The purpose of the Women & Science: Celebrating Achievements, Charting Challenges conference was to take stock of the achievements that women have made, assess what works best in the classroom and workplace, and chart a new course to address the challenges that remain.
The conference was a joint effort of the seven directorates of the National Science Foundation (NSF). Seven hundred women and men from colleges and universities, industry, nonprofit groups, schools, and community groups assembled in Washington, DC, on December 13-15, 1995, to take part in plenary sessions, breakout sessions, and a special showcase of posters and demonstrations. Breakout sessions were organized by scientific and engineering disciplines and by cross-cutting themes:
|Disciplinary Breakouts||Cross-cutting Theme Breakouts|
|Biological Sciences||Research-Education Infrastructure|
|Computer and Information Science and Engineering||The Impact of Technology|
|Geosciences and Polar Programs||Shattering Preconceptions|
|Mathematical and Physical Sciences||Bridging Education and Workforce Transitions|
|Social and Behavioral Sciences||Changing Curriculum and Instruction|
The conference was hosted by Anne C. Petersen, then Deputy Director of NSF. It was co-chaired by Daryl E. Chubin, Division Director for Research, Evaluation and Communication, and Sue V. Rosser, Senior Program Director for Programs for Women and Girls, both of the Directorate for Education and Human Resources. A Planning Committee was established to provide general guidance, and a Program Steering Committee was formed to construct the conference program. NSF sought and incorporated the advice from a multitude of organizations concerned with women and science.1
The conference breakout sessions examined the challenges and reflected on possible solutions; some tried and some new. Strategies for increasing participation and opportunities for women at all educational levels and throughout the workforce were recommended. However, due to the backgrounds of conference participants, much of the focus was on women in academia. Prior to the conference, participants were invited to respond to one of three open-ended questions about issues central to the conference. The responses were distributed at the conference and are excerpted in this report. The questions were:
Each of the 12 breakout sessions is summarized based on notes recorded at the session. The summaries contain the following information:
Status Report: A brief statistical summary of the status of women in each field. These are found in the disciplinary breakout summaries only.
Overview: A summary of the mission and topics covered by the breakout session.
Topical Summaries: A brief summary of what transpired at the breakout session organized by the major challenges and possible solutions suggested by the participants.
Views of the Participants: One or more excerpts from the actual words of the conference participants on a particular discipline or issue. These statements are taken from responses to the conference questions that participants were invited to answer before arriving at the conference.
Views of the Assistant Directors and Post-Conference Reflections: Each Assistant Director was asked to participate in a conference session devoted to what NSF directorates were doing to promote opportunities for women. These statements are reproduced. In addition, each Assistant Director was asked to write a statement 6 months after the conference that reflects on the conference and progress made since.
Other Conferences: Some summaries include a box describing findings from a relevant conference on women in science. These conferences were sponsored by organizations other than NSF.
Of female biology faculty who were newly hired2 when surveyed in 1992, 60 percent were hired as part-time employees and more than three-fourths were not on a tenure track or there was no tenure system for their faculty status. In both cases, this was close to or double the proportion of men in these employment situations. At the senior academic ranks, women are still not well represented. Sixteen percent of all female biology faculty were full professors in 1992 compared with 39 percent of male faculty.
Figure 1 | Figure 2
Workshops should be created where teachers and researchers could learn from each other about their respective needs and problems. This would give researchers a greater understanding of the issues facing learners and teachers and would bring understanding of cutting-edge content to teachers of biology.
I am sure that many of you are aware and have heard during this conference that there are many women in the biological sciences. In some institutions, more than 50 percent of undergraduate biology majors are now women! When one thinks about this in the context of the past, even in the context of other disciplines, this is an amazing development. It is even more amazing when one considers that approximately 40 percent of Ph.D.s in the biological sciences are being earned by women! So one might think that there is no real problem with parity, which I understand is a goal discussed at this conference.
Parity, as such, would require equal participation of women in all of NSF's programs. In fact, all of NSF's programs are open to women now. For example, the success rates in the biological sciences for women grant applicants are the same as or better than for male grant applicants. Thus, we might ask, is there, in fact, a real problem for women in the biological sciences? The answer is both no and yes.
