Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering

by Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Engineering, National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering

Overview

The United States economy relies on the productivity, entrepreneurship, and creativity of its people. To maintain its scientific and engineering leadership amid increasing economic and educational globalization, the United States must aggressively pursue the innovative capacity of all its people—women and men. However, women face barriers to success in every field of science and engineering; obstacles that deprive the country of an important source of talent. Without a transformation of academic institutions to tackle such barriers, the future vitality of the U.S. research base and economy are in jeopardy.

Beyond Bias and Barriers explains that eliminating gender bias in academia requires immediate overarching reform, including decisive action by university administrators, professional societies, federal funding agencies and foundations, government agencies, and Congress. If implemented and coordinated across public, private, and government sectors, the recommended actions will help to improve workplace environments for all employees while strengthening the foundations of America's competitiveness.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780309100427
Publisher:	National Academies Press
Publication date:	06/04/2007
Edition description:	New Edition
Pages:	346
Product dimensions:	6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 1.00(d)

Read an Excerpt

BEYOND BIAS AND BARRIERS

FULFILLING THE POTENTIAL OF WOMEN IN ACADEMIC SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

---

NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Copyright © 2007 National Academy of Sciences
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-309-10042-7

---

Chapter One

Summary

The U.S. economy relies on the productivity, entrepreneurship, and creativity of its people. To maintain its scientific and engineering leadership amid increasing economic and educational globalization, the United States must aggressively pursue the innovative capacity of all of its people-women and men. Women make up an increasing proportion of science and engineering majors at all institutions, including top programs such as those at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology where women make up 51% of its science undergraduates and 35% of its engineering undergraduates. For women to participate to their full potential across all science and engineering fields, they must see a career path that allows them to reach their full intellectual potential. Much remains to be done to achieve that goal.

Women are a small portion of the science and engineering faculty members at research universities, and they typically receive fewer resources and less support than their male colleagues. The representation of women in leadership positions in our academic institutions, scientific and professional societies, and honorary organizations is low relative to the numbers ofwomen qualified to hold these positions. It is not lack of talent, but unintentional biases and outmoded institutional structures that are hindering the access and advancement of women. Neither our academic institutions nor our nation can afford such underuse of precious human capital in science and engineering. The time to take action is now.

The National Academies, under the oversight of the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, created the Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering to develop specific recommendations on how to make the fullest possible use of a large source of our nation's talent: women in academic science and engineering. This report presents the consensus views and judgment of the committee members, who include five university presidents and chancellors, provosts and named professors, former top government officials, leading policy analysts, and outstanding scientists and engineers-nine of whom are members of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, or the Institute of Medicine, and many of whom have dedicated great thought and action to the advancement of women in science and engineering. The committee's recommendations-if implemented and coordinated across educational, professional, and government sectors-will transform our institutions, improve the working environment for women and men, and profoundly enhance our nation's talent pool.

FINDINGS

1. Women have the ability and drive to succeed in science and engineering. Studies of brain structure and function, of hormonal modulation of performance, of human cognitive development, and of human evolution have not found any significant biological differences between men and women in performing science and mathematics that can account for the lower representation of women in academic faculty and scientific leadership positions in these fields. The drive and motivation of women scientists and engineers is demonstrated by those women who persist in academic careers despite barriers that disproportionately disadvantage them.

2. Women who are interested in science and engineering careers are lost at every educational transition. With each step up the academic ladder, from high school on through full professorships, the representation of women in science and engineering drops substantially. As they move from high school to college, more women than men who have expressed an interest in science or engineering decide to major in something else; in the transition to graduate school, more women than men with science and engineering degrees opt into other fields of study; from doctorate to first position, there are proportionately fewer women than men in the applicant pool for tenure-track positions; active recruiting can overcome this deficit.

