AAUW Releases New Report on Women in STEM

In March 2010, the American Association of University Women released Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Sponsored by the National Science Foundation, the report draws from research in a wide range of disciplines to probe the perennial question of why women remain underrepresented in STEM.

Noting that significant gains in girls’ early math test scores have not translated into equal gains in STEM degree attainment or in the workplace, the report looks to a complex array of social factors for explanation. It draws from important recent research in a range of topics—including girls’ self-assessment of their math skills, young women’s propensity to choose STEM majors, institutional factors affecting female science faculty, departmental and workplace climates, and the impact of implicit biases—to pinpoint areas that undermine women’s success in STEM. The report concludes with a series of recommendations for supporting girls’ and women’s scientific aspirations in schools, in academic workplaces, and in society at large.  

The report, written by Catherine Hill, Christianne Corbett, and Andresse St. Rose, is available online at www.aauw.org/learn/research/whysofew.cfm.To read about some of the report’s recommendations for colleges and universities, see Andresse St. Rose’s article in this issue of OCWW.

Gender Salary Gap in the Life Sciences Confirmed

Research published in April 2010 in the journal Academic Medicine suggests that the gender gap is alive and well in the salaries of life sciences faculty. Drawing from surveys distributed to faculty at National Institutes of Health-funded medical schools, the authors found that after controlling for related factors, women received $13,226 less each year than men in the life sciences.

The results confirmed that in addition to receiving different levels of compensation, women and men engaged in different amounts and kinds of work. Women full professors spent more time than men did on “administrative tasks and other professional activities” (excluding research, patient care, and teaching), while women assistant professors spent less time on research than their male colleagues (633). Women full professors were also more likely than men to have engaged in five specific service activities: “university administrator, member of federal review panel, journal editor or editorial board member, chair of university-wide committee, and officer of professional association” (633). Women across ranks published less than their male colleagues (636).

Lamenting the persistence of salary gaps despite widespread attention to their existence, the authors point out that women “take on different roles” as their careers progress (637-638) and should be compensated financially for this typically less-rewarded work. The article, written by Catherine M. DesRoches, Darren E. Zinner, Sowmya R. Rao, Lisa I. Iezzoni, and Eric G. Campbell, is available for free download at journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Abstract/2010/04000/Activities,_Productivity,_and_Compensation_of_Men.23.aspx.

Department of Education Amends Title IX Guidance

In April 2010, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S. Department of Education withdrew its controversial guidance regarding Part Three of Title IX’s Three-Part Test for college athletics. Proponents of Title IX have widely regarded the change as strengthening the regulation’s effectiveness.

Part Three of the Three-Part Test suggests that institutions can prove compliance with Title IX’s athletics requirements by showing that an existing athletics program meets “the interests and abilities” of students whose sex is underrepresented in that school’s particular context. In a series of documents issued in 2005, OCR suggested that nonresponse to a survey constituted such proof. In contrast, the new guidance states that “OCR does not consider the failure by students to express interest during a survey under Part Three as evidence sufficient to justify the elimination of a current and viable intercollegiate team for the underrepresented sex” (5).

In a press release issued on April 20, the National Coalition of Women and Girls in Education (with which AAC&U is affiliated) stated its support of the new guidance and stressed the benefits that women and girls gain from athletic participation. To read the memo, visit www.aauw.org/media/pressreleases/NCWGEtitleIX_042010.cfm. To download the guidance letter, visit ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/index.html.

In Most Jobs, Women Earn Less than Men

In April 2010, the Institute for Women’s Policy Research released a fact sheet detailing the gender wage gap for full-time workers by occupational status. Drawing from data gathered by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the fact sheet states that for full-time workers, women’s median weekly income was 80.2 percent that of men (1).

Women had higher earnings than men in only four of the 108 occupations reviewed: “other life, physical, and social science technicians,” “bakers,” “teacher assistants,” and “dining room and cafeteria attendants and bartender helpers” (9). Women also earned less than men in both the most common occupations for women (where 29 percent of all female workers are concentrated) and the highest-paying occupations for women (where under 4 percent of all female workers are concentrated) (1-3).

The fact sheet included an illuminating breakdown of the gender wage gap by race and ethnicity. While the gender wage gap for white workers is larger than the overall average, the gap for all other racial and ethnic groups is smaller than the average (3). Other differences appeared in the broad occupational categories that women and men of different races occupied. For example, while 31 percent of white women and 37 percent of Asian women worked in “professional and related occupations,” only 17 percent of Latina women and 25 percent of black women worked in these fields. Conversely, 12 percent of white women and 17 percent of Asian women worked in service occupations, compared with 26 percent of Latina women and 25 percent of black women.

The complete fact sheet includes a wealth of related information and is available for free download at www.iwpr.org/pdf/C350a.pdf.

Researchers Explore Gender Differences among Engineering Students

The Academic Pathways Study, a multiyear project conducted by the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education, recently published new data related to men’s and women’s different experiences as undergraduate engineering majors. Articles published by the study’s investigators in 2009 summarized findings related to two particular topics: extracurricular activities and self-confidence.

The first article, “Outside the Classroom: Gender Differences in Extracurricular Activities of Engineering Students,” reports that women undergraduate engineering students tend to show higher rates of participation than men in both engineering-related and non-engineering-related extracurricular activities. Women reported that extracurricular activities were more important to them than men did overall, although both men and women reported that these activities were most important during the third year of college (a time when, incidentally, the frequency of their involvement in extracurricular activities dropped). Qualitative interviews suggested that within these activities, women were more likely to take on administrative leadership roles, while men were more likely to participate in applied engineering work.

In the second article, “Exploring Gender and Self-Confidence in Engineering Students: A Multi-Method Approach,” researchers detailed findings related to women’s self-confidence in their abilities as engineers. Data showed that men were more confident than women in their “math and science skills” and in “open-ended problem solving skills,” although men’s and women’s confidence in their “interpersonal and professional skills” was roughly equivalent. In a series of interviews, researchers discovered that women’s lower self-confidence was likely related to internalized stereotypes about their abilities. Significantly, women’s lower self-confidence appeared in their self-presentation. When asked what they would like someone to know about them during a hiring interview, women tended to characterize themselves as “‘hard workers’” who could quickly gain the skills needed for a job, while men represented themselves as already having those skills.

Both papers are available for free download online. To access “Outside the Classroom,” visit fie-conference.org/fie2009/papers/1239.pdf; to access “Exploring Gender and Self-Confidence in Engineering Students,” visit soa.asee.org/paper/conference/paper-view.cfm?id=11830.