The problem is not about numbers of women entering the field. It is about the numbers of women in leadership positions. Despite the increasing numbers of women with appropriate academic and research qualifications, there are too few women in leadership positions. This means that there are too few women sitting at the tables where decisions are being made. To make a difference, women have to be at the table when decisions are being made, when policy is being set. We at NSF have witnessed over and over a strange phenomenon. When more women participate in the review process, more women get grants. This might seem strange to some, but when we regularly see at least 50 percent of proposals as fundable, it surely makes a difference who is sitting at the table and who is directing our programs. Interestingly, our experience is that once women begin to participate, their careers take quantum leaps forward.
Thus, I find it disturbing that we have difficulty in recruiting women for program officer positions and even to sit on review panels. Women will often say no because they have other commitments, they do not think it is a worthwhile use of their time, or their universities do not recognize or reward them for this service. But women must recognize that only if they participate will the system change. Every woman who has ever been a program officer in the biological sciences has advanced in her own career as a direct outcome of her experience in making decisions and developing policy at a national level. Panel service is also a significant step in gaining visibility, gaining experience that will pay off in career development.
Therefore, I extend a personal invitation to women who are interested in working with us to advance science and education in an important and significant way, either as panel members or as program directors, to contact me or anyone in the biological sciences directorate. You will not be sorry.
Finally, I have heard at this conference and at others that the year 2010 is the projected goal for reaching real parity in the sciences. We have made strong progress in the biological sciences, but we are a long way from that 2010 goal. We are even further from the goal of having parity in leadership in the biological sciences throughout our research and education enterprise. Until we have women leaders in significant numbers, the parity goal is unlikely to be reached.
The Directorate for Biological Sciences will perform the following tasks:
"With the large number of women now getting their first degree in biology, the chances of more women going on to advanced degrees in biology increase.
As the number of women professors increases, so does the presence of women role models and mentors, which should in turn encourage more women.
I remember only one woman faculty member in the biology department when I was an undergraduate in the early 1960s.
In graduate school, the women faculty were all research faculty and were not in tenure-track positions.
On the other hand, while an undergraduate, my daughter performed independent research with two women faculty members in the biology department
and could have chosen from no less than seven women to serve on her Ph.D. committee."
"One of the major problems that has become clear to me through my observations of the job searches conducted by my department is that it is harder to recruit women than men.
Our top group of candidates usually includes as many women as men, if not more, and we have offered jobs to more women than men.
But, we end up hiring many more men than women because women are more apt to turn us down.
Their reasons are diverse, but a common theme is the lack of jobs in our area for their professional spouses.
Male candidates have this constraint less often than women candidates (and are probably less often willing to turn down a good job even if their spouse's professional opportunities are likely to be limited).
We have been unsuccessful, despite good intentions and serious efforts, to increase the number of women on our faculty."
Figure 3 | Figure 4
We are particularly concerned with the drop-off of interest in computing and information sciences among women at the undergraduate and K - 12 levels. We are looking for creative ideas for increasing awareness at those levels. Let me mention what we are doing nationally to increase participation of women.
In the late 1980s, Anita Borg, consultant engineer at Digital Equipment Corporation, developed a group of academic and professional women in computer science and engineering called Systers. This electronic association has encouraged a particularly active mentor program at several conferences. Computer Research Association has developed an active, on-line database of women speakers and leaders in computer science, useful for academic departments looking for distinguished speakers as well as new faculty members.
At national conferences, the CRA Women's Committee runs career management workshops for women graduate students and faculty each year and provides information on grants, the tenure process, and professional networking. We think this committee is very effective. It also matches female faculty with undergraduate women for summer research work. Because the students are from different institutions than the faculty members, we view this as a model of how information technology is being used and can be used for mentoring undergraduate students across the nation.
In the long run, information technology will transform education. It will have a major impact at the undergraduate level. By transforming education at the undergraduate level, K-12 education will also be positively affected. But beware, there are positive and negative consequences of information technology. On the negative side, this transformation has the potential for depersonalizing communication and human interaction. On the other hand, the positive effects are boundless. Technology has the potential for developing much more personalized, tailored education and can bring people together from all points in the world. The ability to tailor individual experiences can have a beneficial effect for women in computing and will encourage new forms of direct interaction over large geographical distances.
The Distributed Mentor Project matches female undergraduates with female professors on summer research projects, thus providing role models for successful research and academic careers. To prepare for graduate school, a Graduate Information Booklet, available on the World Wide Web, has been developed describing advantages of pursuing an advanced degree in computer science or computer engineering. Also, a Careers Booklet containing biographies of successful women who have chosen interesting and rewarding computer-related careers has been produced to motivate young women at the undergraduate and high school levels to consider a career in computer science. Women professionals distribute the booklet in high schools, give talks, and provide advice and mentoring. CRA-W is also involved in recognizing talent at the undergraduate and faculty levels by presenting awards at various conferences. A CRA-W newsletter column titled, Expanding the Pipeline, addresses problems that women in computing face such as the two-body problem (where only one of two spouses receives tenure, usually the male), high drop-out rates, leave policies, etc.