3. The problem is not simply the pipeline. In several fields, the pipeline has reached gender parity. For over 30 years, women have made up over 30% of the doctorates in social sciences and behavioral sciences and over 20% in the life sciences. Yet, at the top research institutions, only 15.4% of the full professors in the social and behavioral sciences and 14.8% in the life sciences are women-and these are the only fields in science and engineering where the proportion of women reaches into the double digits. Women from minority racial and ethnic backgrounds are virtually absent from the nation's leading science and engineering departments.

4. Women are very likely to face discrimination in every field of science and engineering. Considerable research has shown the barriers limiting the appointment, retention, and advancement of women faculty. Overall, scientists and engineers who are women or members of racial or ethnic minority groups have had to function in environments that favor-sometimes deliberately but often inadvertently-the men who have traditionally dominated science and engineering. Well-qualified and highly productive women scientists have also had to contend with continuing questioning of their own abilities in science and mathematics and their commitment to an academic career. Minority-group women are subject to dual discrimination and face even more barriers to success. As a result, throughout their careers, women have not received the opportunities and encouragement provided to men to develop their interests and abilities to the fullest; this accumulation of disadvantage becomes acute in more senior positions.

These barriers have differential impact by field and by career stage. Some fields, such as physics and engineering, have a low proportion of women bachelor's and doctorates, but hiring into faculty positions appears to match the available pool. In other fields, including chemistry and biological sciences, the proportion of women remains high through bachelor's and doctorate degrees, but hiring into faculty positions is well below the available pool.

5. A substantial body of evidence establishes that most people-men and women-hold implicit biases. Decades of cognitive psychology research reveals that most of us carry prejudices of which we are unaware but that nonetheless play a large role in our evaluations of people and their work. An impressive body of controlled experimental studies and examination of decision-making processes in real life show that, on the average, people are less likely to hire a woman than a man with identical qualifications, are less likely to ascribe credit to a woman than to a man for identical accomplishments, and, when information is scarce, will far more often give the benefit of the doubt to a man than to a woman. Although most scientists and engineers believe that they are objective and intend to be fair, research shows that they are not exempt from those tendencies.

6. Evaluation criteria contain arbitrary and subjective components that disadvantage women. Women faculty are paid less, are promoted more slowly, receive fewer honors, and hold fewer leadership positions than men. These discrepancies do not appear to be based on productivity, the significance of their work, or any other measure of performance. Progress in academic careers depends on evaluation of accomplishments by more senior scientists, a process widely believed to be objective. Yet measures of success underlying the current "meritocratic" system are often arbitrary and applied in a biased manner (usually unintentionally). Characteristics that are often selected for and are believed, on the basis of little evidence, to relate to scientific creativity-namely assertiveness and single-mindedness-are given greater weight than other characteristics such as flexibility, diplomacy, curiosity, motivation, and dedication, which may be more vital to success in science and engineering. At the same time assertiveness and single-mindedness are stereotyped as socially unacceptable traits for women.

7. Academic organizational structures and rules contribute significantly to the underuse of women in academic science and engineering. Rules that appear quite neutral may function in a way that leads to differential treatment or produces differential outcomes for men and women. Structural constraints and expectations built into academic institutions assume that faculty members have substantial spousal support. The evidence demonstrates that anyone lacking the work and family support traditionally provided by a "wife" is at a serious disadvantage in academe. However, the majority of faculty no longer have such support. About 90% of the spouses of women science and engineering faculty are employed full-time; close to half the spouses of male faculty also work full-time.

8. The consequences of not acting will be detrimental to the nation's competitiveness. Women and minority-group members make up an increasing proportion of the labor force. They also are an increasing proportion of postsecondary students. To capture and capitalize on this talent will require revising policies adopted when the workplace was more homogeneous and creating new organizational structures that manage a diverse workforce effectively. Effective programs have three key components: commitment to take corrective action, analysis and utilization of data for organizational change, and a campus framework for monitoring progress.

To facilitate clear, evidence-based discussion of the issues, the committee compiled a list of commonly held beliefs concerning women in science and engineering (Table S-1). Each is discussed and analyzed in detail in the text of the report.

