Beyond the Degree: Where Are Women Scientists, and How Are They Doing?
By Judy Touchton, executive coach and research consultant, founder of WomenLeadersMove.com, and author of A Measure of Equity: Women’s Status in Higher Education (forthcoming 2008)

According to the National Science Foundation (2007), women’s representation among PhD earners in science and engineering (S&E) is higher than ever, although progress has not been uniform across disciplines. In 2005, women (U.S. citizens and students with visas) earned more than half (68 percent) of all doctorates in psychology, almost half (45 percent) in social sciences, and about one-third (34 percent) in earth, atmospheric, and oceanic sciences. But in other S&E fields, women’s share of doctorates is lower: women received 27 percent of doctoral degrees in mathematics and statistics, 27 percent in physical sciences, 27 percent in astronomy, chemistry, and physics, 20 percent in computer sciences, and 18 percent in engineering (NSF 2007). These women enter the workforce with a range of professional opportunities from academe to industry. But what is happening in science and engineering beyond the degree, once women have obtained PhDs and entered the job market? Where are women doctorates employed, how well are they compensated, and how do outside considerations (such as family circumstances) affect their careers?

Employment Sector Differences

In 2003, across all educational levels, women constituted about 7.6 million of the total 18 million scientists employed in S&E, S&E-related, and non-S&E occupations (NSF 2007 Table H-19). In broad terms, women were 34 percent of scientists, 11 percent of engineers, 55 percent of workers in S&E-related occupations, and 43 percent of workers in non-S&E occupations (NSF 2007 Table H-19). These women were most likely to work in education, government, and nonprofit organizations and less likely to be in business and industry or self-employed (NSF 2007 Table H-19).

A 2008 study by Joan Burrelli for the National Science Foundation (NSF) examines employment sector differences from 1973-2006 for women and men with doctorates in science, engineering, and health. Drawing on the NSF Survey of Doctoral Recipients, Burrelli reports that in 2006, slightly more than half (52 percent) of all women science doctorates worked in higher education, compared to 19 percent in business or industry, 10 percent in government, and 16 percent in other fields (including K-12 education, nonprofit organizations, or self-employment). Men’s employment concentrations were similarly ranked, although men were more likely than women to be working in business and industry (Burrelli 2008 Table 2).

To some extent, these differences reflect variations in fields of study. In physical sciences, for example, women doctorates were employed in business and industry in the same proportion as men (about 42 percent). Meanwhile, greater discrepancy appears in computer science, where 47 percent of men and 27 percent of women with doctoral degrees enter the business and industry sector. Across all other S&E fields in 2006, a smaller percentage of women than men tended to enter the business and industry sectors (see Figure 1) (Burrelli 2008 Table 3).

Figure 1

Levels of Success within Employment Sectors

In academe, women’s share of full-time tenured or tenure-track S&E faculty positions has increased slowly but steadily, from slightly less than 10 percent in 1979 to 28 percent in 2006, with distributions varying considerably by field (see Figure 2) (Burrelli 2008 Table 5). Women are more likely to be assistant (42 percent) and associate (34 percent) professors than full professors, where women hold only 19 percent of jobs (a considerable increase over the 5 percent of these positions women held in 1973) (Burrelli 2008 Table 5). This pattern indicates a need for continued focused efforts to enable women to move up the career ladder in the sciences (Burrelli 2008 Table 5).

Figure 2

Meanwhile, the gender composition of S&E faculty varies considerably by institutional type and location. Women in tenure and tenure-track S&E positions are most likely to be found in medical schools and medical centers, where in 2003 they constituted one-third (33 percent) of total faculty (Burrelli 2008 Table 6). Most of these women were located at the assistant professor and instructor level (AAMC 2003 Table 9). Women are least likely to be found in research universities, where in 2003 they were less than one in four faculty members (23 percent) (Burrelli 2008 Table 6). Combining all institutional types, male doctoral S&E faculty outnumber female S&E faculty by more than two to one (Burrelli 2008 Table 6).

In nonacademic S&E positions, college-educated women are less well represented than in the workforce at large: in 2005, 26 percent of college-degreed persons in nonacademic S&E occupations were women, compared to 47 percent of the college-degreed workforce (NSF 2008). Women held a higher proportion of doctoral-level nonacademic S&E occupations in comparison: in 2005 they constituted 31 percent of this occupational group, up from 23 percent in 1990 (NSF 2008).

In the government sector, managerial status presents one indicator of career success. On average, 35 percent of women and 44 percent of men across all age groups were managers in 2003 (NSF 2008 Table H-32). Interesting differences appeared by age group: among those younger than 35 years old, 26 percent of women and 37 percent of men had become managers. Between the ages of 35-44 the gender gap almost closed, with 39 percent of women and 41 percent of men being managers. After age 45, however, the gap increased to 10 percentage points for ages 45-54 and 15 percentage points for those 55 or older.

Levels of Compensation: Salary

Examining S&E faculty salaries in relation to five broad fields (biological/agricultural, environmental life sciences, physical sciences, engineering, mathematics/statistics, and computer/information sciences), recent data indicate that with only two exceptions, women faculty earn less than men in the same faculty ranks (AWIS 2008). In computer/information sciences, tenure-track women earned a median salary of $74,200 (compared to $71,000 for men), while tenured women’s median salary was $84,000 (compared to $83,100 for men) (AWIS 2008). In engineering, tenure-track women and men had equal salaries. In all other cases, across all five fields and regardless of tenure status, men’s salaries exceeded those of women (see Figure 3 for tenured faculty) (AWIS 2008).