Few conferences come close to the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing in providing avenues for professional networking and mentoring. The first of these conferences was held in June 1994 and featured technical presentations by prominent women in computing fields. During the EHR-sponsored Women & Science conference, plans for the follow-up Grace Hopper conference were solidified. The next one will be held in 1997. Another CRA-W project, Systers-Academia, modeled after the Systers Network, serves as an electronic forum to provide an additional venue for mentoring women and graduate students in the field.
Anita Borg's dream, to have equal numbers of women and men in computer and information science and engineering by the year 2010, a project entitled, 50-50 by 2010, constitutes a significant challenge. The 1995 Women & Science conference generated a lively discussion of the project and many useful ideas that can help make Anita's dream a reality.
"In recent years, there has been a small increase in the number of women Ph.D. recipients in computer science and engineering (CS&E).
Out of 710 women in the [women in computing] database, 235 are Ph.D. students, and 449 already have Ph.Ds.
The fact that more women are going for Ph.Ds is definitely encouraging, since these women are more likely to be in positions to close the gender gap in CS&E by playing leadership roles and by being role models.
A more recent study, however, shows that there is a decrease in the percentages of women who intend to major in CS&E.
In parallel to efforts by NSF and the Computer Research Association (CRA), it is important to have programs directed to students at earlier stages in their education."
"In my work with high school students, I have seen that there are still serious stereotypes that need to be overcome (e.g., many girls still think that computers are used for number-crunching only).
But I have also seen that it doesn't take very long to change individuals' minds about the field.
What works best is the one-on-one contact between senior and junior computer scientists, especially when both are women.
However, there are still too few senior women in my field to provide this kind of contact to enough younger women without compromising their own careers."
The proportion of engineering faculty who are women remains alarmingly low, although there has been some progress. However, just 19 percent of women faculty in engineering were full professors in 1992 compared with 33 percent of men. In nonacademic positions, women accounted for 9 percent of engineers in 1990 compared with just 4 percent a decade earlier.
Figure 5 | Figure 6
We in the Engineering Directorate are embracing a strategy that will enable women to succeed. We have an early career development program (called CAREER) that is intended to integrate research and education as a strategy over time. CAREER is an excellent venue to make good use of that special talent.
We have the GOALI Program (Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry). GOALI gives professors and students the chance to spend extended periods of time in industry collaborating on research projects of mutual interest. It also has a component that enables engineers from industry to serve for extended periods in academic research labs, in classrooms, and even on curriculum committees. This gives women the opportunity to influence both cultures and expand their own horizons.
I think we should embrace women enablement tactics within the true meaning of affirmative action. One-half of the advisory committees should be women. Women should be on all the panels. Action groups at NSF should include women. We have an engineering education coalitions program, and it's funded very handsomely from NSF to change all engineering schools' undergraduate programs. Women are taking leadership here because the coalitions program requires research-education integration. We should fast track women graduate students into the professoriate. If there are more women there, we solve a lot of the problems of academe.
Finally, none of this happens without leadership, and we should be pushed to make sure we lead well.
Today's engineering students will spend most of their careers in the twenty-first century coping with challenges and opportunities vastly different from those experienced by engineers of the last one-half century. The intellectual skills of tomorrow's engineers will extend well beyond the traditional science-focused preparation that has characterized engineering education since World War II. Underlying this trend is a number of factors, including global commercial competition as a major driver for industrial organization and engineering employment; opportunities offered by intelligent technology to be more creative and work smarter; an expanding social infrastructure that demands a talent for complexity; an eclectic, constantly-changing work environment calling for astute interpersonal skills; and massively integrated populations placing environment, health, and safety at the front end of design.
The Engineering Directorate is crafting its education and research programs and its internal management strategy to enable the nation's engineers to take advantage of these opportunities and contribute fully to society's cultural progress and quality of life. Toward this end, the Directorate is emphasizing the broad concept of acting affirmatively in all interactions with its constituencies. For example, program officers' success in achieving diversity in all aspects of their professional duties is explicitly noticed and rewarded. All professional staff appointments are made through the Directorate's Personnel Search Committee, which seeks out excellent women candidates for every position. As a result, the number of women program officers in engineering has increased dramatically over the past several years. The Directorate's external advisory committee is composed of approximately equal numbers of men and women, all with stature in the engineering community.