CONCLUSIONS

The United States can no longer afford the underperformance of our academic institutions in attracting the best and brightest minds to the science and engineering enterprise. Nor can it afford to devalue the contributions of some members of that workforce through gender inequities and discrimination. It is essential that our academic institutions promote the educational and professional success of all people without regard for sex, race, or ethnicity. So that our scientists and engineers can realize their greatest potential, our academic institutions must be held accountable and provide evidence that women and men receive equitable opportunities, resources, and support. Institutional policies and practices must move from the traditional model to an inclusive model with provisions for equitable and unbiased evaluation of accomplishment, equitable allocations of support and resources, pay equity, and gender-equal family leave policies. Otherwise, a large number of the people trained in and capable of doing the very best science and engineering will not participate as they should in scientific and engineering professions.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Career impediments for women deprive the nation of an important source of talented and accomplished scientists and engineers who could contribute to our nation's competitiveness. Transforming institutional structures and procedures to eliminate gender bias is a major national task that will require strong leadership and continuous attention, evaluation, and accountability. Because those obstacles are both substantial and systemic, there are no easy fixes; however, many practices developed in the last decade by universities and funding agencies have proven effective in increasing both the participation of women on faculties and their appointment to leadership positions. In part, the challenge is to use such strategies more widely and evaluate them more broadly to ensure we are accessing the entire talent pool to find truly the best people for our faculties. We need to think creatively about opportunities for substantial and overarching reform of the academic enterprise-its structure, incentives, and accountability-to change outcomes and achieve equity.

The committee's recommendations are large-scale and interdependent, requiring the interaction of university leaders and faculties, scientific and professional societies, funding agencies, federal agencies, and Congress.

A. Universities

A1. Trustees, university presidents, and provosts should provide clear leadership in changing the culture and structure of their institutions to recruit, retain, and promote women-including minority women-into faculty and leadership positions.

(a) University leaders should incorporate into campus strategic plans goals of counteracting bias against women in hiring, promotion, and treatment. This includes working with an inter-institution monitoring organization (see below) to perform annual reviews of the composition of their student body and faculty ranks, publicizing progress toward the goals annually, and providing a detailed annual briefing to the board of trustees. (b) University leaders should take action immediately to remedy inequities in hiring, promotion, and treatment. (c) University leaders should as part of their mandatory overall management efforts hold leadership workshops for deans, department heads, search committee chairs, and other faculty with personnel management responsibilities that include an integrated component on diversity and strategies to overcome bias and gender schemas and strategies for encouraging fair treatment of all people. It is crucial that these workshops are integrated into the fabric of the management of universities and departments.

(d) University leaders should require evidence of a fair, broad, and aggressive search before approving appointments and hold departments accountable for the equity of their search process and outcomes even if it means canceling a search or withholding a faculty position. (e) University leaders should develop and implement hiring, tenure, and promotion policies that take into account the flexibility that faculty need across the life course, allowing integration of family, work, and community responsibilities. They should provide uniform policies and central funding for faculty and staff on leave and should visibly and vigorously support campus programs that help faculty with children or other caregiving responsibilities to maintain productive careers. These programs should, at a minimum, include provisions for paid parental leave for faculty, staff, postdoctoral scholars, and graduate students; facilities and subsidies for on-site and community-based child care; dissertation defense and tenure clock extensions; and family-friendly scheduling of critical meetings.

A2. Deans and department chairs and their tenured faculty should take responsibility for creating a productive environment and immediately implement programs and strategies shown to be successful in minimizing the effect of biases in recruiting, hiring, promotion, and tenure.