Figure 3

These gaps extend outside of academe and vary by employment sector. AWIS reports that across employment sectors, women scientists with PhDs earned only 87 percent of what their male counterpoints earned in 2003 (AWIS 2008). In physical sciences, for instance, the gaps varied within each sector, but each was significant: women made 80 percent of what their male colleagues earned in the federal government, 82 percent in universities and four-year colleges, 89 percent in the private for-profit sector, and 90 percent in the private non-profit sector (AWIS 2008). These figures indicate that much change is needed before full equity will be reached.           

Differential Impact of Marriage and Family

Empirical studies have recently documented what women have long recognized: that marriage and children impact career progression. NSF analysis of academic careers found that in 2006, across all science, engineering, and health fields, women represented only 23 percent of married full-time tenure or tenure-track faculty, compared to 48 percent of unmarried faculty in the same group (Burrelli 2008 Table 7). Within these ranks, women represented only 24 percent of faculty who had children at home, while they were 31 percent of faculty who had no children at home (Burrelli 2008 Table 7). For full-time full professors, the differences were even more pronounced (see Figure 4) (Burrelli 2008 Table 8).

Figure 4

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has long called attention to similar hurdles women face in business and industry. In “Women Scientists and Engineers Employed in Industry: Why So Few?,” the National Academy identified barriers to women’s success, including limited access to traditional networks, paternalism, sexual harassment, lower salaries, and hostile work environments (1994). In response to these and other barriers, they suggested several initiatives to produce positive change, including increased attention to work-family issues, mentoring, establishment of women’s networks, and flexible work schedules—always emphasizing the importance of chief executive officer support for such initiatives to be successful (Committee on Women in Science and Engineering 1994). If industry leaders were to follow these recommendations in support of their pursuit of the “bottom line,” they might bring about family-friendly policies for women in S&E faster than academe.

A mere glance at the demographics of employed scientists and engineers reveals the degree to which family-friendly policies are needed. In 2003, significantly fewer women (69 percent) than men (80 percent) were married; twice as many women (10 percent) as men (5 percent) were divorced; and considerably more women (19 percent) than men (14 percent) had never married (NSF 2007 Table H-36). Among those who were married, women were much more likely (57 percent) than men (39 percent) to have a spouse who worked full time (NSF 2007 Table H-36). Half (50 percent) of women had children in the home, compared with 53 percent of men (NSF 2007 Table H-36). Perhaps most tellingly, among scientists and engineers who were out of the labor force by choice, 27 percent of women versus only 2 percent of men named “family responsibilities” as the reason (NSF 2007 Table H-12).

Conclusion

Fortunately, today’s employers are aware of gender imbalance in the sciences and are working to combat inequity, although they still have much to accomplish on this front. Higher education and industry are reaching out to middle schools to engage students at an early age. High schools and colleges are experimenting with different pedagogical approaches. Some federal government agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), are examining workplace climates to find out why “women do not perceive [the science workplace] as a female-friendly environment” (Adams 2008). Employers in the private sector are recognizing the importance of creating environments that are not only female-friendly, but family-friendly, reflecting the changing values and priorities of a new and younger workforce.

As the development of an increasingly technology- and science-driven economy converges with the projected retirement of a whole generation of “boomer scientists,” the demand for highly trained scientists is poised to rise in all sectors. Women and people of color need to be a substantial part of the expanded scientific workforce. In the words of Shirley Ann Jackson, president of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, “If we are to sustain our capacity for innovation, it must be an all-in proposition. You cannot presume to have tapped the best talent if you do not tap the complete talent pool” (Adams 2008).         

References

Adams, J. U.  2008. Nurturing women scientists. Women in Science, February 8. sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2008_02_08/science.opms.r0800047

American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). 2003. U.S. medical school faculty, 2003. Table 9: Sex and Rank. www.aamc.org/data/facultyroster/usmsf03/start.htm. 

Association for Women in Science (AWIS). 2008. The pay gap in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professions. www.awis.org/news//documents/finalpaygapinSTEMreport.pdf

Burrelli, J. 2008. Thirty-three years of women in S&E faculty positions. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08308/

Committee on Women in Science and Engineering, National Research Council. 1994. Women scientists and engineers employed in industry: Why so few? Washington, DC: National Academy Press. www.nap.edu/openbook/0309049911/html/R1.html.

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2007. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2007. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/pdf/nsf07315.pdf.

• Table F-2: S&E doctoral degrees awarded to women, by field: 1998-2005.
• Table H-12: S&E doctorate holders who are unemployed or out of labor force, by reason for not working, sex, race/ethnicity, and disability status: 2003
• Table H-19: Employed scientists and engineers, by sector of employment, broad occupation, sex, race/ethnicity, and disability status: 2003.
• Table H-32: Scientists and engineers employed in government, by managerial status, age, sex, race/ethnicity, and disability status: 2003
• Table H-36: Demographic characteristics of employed scientists and engineers, by sex: 2003

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2008. Science and engineering indicators 2008. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/c0/c0i.htm.