NSF's high profile in the academic community brings with it the responsibility to lead by working continuously, sensitively, and comprehensively to increase the diversity of the pool of proposers, reviewers, and candidates for NSF staff positions. The heads of the various divisions in the Engineering Directorate are expected to be proactive in addressing this issue when they travel to conferences and universities, especially in talks they present on NSF programs and priorities.
"During the last 5 years, the College of Engineering at my university has greatly benefited from its participation in NSF's Engineering Education Coalitions program.
Our coalition has had a significant effect on the transformation of the lower division curriculum.
Our approach has appealed to a diverse set of learning styles rather than only to those students whose learning styles match those encountered in the traditional classroom.
This type of long-term commitment from NSF has been highly successful.
Continuing this approach to the development of the undergraduate curriculum in a broad manner will make engineering a more attractive career choice for a diverse group of students."
"As an engineer and researcher, my experience of the climate in engineering is that it is very uncomfortable for women.
The problems are due to many cultural behaviors that could change if the men in power chose to recognize those behaviors and change them.
Because the men in power have no motivation to give up some of their power, the problems remain.
Voluntary desire to be politically correct is not going to become a pervasive part of the white male structure in engineering.
With our government in fiscal crisis, it is imperative that efforts by NSF be directed to programs that will force those in power to replace the system with one that works for everyone.
I am calling for programs that require lasting paradigm shifts among university administrators and educators."
In 1994, women in the geosciences (earth, atmospheric, and oceanographic sciences) accounted for 31 percent of bachelor's degrees awarded, 30 percent of master's and 22 percent of doctorates. This compares favorably with the situation in 1973, when women earned 12 percent of bachelor's and master's degrees awarded and just 4 percent of doctorates. Within the subfields of the geosciences, there is considerable variation in terms of the participation of women. Women remain least well represented in the atmospheric sciences
where they earned just 19 percent of bachelor's degrees and most well represented in earth science where they earned 33 percent of bachelor's degrees in 1994.
Bridging the gap between research and education is important at all levels. Methods that could be promoted to encourage collaboration between science educators at the K-12 level and scientists at colleges, universities, and in industry include electronic bridges, industry mentorships for teachers, and summer internships. At colleges and universities, the reward system should be redesigned to encourage faculty to engage in education and K-12 curriculum development as well as research. Opportunities should be provided for women to be involved in research as early as possible in their academic careers.
I see this as a unique conference, a starting point, a nest within which new strategies and approaches can be developed, nurtured, and ultimately implemented. We in the geosciences care about this, and we've made some progress. We've put a great deal of effort into this issue over the past decade or more and developed partnerships to implement new programs and activities that we hope will make a difference. But we have a long way to go.
Our fields are fields that historically have not attracted women in the ranks of scholarship as well as industry. However, over the past 25 years, baccalaureate degrees have gone up by a factor of 3, master's degrees have gone up by a factor of 4, Ph.Ds have gone up by a factor of 7. So, while the overall proportions are in the 25 to 30 percent range for these various degrees, that's a dramatic change from single-digit participation in the 1960s and 1970s. It is my pleasure to be here with you today to hear your questions and seek a mutual understanding about how we take the next steps.
Attending the Women & Science conference was a powerful experience. I was struck by the enthusiasm with which the conference was received. It offered a valuable opportunity to recognize and celebrate the tremendous achievements made by women in all areas of science, as well as an opportunity to identify the challenges that remain.
There is considerable reason to celebrate the successes women have made in the geosciences. Only a few decades ago women were not permitted to participate in most research cruises, were discouraged from participating in fieldwork and, until 1969, U.S. women scientists were not allowed to conduct research in Antarctica. These barriers have since been eliminated. Statistics presented at the conference demonstrated that the numbers of women receiving undergraduate and graduate degrees in the geosciences has dramatically increased over the last several decades. Within the Geosciences Directorate, the women's success rate (the number of awards divided by the number of proposals submitted) for peer-reviewed proposals has equaled or exceeded that of their male counterparts for the last several years.