(a) Faculties and their senates should initiate a full faculty discussion of climate issues. (b) Deans, department chairs, and their tenured faculty should develop and implement programs that educate all faculty members and students in their departments on unexamined bias and effective evaluation; these programs should be integrated into departmental meetings and retreats, and professional development and teacher-training courses. For example, such programs can be incorporated into research ethics and laboratory management courses for graduate students, postdoctoral scholars, and research staff; and can be part of management leadership workshops for faculty, deans, and department chairs. (c) Deans, department chairs and their tenured faculty should expand their faculty recruitment efforts to ensure that they reach adequately and proactively into the existing and ever-increasing pool of women candidates. (d) Faculties and their senates should immediately review their tenure processes and timelines to ensure that hiring, tenure, and promotion policies take into account the flexibility that faculty need across the life course and do not sacrifice quality in the process of meeting rigid timelines.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from BEYOND BIAS AND BARRIERS Copyright © 2007 by National Academy of Sciences. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Summary     1
Findings     2
Conclusions     4
Recommendations     7
Call to Action     12
Introduction     13
Recognizing Obstacles     15
Defining the Issues     22
Learning and Performance     24
Chapter Highlights     24
Findings     25
Recommendation     26
Research Approaches     26
Cognition     28
Mathematical and Spatial Performance     29
Verbal and Written Performance     32
Longitudinal Manifestation of Cognitive Differences     36
Biology     37
Brain Structure and Function     37
Hormonal Influences on Cognitive Performance     38
Psychological Development in Infancy     39
Evolutionary Psychology     41
Society and Culture     42
Socialization of Infants and Children     43
Education     44
Social Effects on Women's Cognitive Performance     45
Conclusion     49
Examining Persistence and Attrition     50
Chapter Highlights     50
Findings     51
Recommendations     52
Course Selection in High School     59
College-Going and Majors     61
Undergraduate Persistence to Degree     61
Social Factors Influencing Undergraduate Attrition     63
College to Graduate School     66
Graduate School     68
Graduate School Attrition     75
Postgraduate Career Plans     76
Postdoctoral Appointments     77
Professional Development and Productivity     77
Funding Source     78
Faculty Positions     79
Hiring New Doctorates into Faculty Positions     80
The "Pool"     85
Faculty Mobility     89
Exiting the Tenure Track     91
Tenure     92
Promotion     93
Faculty Retention     95
Departments vs. Centers     99
Economic Impact of Faculty Attrition     100
Case Study: Chemistry     104
Conclusion     109
Success and Its Evaluation in Science and Engineering     113
Chapter Highlights     113
Findings     114
Recommendations     115
Building a Career      117
Productivity     117
Sex Differences in Publication Productivity     121
Recognition     123
Leadership Positions     125
Grants and Contracts     129
Evaluation of Leaders     129
Evaluation of Success     135
Gender Bias in Evaluation     143
Understanding Discrimination     150
Subtle, Implicit, or Unexamined Bias     151
The Case for Diversity: "There Goes the Neighborhood?"     153
Accountability and Evaluation     155
Beyond Bias     159
Conclusion     159
Institutional Constraints     160
Chapter Highlights     160
Findings     161
Recommendations     162
The "Ideal" Scientist or Engineer     166
Recruitment     167
Institutional Interactions     169
Family Responsibilities and the Bias Against Caregivers     174
The Maternal Wall     176
Glass Ceilings     179
Pioneers and Tipping Points     180
The Legal Landscape     189
Bringing Institutional Change     196
Small-Win Experiments     197
Identifying Barriers to Success in Science and Engineering     200
Establishing an Inclusive Work Environment     205
Integrating Work into One's Whole Life     207
Service Obligations     210
Breaking the Conspiracy of Silence: Minority-Group Women Faculty     210
Funding-Agency-Driven Institutional Transformation     211
Conclusion     212
Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering     214
Root Causes of Disparities     214
Why Change is Necessary     217
What Must Be Done: A Blueprint for Action     219
Change Institutional Processes to Combat Bias     219
Create New Institutional Structures     225
Create Methods for Evaluation and Accountability     229
Coordinating Body     232
Continuous Evaluation: Scorecard     237
Federal Standards and Compliance Issues     237
Sanctions     239
Possible Unintended Consequences     239
Call to Action     240
Appendixes
Biographical Information     245
Statement of Task     256
Chapter 4, Measuring Racial Discrimination Theories of Discrimination     258
References     275
Index      301