by individual firms and specifically targeted to women are American Telephone

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

& Telegraph (AT&T) Company's Graduate Research Program for Women, the Summer Research Program for Minorities and Women, and the Summer University Relations Program; Hewlett-Packard's Student Employment and Education Development (SEED) Internship; and the Bristol-Myers-Squibb Clairol Mentor Program.

An example of a jointly sponsored program targeted at women and minorities is the National Physical Science Consortium (NPSC), which links more than 68 graduate institutions and 27 employers (Snow, 1991). Corporate employers provide six-year fellowships in astronomy, physics, chemistry, material science, mathematics, geology, and computer science. The universities provide full tuition and admission fees. Sponsoring organizations provide two summers of employment for meaningful research at their laboratories, as well as mentors, overhead support, and money for student stipends. Recipients must be U.S. citizens and can be undergraduate seniors, master's candidates at non-Ph.D.-granting universities, or returning students who have been in industry for more than a year. A minimum 3.0 GPA (of a possible 4.0 GPA) is required, and the average awardee has a 3.6. Thus far, the consortium has received the most employer support for fellowships in physics and the least in chemistry and materials science.

The consortium began with a goal to increase the number of minority and female Ph.D.s in the physical sciences; the organizational process to achieve this goal was developed by a local task force organized at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The local task force eventually became a national task force and then the first board of directors for the consortium. The administrative center for the consortium is at the University of California-San Diego in La Jolla. New Mexico State University, because it is a center for American Indian and Hispanic populations in the Southwest and West, is the focus area for student recruitment.

Recruitment is carried out primarily through personal contact by staff and referrals from professors and other students. About 60 percent of the applicants have been white females; the rest are minorities including black females. Awards, on the other hand, have been about 57 percent to minority students and the rest to white and Asian females. Initial screening of applicants is carried out in December of each year by a committee from participating universities. In 1991 the committee came from 13 universities. The committee selects two candidate pools, a top applicant group (about 5 to 1 for each fellowship position) and a pool of those who survived the first cutoff but did not make the top list. A booklet with demographics of all selected

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

applicants and copies of their applications, as well as certain computer configurations of applicants in the top pool, is sent to employers. The employers send representatives to La Jolla in January, and the selection is made by a method similar to that of a football draft—each employer takes a number out of a hat and when the number is drawn, picks the first student remaining in the pool who is on the employer's list. The diverse national distribution of employers and student applicants insures that each member employer gets their optimal choice from their list of top students. The student dropout rate for the consortium has been approximately 4 percent. In 1991 NSPC awarded 48 fellowships and they will award 85 in 1992.

Interventions Sponsored by Federal Agencies

Among the many graduate education programs sponsored by federal agencies are two administered within the National Research Council's Office of Scientific and Engineering Education for the National Science Foundation: the NSF Graduate Fellowship Program and the NSF Minority Graduate Fellowship Program.

National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Fellowship Program

The NSF Graduate Fellowship Program is open to U.S. citizens or nationals and permanent resident aliens of the United States for advanced study in the mathematical, physical, biological, engineering, and behavioral and social sciences, as well as in the history and philosophy of science. In addition to the annual awards dispersed across these disciplines, NSF allocates about 70 awards for Graduate Fellowships for Women in Engineering. As shown in Table 5-6, except in earth science, increasing numbers of students, both women and men, are applying for these fellowships. However, in most fields, the percentage of women receiving awards is almost always smaller than the percentage of women applying. In four areas—chemistry, applied mathematics and statistics, mathematics, and computer science—the disproportions are strikingly large.