I am committed to seeing that this trend continues. The Directorate participates in a range of activities, working with other government agencies as well as professional societies, designed to enhance diversity. We are continuing to work to integrate human resources development in our ongoing programs. In addition, the Directorate has made a concerted effort to ensure that there is broad representation of all groups on our scientific and professional staffs; in our advisory panels and committees; in our pool of reviewers; in our K-12 outreach programs; and in our undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral research programs. Our efforts are reviewed on a biennial basis by a committee of representatives of the scientific community that we serve.
Much work remains to be done if we are to achieve parity in the geosciences. While the barriers that exist today may not be as egregious as the ones of decades ago, their results are equally detrimental if they inhibit the participation of women. However, it was clear, both from the poster and breakout sessions, that many exciting programs have been undertaken by the scientific community to address this issue. During the geosciences session at the conference, some excellent strategies, many of which resurfaced in other sessions, were identified for enhancing the participation of women.
We must capitalize on the momentum that this conference has generated. I have requested that a team of program officers, representative of our respective divisions, work with the senior management of the Directorate to carefully review the recommendations made at the Women & Science conference. This process is underway and will ultimately result in a strategic plan for the Directorate.
The success of any strategy will require the full participation of the scientific community, including government agencies, academic institutions, industry and individuals. During this period of flat or potentially declining research budgets, we must increase our vigilance to see that the number and prominence of women in our discipline continues to increase -- not simply because it's the right thing to do, but because enhancing diversity will improve our science.
"A clear and dramatic increase has occurred over the past decade in the number of professional women in the field of oceanography/marine sciences.
A combination of the awareness of the problem on the part of institutions, equal employment opportunity and other programs, and the
increasing acceptance by male oceanographers have played a role in this.
I have noticed a bias toward women candidates in our recent recruiting because they are
often overachievers and very competitive.
On the other hand, their proportion in the labor pool remains low."
"A growing trend, at least in academic geoscience departments, is toward flexible hiring arrangements for women to enable them to have both a career and a family.
The situation I am most familiar with is the split, or shared, position.
A husband and wife team share one salaried position between them in addition to household/child rearing duties.
There is no inherent reason why this arrangement should only be available to married couples.
The arrangement may become more inclusive over time."
However, at the faculty level women can report virtually no progress in MPS in recent years. Moreover, comparatively few women (6 percent) in mathematics were full professors in 1992 compared with men (28 percent).
Figure 8 | Figure 9 | Figure 10
In competing for grants in MPS, women principal investigators do, by and large, better than men. The success rate is approximately 38 percent. Women have been very successful in the CAREER program for young faculty members, earning 28 percent of the awards.
We have changed, rather significantly, the participation of women in the program officer's corps in MPS over the last few years; it has more than doubled. Women now represent almost 25 percent of the MPS program officer's corps. Their presence changes the way the Directorate does business. MPS intends to continue to emphasize the participation of women.
Recently MPS revised its staff memorandum, Policies to Promote the Full Participation of Women, Minorities, and Disabled Persons in Science, to more clearly define responsibilities of senior managers and program staff. An annual report from each MPS division summarizing its activities in each of several important areas is required. These areas include staffing and staff orientation, inclusion of underrepresented minorities and women on review committees and their use as ad hoc reviewers, encouragement of and help with proposals through information dissemination with respect to programs and proposal preparation, site visits, and technical assistance. Program officers are expected to ensure that funded conference proposals provide appropriately for participation by women and for child care.
Supplements for projects that extend integrated research and education goals are now part of the CAREER program and suggest a possible mode of support for encouraging research-based education projects. Also, supplements for personal computers or equipment that allow expectant or new mothers to continue their research at home could be considered.
NSF could support grant writing workshops to focus attention on advising women on successful proposal preparation. Funding rates, averaged over the period from FY92 through FY95, have been at least as good for women as for men. However, the number of proposals from women remain small, reflecting in part the dominance of males in the universities submitting proposals. Fortunately, opportunities for women will increase, assuming no dramatic downsizing in faculty numbers, in the next few years since the average age of faculty in some disciplines is in the 50s.
"Creating interest among women in the physical sciences is crucial to increasing the number of women educated in the area.
This interest is best created at an early age through successful encounters and hands-on
experience with the materials.
The perception that physical sciences are "too hard for a girl" can only be overcome when girls believe they can do the work."
"The single most important trend that creates, improves, and supports opportunities for women in the physical sciences is the presence of other successful women in the field.
Increasing the number of women in science decreases the solitude of the struggle.
Most importantly, the infrastructure necessary to support women in science will not be built without a representative number of women in the field."
