Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
REFERENCE C RW UCI â¢: WOMEN: '/ Their Underrepresentation and Career Differentials in Science and Engineering Proceedings of a Workshop PROPERTY OF NAS - NAE 1987 Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel National Research Council Linda S. Dix Editor LIBRAR* National Academy Press Washington, D.C. 1987 Order from National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161 order NO.
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by tne Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors ac- cording to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-per- petuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technol- ogy and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in l863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and tech- nical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in l964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organiza- tion of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The Na- tional Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in l970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appro- priate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to iden- tify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Samuel 0. Thier is president of the institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in l9l6 to associate the broad community of science and tech- nology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. This study was supported by Contract SRS-85l546l between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation. Copies available from: Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel 2l0l Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 204l8 Printed in the United States of America
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This proceedings volume is the result of the joint interest of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Research Coun- cil's Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel (OSEP) in the nation's human resources.* Each has had a strong, longstanding commit- ment to understand populations that are underrepresented in the scien- tific and engineering work forces. For women this underrepresentation has been extensively documented in the congressionally mandated bien- nial NSF reports, Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. The reasons for this underrepresentation are less well-understood. Why are girls less apt to participate in advanced math and science courses in secondary schools? Why do fewer women than men pursue undergraduate degrees (and, subsequently, graduate coursework) in science and engi- neering? and What factors might influence these decisions by females to forego careers in scientific disciplines? We are greatly indebted to the authors whose commissioned papers attempted to answer these questionsâSusan F. Chipman, Lilli S. Hornig, Jane Butler Kahle, William K. LeBold, J. Scott Long, Marsha Lakes Matyas, and Harriet Zuckermanâand to M. Elizabeth Tidball, who chaired the workshop and offered helpful advice from the project's inception. Their contributions constitute the substantive heart of this project. We are also grateful to many other individuals who contributed to this project. Michael Crowley, director of NSF's Scientific and Tech- nical Personnel Characteristics Studies Group, was the guiding force behind the convening of the Workshop on the Underrepresentation and Career Differentials of Women in Science and Engineering, held on October 9, l986. Gwendolyn L. Lewis, formerly OSEP's data services officer, compiled information from numerous sources in order to struc- ture the workshop's agenda and to ensure that scholars with the appro- priate backgrounds and expertise would be involved in this exploratory workshop. Linda S. Dix, OSEP's administrative officer, shepherded this proceedings volume through the production process. Nancy Conlon, senior science resources analyst in NSF's Scientific and Technical Per- *Throughout this proceedings volume, the views expressed by the authors and other participants are those of individuals and are not to be at- tributed either to the National Research Council or to the National Science Foundation. iii
sonnel Characteristics Studies Group, worked closely with OSEP staff as the project developed. The technical support of Yupin Bae, research assistant, and secretarial support of Joan M. Grady, Agnes Israelsen, and Catherine D. Jackson are also most appreciated. ALAN FECHTER Executive Director iv
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OF PRESENTATIONS EQUITABLE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION: A DISCREPANCY MODEL by Jane Butler Kahle and Marsha Lakes Matyas 5 Introduction, 5 The Discrepancy Model, 6 The ideal State of Science and Mathematics Education, 6 Elementary School, 7 Secondary School, l0 The Actual State of Science and Mathematics Education, l6 Numbers, l8 Packaging, 29 Practice, 23 Biological Factors, 25 Transition from Actual to Ideal State, 25 Teacher Education, 27 Research, 29 Curriculum, 29 Parent Education, 30 Summary, 30 Bibliography, 32 DISCUSSION: EQUITABLE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION by Susan F. Chipman 43 WOMEN IN ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE: AN UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE by William K. LeBold 59 Introduction, 49 Underrepresentation of Women in Engineering and Science, by Field, 50 Degree Data, 50 Beginning College Data, 53
Detailed Field Differences, 53 Summary, 59 Factors Influencing Initial Enrollments, 64 Mathematics and Physical Science Background, 65 College Board Scores, 65 Women and Computers, 70 Comprehensive Studies Related to Undergraduate Participation of Women in Science and Engineering, 73 Engineering Education and Practice in the United States (National Research Council), 73 An International Perspective Regarding Women in Engineering (Australian Bureau of Labor Market Research), 76 An Impact Analysis of Sponsored Programs To Increase the Participation of Women in Careers in Science and Technology (Denver Research Institute), 77 Women in Engineering: An Exploratory Study of Enrollment Factors in the Seventies (National Center for Higher Education Management Systems), 8l Women in Engineering: Policy Recommendations for Recruitment and Retention in Undergraduate Programs (Georgia institute of Technology), 83 Enriched Environments and Background Study, 84 Critical Mass, Role Models, and Unisex Programs, 85 Retention of Women in Science and Engineering Programs, 87 Female Engineering Students: Attitudes, Characteristics, Responses to Engineering, 87 National Engineering Career Development Study, 88 Purdue University's Studies of Engineering and University Retention, 88 Graduate School and Related Financial Aid, 9l Major Findings and Implications, 9l Program Elements, 92 Future Areas of Research on Gender Equity in Science and Engineering, 93 Summary, 93 Bibliography, 94 DISCUSSION: WOMEN IN ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE by Susan F. Chipman 99 WOMEN GRADUATE STUDENTS: A LITERATURE REVIEW AND SYNTHESIS by Lilli S. Hornig l03 Introduction, l03 The Statistical Outlines, l04 Graduate Enrollments and Degrees Since l970, l04 Attrition and Persistence, l08 Factors Affecting Continuation and Persistence, ll0 Ability, ll0 Access, ll2 Motivation, ll6 vi
Discussion and Conclusions, l2l Bibliography, l22 PERSISTENCE AND CHANGE IN THE CAREERS OF MEN AND WOMEN SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS: A REVIEW OF CURRENT RESEARCH by Harriet Zuckerman l27 Introduction, l27 Selected Demographic Characteristics of American Men and Women Scientists and Engineers, l28 Research on Career Attainments of Men and Women Scientists and Engineers, l33 initial Qualifications, l34 Job Histories, l35 Later Jobs, l37 Tenure, l38 Timing of Promotion and Tenure, l39 Salary Differences, l40 Role Performance, l42 Research Performance, l42 Impact or Influence of Research, l45 Gender, Research Performance, and Rank, l46 Honor and Repute, l46 Some Explanations Proposed for Gender Differences in Career Attainments, l49 Gender Differences in Scientific Ability, l50 Processes of Social Selection, l50 Gender Differences as Outcomes of Self-Selection, l52 Gender Differences in Career Commitment, l53 Accumulation of Advantage and Disadvantage, l54 A Limited Research Agenda: Domains of Specified Ignorance, l55 Bibliography, l57 DISCUSSION: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS FOR RESEARCH ON SEX DIFFERENCES IN THE SCIENTIFIC CAREER by J. Scott Long l63 Introduction, l63 The Facts To Be Explained, l63 Participation in Science, l63 Performance and Recognition, l64 The Explanations, l65 Ability, l65 Discrimination and Evaluation, l66 Motivation and Dedication, l66 Domestic Obligations, l67 Cumulative Advantage, l68 Methodological Problems in Research on the Scientific Career, l68 Incomplete or Atheoretical Specifications, l69 Aggregation over Time, l70 Assumptions of Uniform Effects, l70 Sampling on the Dependent Variable, l7l Problems in Uniform Measurement, l72 Solutions, l72 vii
Conclusions, l68 Bibliography, l68 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS l7l APPENDIX A: Agenda, Workshop on the Underrepresentation and Career Differentials of Women in Science and Engineering l75 APPENDIX B: Attendees l77 viii