NSF Minority Graduate Fellowship Program

The objective of this program, began in 1978, is "to increase the number of scientists who are members of ethnic minority groups under-represented at the advanced levels of science, mathematics, and engineering" (NSF, 1988). The program is open to U.S. students who are members of the following ethnic groups—American Indian, Black American, Hispanic, Native

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-6: NSF Graduate Fellowship Program Applications and Awards, by Sex, 1985 and 1992

Discipline

1985

1992

1985

1992

 

M

W

M

W

M

W

M

W

 

Total Applicants

Total Awards

N

2776

1614

4387

3336

362

178

450

290

%

63.2

36.8

56.8

43.2

67.0

33.0

60.8

39.2

Biochem*

246

167

268

268

32

16

26

23

 

59.6

40.4

50.0

50.0

66.7

33.3

53.1

46.9

Biology

298

274

364

499

32

40

27

46

 

52.1

42.9

42.2

57.8

44.4

55.6

37.0

63.0

Chemistry

219

118

293

160

32

9

39

8

 

65.0

35.0

64.7

35.3

78.0

22.0

83.0

17.0

Earth Sci

151

88

125

87

20

9

12

7

 

63.2

36.8

59.0

41.0

69.0

31.0

63.1

36.9

Appl Math/

80

39

106

89

14

1

13

3

Statistics

67.2

32.8

54.3

45.7

93.3

6.7

81.2

18.8

Mathematics

105

43

175

83

19

1

23

3

 

70.9

29.1

67.8

32.2

95.0

5.0

88.5

11.5

Physics and

309

44

394

93

39

6

35

12

Astronomy

87.5

12.5

80.9

19.1

86.7

13.3

74.5

25.5

Behavioral

397

436

791

935

50

50

77

65

Sciences**

47.7

52.3

45.8

54.2

50.0

50.0

54.2

45.8

Biomedical

154

208

192

279

15

28

14

25

Sciences

42.5

57.5

40.8

59.2

42.5

57.5

35.9

64.1

Computer

182

54

302

90

27

3

30

2

Science

77.1

22.9

77.0

23.0

90.0

10.0

93.8

6.2

Engineering

635

143

1377

753

82

15

154

96

 

81.6

18.4

64.7

35.3

84.5

15.5

61.6

38.4

* Includes biochemsitry, biophysics, and molecular biology.

** Prior to 1991, this field included psychology, economics, and sociology. Becasue the disaggregation of behavioral sciences—into (1) anthropology, sociology, and linguistics; (2) economicis, urban planning, and history of sciences; (3) political science, international relations, and geography, and (4) psychology—did not occur until 1991, a single category is used here.

SOURCE: National Resource Council, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, Fellowships Office.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

Alaskan, or Native Pacific Islander—for "if we genuinely want to achieve our goal of filling vacant faculty, research, and industrial positions, we will find ourselves increasingly dependent on minority talent" (Bloch, 1988). As shown in Table 5-7, gender equity in both applications and awards has, in the aggregate, been reached. However, disparities occur in broad fields—that is, greater percentages of women apply for awards in the biosciences and behavioral sciences while men tend to apply for fellowships in the physical sciences and engineering. It should also be noted that the success rate of women is much higher in the fields of chemistry, earth science, physics/astronomy/mathematics, and behavioral sciences in the Minority Graduate Program than in NSF's Graduate Fellowship Program.

Postdoctoral Research Associateship Program

Many federal programs provide an opportunity for individual scientists and engineers to link their own research projects to the ongoing work of federal research centers. One such program is the Research Associateships Program administered by the National Research Council (NRC), which provides support for one-to three-year periods for "postdoctoral scientists and engineers of unusual promise and ability." The program expects to award approximately 350 new Research Associateships in 1992, for a total of approximately $30 million. The NRC Postdoctoral Research Associateships (PRAs) are open to U.S. citizens (with one exception) who have completed doctorates within five years of the date of application. Resident Research Associateships are open to citizen and foreign national senior investigators as well as to recent doctoral graduates. Senior Research Associateships are open to applicants who have held a doctorate for more than five years. Appendix A fists programs offered in 1992. Figure 5-4 reveals the increasing number of PRAs awarded to women in recent years; the decline in numbers of awards to both women and men, beginning in 1990, reflects the fact that 1990 was the first year in which awardees could receive third-year funding for their research, limiting the number of new awards made by the laboratories. Drawing from Figure 5-4, we note that the percentage of PRAs awarded to women has more than doubled since 1979, although the progress has not been steady:

Year

% to Women

1979

8.9

1980

9.6

1981

12.0

1982

8.4

1984

13.7

1985

18.4

1986

15.2

1987

20.4

1988

21.0

1989

19.3

1990

18.6

1991

19.3

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-7: NSF Minority Graduate Fellowship Program Applications and Awards, by Sex, 1985 and 1992