"A significant trend that is reshaping the status of opportunities for women in mathematics--both in mathematics education and in careers that rely heavily on mathematics--is the increased awareness that women possess the analytical thinking skills to do mathematics and that women can excel in mathematics-related careers."
At faculty levels, women are most well represented in psychology. Indeed, women have made tremendous progress in psychology from 1987 to 1992. However, in the social sciences, no progress has been made recently.
Figure 11 | Figure 12 | Figure 13
There are three reasons why all scientists and engineers should be interested in the status of women in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences. The first is that many of the issues call for greater knowledge about programs and their effects, family influences, and social processes that social and behavioral scientists study. The second reason is that many of the concerns of women in science and engineering span disciplines. Third, there are higher rates of participation for women in at least some of the social and behavioral sciences compared to the other sciences.
Let me note at the outset that the participation rate for women varies across the social and behavioral sciences. Perhaps something can be learned from the variety of experiences across disciplines.
On the disturbing side, some of the fields that are experiencing increasing numbers of women have not seen a similar increase in the rates of participation in influential positions. Efforts to change numbers must be accompanied by efforts to improve retention, promotion, and advancement.
The other disturbing sign is the "feminization" of those fields in which the numbers of women have been growing. There is a long-term tendency for areas dominated by women to suffer lower compensation and prestige. No necessary connection exists, but clearly that is an issue that we all must be concerned about.
The Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences is responsible for collecting data on the status of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities. We produce a report of which we are very proud: The Foundation's biennial report to Congress, Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering. We also fund research, especially on the status of women in the social and behavioral sciences, and hold conferences and activities, especially on the subject of women in economics. We provide support wherever we can in connection with our colleagues across the rest of the Foundation.
In our strategic plan, NSF in a Changing World, one of three goals is the provision for excellent science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education for all students at all educational levels. What I would like to do is to take a few minutes to point out some issues and opportunities offered by the Directorate for Education and Human Resources.
First, there is the quality advice that we garner from the broad community. We need individuals with a wide range of views and backgrounds to participate as members of a national advisory committee to guide the Directorate's planning.
Second, there is the diversity issue not only at the program officer level but also in leadership roles throughout the various programs of the Directorate. We need program officers and division directors who shape programs and define their components.
Third, there is the issue of balancing priorities. We must effectively ensure substantial participation of women in our mainstream programs in addition to offering targeted, highly specific programs designed to achieve highly specific goals in a finite time period.
Along with these issues, we must make sure that the broad diversity of the scientific and technical enterprise is represented at all levels of education and career. This involves monitoring who receives NSF awards, who assumes leadership roles, and who directs the broad educational agenda independent of its level, whether it is K to 12, undergraduate, graduate, and obviously, science and engineering professionals.
I would like to tell you a little about what the Directorate for Education and Human Resources is doing to promote diversity in science and engineering particularly as it affects women.
Finally, I wish to point out that all of our programs undergo a rigorous process of evaluation and all projects are expected to evaluate their outcomes and disseminate the best of their results and findings. Only through this systematic examination can we hope to learn what works and how we can best share this with the community.
"The single most dramatic trend in academic sociology since the 1970s has been the feminization of the discipline's recruitment pool.
Contrary to conventional wisdom that feminization leads to occupational decline, data strongly suggest that as the field declined in prestige and earnings, men moved to other training programs.
This opened up additional graduate slots for women, who were themselves newly interested in the field.
Signs of renewal have once again surfaced.
Median annual salaries of sociologists are once again on the increase, and women sociologists have narrowed the gender gap in earnings."
"Although women and men are earning an equal number of sociology doctoral degrees -- as measured in a variety of ways -- women are not achieving parity in the discipline.
Women earn significantly lower salaries than men.
Women reported fewer experiences serving as peer reviewers, making public appearances as experts, working as primary researchers, or publishing in academic journals."
The Cross University Research in Engineering and Science (CURIES) group on women and gender in science, engineering, and mathematics sponsored a conference in May 1994 to assess current knowledge and set an agenda for future research, practice, and policy. The goal of this agenda was to ensure equitable opportunities for women in scientific and technical fields. The key recommendations included:
Source: The Equity Agenda: Women in Science, Mathematics and Engineering. Copies of this report can be ordered from: The Center for the Education of Women, University of Michigan, 330 E. Liberty St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104-2289. E-mail request to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Back to Top | Table of Contents | Next Section