Discipline

1985

1992

 

Men

Women

Men

Women

Total Applicants N

298

305

713

767

%

49.4

50.6

48.2

51.8

Biosciences*

62

79

107

169

 

44.0

56.0

38.8

61.2

Chemistry/Earth Science

27

22

46

54

 

55.1

44.9

46.0

54.0

Physics/Astronomy/Math

37

32

114

92

 

53.6

46.4

55.3

44.7

Behavioral Science**

68

116

183

287

 

37.0

63.0

38.9

61.1

Engineering

65

35

263

165

 

65.0

35.0

61.4

38.6

Total Awards N

39

21

61

59

%

65.0

35.0

50.8

49.2

Biosciences*

10

5

12

8

 

66.7

33.3

60.0

40.0

Chemistry/

2

2

2

5

Earth Science

50.0

50.0

28.6

71.4

Physics/Astronomy/

6

1

7

8

Math

85.7

14.3

46.7

53.3

Behavioral Science**

12

11

13

22

 

52.2

47.8

37.1

62.9

Engineering

9

2

27

16

 

81.8

18.2

62.8

37.2

* Includes biology, biochemistry, biophysics, and biomedical science.

** Includes anthropology, sociology, and linguistics; economics, urban planning, and history of science; political science, international relations, and geography; and psychology.

SOURCE: National Research Council, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, Fellowships Office.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

SOURCE: National Research Council, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, Committee on NRC Research Associates' Career Outcomes.

Figure 5-4. Number of new awards, NRC Postdoctoral Research Associateship Program, 1979–1991, by sex.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

TABLE 5-8: Applications and Awards to Women in NIST/NRC Postdoctoral Research Associateship Program, 1987–1991

 

Total Number of

Female Applicants

Awards to Women

Year

Applicants

No.

%

(%)

1987

106

14

13.2

13.6

1988

114

14

12.3

14.3

1989

104

12

11.5

22.7

1990

121

16

13.2

16.0

1991

185

19

10.3

11.5

1992

208

25

12.0

19.4

 

SOURCE: Burton H. Colvin, The NIST/NRC Postdoctoral Research Associateship Program, paper presented at the National Research Council conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?," Irvine, CA, November 4–5, 1991.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) sponsors a Postdoctoral Research Associateship Program in chemistry, mathematics, and physics. The NIST/NRC program is not specifically an intervention or recruitment program, but its outcomes with respect to the participation of women have had the effect of interventions and are probably characteristic in many ways of the experience of the 35 other federal laboratories that participate with the NRC in similar programs (Colvin, 1991). The associateships were initiated at NIST in 1954 with positions available in three fields of mathematics, seven fields of physics, and three chemistry fields and a gross stipend of $5,940. The 1992 announcement offers 500 research opportunities with 455 different research advisers and an annual stipend of $44,000 (Colvin, 1991).

Although no special effort has been made to increase the participation of women, their percentage has, in fact, increased; for example, for the years 1987–1992, the percent of awards to women at NIST exceeded the percent of applications by women, as shown in Table 5-8. While the percentages of awards to women throughout the NRC Postdoctoral Associateship Programs are holding steady at about 20 percent, at NIST the average has been lower. The total percent of awards to women for the period

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

1987–1991 is 15.5 percent, compared to 9.7 percent for the period 1979–1985 (Colvin, 1991). In comparison, women received 22.8 percent of an Ph.D.s awarded in science and engineering disciplines during the 1978–1984 period and 26.2 percent in the 1985–1988 time period (NSF 1990). In the years since 1954, NIST, which has approximately 3,000 full-time employees and 1,000 guest researchers, has appointed a total of 679 research associates (about 40 percent of those in the program) to its staff. Forty-seven (7 percent) of these appointees have been women.

The CWSE conference confirmed that graduate-and postdoctoral-level interventions sponsored by the federal government are more likely to be available to women, rather than targeted to them. Nevertheless, the programs offer a wide variety of choices (Appendix A).

Future Directions

Graduate and postdoctoral interventions aimed at recruiting and retaining more women in scientific and technical fields serve the interests of sponsors and of education in general, as well as the interests of women. The model programs described above provide new ways of addressing the issues and suggest ways that elements of these programs can be replicated in other places and other situations. An important fact about them is that the models almost always include three elements identified as characteristic of successful programs: (1) specific identification of needs, (2) a total or holistic approach, with multiple linkages between graduate education and other populations, and (3) substantial faculty or mentor commitment as well as support from the head of the sponsoring organization (Fowler, 1991; Marrett, 1991; Nerad, 1991; Sheridan, 1991; Snow, 1991). This support includes commitments of both staff and money to initiate and maintain the program. An additional aspect of effective programs is opportunities for networking.

Although such programs were not part of the formal discussions at the conference on S&E programs held by the National Research Council's Committee on Women in Science and Engineering, it is important to note the existence at the graduate level of informal strategies for increasing the numbers of women receiving master's and doctorates in S&E disciplines. While often operating without commitment from, or even knowledge of, the president, the graduate dean of a university, or even (in some cases) the department head, these activities often reflect the commitment of faculty

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

within an individual department to achieving this goal. Such interventions include active support groups where graduate students in the same or related departments meet together for discussions on how to get ahead and bow to cope with daily problems in the classroom, in the research environment, and with colleagues and supervisors. They also include programs of visiting scientists and engineers, who meet with the students and other interested people to discuss and facilitate the careers of these students in science and engineering. Among recurring topics of discussion are the relationship of a female student with her peers and with her research adviser, balancing career and family responsibilities, and strategies to eliminate the "chilly environment" often encountered by women pursuing graduate studies and later employment in the sciences and engineering. During informal discussions, participants at the Conference on Science and Engineering Programs noted that the incidence of such informal programs is increasing on U.S. campuses, particularly as professional S&E societies and individual practitioners seek to encourage more women to enter S&E careers.

The replication of successful models for interventions is needed in graduate education. For example, Figure 5-5 reveals that in the sciences and engineering, only in psychology did more women receive advanced degrees than men in 1990; in general, differences between women's and men's shares of advanced degrees are particularly great at the doctoral level. Nevertheless, in spite of their potential benefits for increasing the number of women receiving graduate degrees in the sciences and engineering, efforts targeted toward women graduate students are presently extremely limited in both number and kind and are primarily in the form of recruitment and/or financial support rather than interactive retention support programs (Bogart, 1984; U.S. Congress, 1988; White House, 1989). As at the undergraduate level, "a coherent, coordinated, articulated structural approach has yet to be achieved by institutions" (Matyas and Malcolm, 1991), and little is known about the evaluation of such programs.

Listed below are some future directions for effective intervention in graduate and postdoctoral S&E education suggested by conference participants:

  • "Confidence building" techniques should be developed so that women graduate students gain both scientific expertise and effective communication skills that will permit them to go forward in careers in science and mathematics with a high degree of comfort and

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

confidence. These are clearly good skills to be developed at both the mentor/adviser and the departmental levels.

  • In addition, to retain graduate students in the sciences and engineering, departments and institutions must develop programs of positive incentives for faculty. Research from numerous sources, such as the Association of American Colleges' Project on the Status and Education of Women, have shown the important role of faculty in decisions by students to continue advanced study; this is particularly true for women students in the sciences and engineering. However, unless faculty are active participants in the development of student retention programs and the faculty are rewarded for their efforts, such programs seldom achieve their goal of greater retention of women students.

  • The ''level playing field'' concept for women graduate students must be concretely and articulately demonstrated by upper management of the academic institution. As Sandier (1986) noted, the institutional environment for women is often "chilly," particularly for women pursuing careers in "nontraditional" fields.

  • At all levels—institution, department, and individual mentor—sensitivity, flexibility, and understanding of child bearing/rearing issues must be demonstrated in order to avoid discouragement and loss of talented female graduate students from these fields into others where time for a family is more easily managed. The philosophy that "it is the people, not the bricks" that make any laboratory group, department, school, or university excellent must be inculcated.

  • Resolving issues related to balancing family and scientific career goals for women graduate students must be a high priority for any academic institution. This means that upper university management must do more than articulate a philosophy toward women graduate students that removes penalties or other discouragements for bearing children or even getting married. Upper management must demonstrate its commitment to putting that philosophy into action. Ideally, the institution could provide an on-site day-care facility similar to those already present at many federal laboratories and private companies and develop flexible leave policies for essential family/parenting activities. The lack of such support mechanisms is currently strong discouragement for many young graduate women scientists, mathematicians, and engineers who are attempting to balance beginning a family with graduate education.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

SOURCE: National Science Foundation, Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering (NSF 90–301), Washington, DC: NSF, 1990, p. 22.

Figure 5-5. Percentage of advanced degrees in science and engineering granted to women, by field, 1990.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

Clear, flexible, and efficient policies and programs to address these concerns could benefit both female and male graduate students.

REFERENCES

Bird, Stephanie J. 1992. Personal communication to Gaelyn Davidson, July 30, 1992.

Bloch, Erich. 1988. From the director. In National Science Foundation, Legacy to Tomorrow (NSF 88-49), Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Bogart, Karen. 1984. Toward Equity. An Action Manual for Women in Academe. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges.


Colvin, Burton H. 1991. The NIST/NRC Postdoctoral Research Associateship Program. Paper presented at the National Research Council conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.


Fowler, Bruce. 1991. University of Maryland Programs in Toxicology . Paper presented at the National Research Council conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.


Hall, Roberta M. 1982. The Classroom Climate. A Chilly One for Women? Washington, DC: Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges.

____, and Bernice R. Sandler. 1984. Out of the Classroom: A Chilly Campus Climate for Women? Washington, DC: Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges.


Kagiwada, Harriet H. N. 1991. Fellowships and Societies for Women in Engineering. Paper presented at the National Research Council conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.


Marrett, Cora. 1991. Discussion at the conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.

Matyas, Marsha Lakes, and Malcom, Shirley M. (eds.). 1991. Investing in Human Potential: Science and Engineering at the Crossroads. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.


National Science Board. 1991. Science & Engineering Indicators: 1991 (Tenth Edition) (NSF 91-1), Washington, DC: NSF.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×

National Science Foundation (NSF). 1988. Legacy to Tomorrow (NSF 88-49), Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

____. 1990. Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering (NSF 90-301). Washington, DC: NSF.

____. 1992. America's Academic Future: A Report of the Presidential Young Investigator Colloquium on U.S. Engineering, Mathematics, and Science Education for the Year 2010 and Beyond (NSF 91-150). Washington, DC: NSF.

Nerad, Maresi. 1991. Using Time, Money, and Human Resources Efficiently and Effectively in the Case of Women Graduate Students. Conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.

____, and Joseph Cerny. 1991. From facts to action: Expanding the educational role of the graduate division. CGS Communicator May:8. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools in the United States.

Ruppenthal, Karol. 1991. Summary presentation, session on graduate education at the conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.


Sandler, Bernice R. 1986. The Campus Climate Revisited: Chilly for Women Faculty, Administrators, and Graduate Students. Washington, DC: Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges.

Sheridan, Judson D. 1991. Intervention Programs at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Paper presented at the National Research Council conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.

Sloan Foundation. 1991. Project Summaries. Conference on Science and Engineering Education, New York, July 23.

Snow, L. Nan. 1991. The National Physical Science Consortium. Paper presented at the National Research Council conference on "Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?" Irvine, CA, November 4–5.


U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1988. Educating Scientists and Engineers: Grade School to Grad School (OTA-SET-377). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.


White House Task Force on Women, Minorities, and the Handicapped in Science and Technology. 1989. Changing America: The New Face of Science and Technology (Final Report). Washington, DC: The Task Force.

Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"5 Promoting Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in Science and Engineering." National Research Council. 1992. Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women?. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2039.
×
Page 98
Next: EMPLOYMENT »
Science and Engineering Programs: On Target for Women? Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $50.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Based primarily on a conference, this book examines the need for interventions to increase the number of U.S. students, both males and females, pursuing careers in the sciences and engineering and describes interventions supported by the private and public sectors at the undergraduate and graduate levels of education.

The individually authored chapters also describe actions taken by employers of scientists and engineers to retain their technical work force.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!