gender and it education conference, indiana university, 2007 gender & it education recruitment...

Gender and IT Education Conference, Indiana University, 2007Gender and IT Education Conference, Indiana University, 2007

Gender & ITEducation

Recruitment and Websites

What Do IT Program Websites Reveal about Woman Friendliness?

Kristin Hanks

Gender and IT Education Conference, Indiana University, 2007

Research Questions• At first glance, might websites give

subtle gender cues, whether intentional or not?

• Do applied departments differ in their online recruitment practices from Computer Science and Engineering departments?


Why Websites?

Websites are one of the most influential recruitment devices, second

only to an in-person campus visit

(Abrahamson, 2000)


Technology Usage Differences

• Women Prefer:– sites that are less cluttered– minimal use of graphics – sites which avoid multiple levels of sub-

pages to drill through

• Women Value:– ease of use (while men value perceived

usefulness)


Information Processing Differences

• Women are more sensitive to:– visual/non-verbal cues– message claims– overall themes– manipulative intent

• “Comprehensive Information Processors”

• Women have a tendency to elaborate on these messages, forming opinions using subtle cues.


Professional Preference Differences

• Desired workplace characteristics:– Interpersonal relationship opportunities– Prioritization of work-life balance– “Service” as a core value– Environment of Inclusiveness– Empowerment– Empathy

• Women in studies valued an informal and friendly culture and a place that really cared about them as individuals


Methodology• Content Analysis of 104 pages from 16

departments at the 5 schools, over 90 variables on each page

• Pages Coded – Recruitment Perspective– Home– About Us/Mission– Contact Us– Prospective Student– Admissions/Applying– Current Student– People or “Find People”– Diversity– Other


Coding Categories

• Photographs

• Text

• Navigation

• Qualitative Observations


Photographs might indicate

• Who “represents” the school? – Proportion of men to women in photos? – Photos of groups or individuals?

• Is intimacy depicted?– Are people making eye contact? – Are people touching? – Are the pictures formal (headshots, posed

groups) or informal?

• What/who is the main focus? Are the photos of buildings, technology, people, or a mix?


Text might indicate:

• Who “speaks” for the school? – Who is quoted?

• Who gets credit? – Are the accomplishments of both

genders listed?

• Is diversity valued? – Is there a link to information about

diversity or minorities? – Is diversity mentioned in the other text

on the page?


Navigation might indicate:

• Can I find the information I need? – Wayfinding is documented to be

different for men and women.

• Can I find other female students? – Do female student organizations exist

here? – Are such organizations clearly a

priority for the department?


Three Disclaimers

• Can NOT tell the cumulative effects of the elements

• The applied departments are all grouped together, despite the fact that substantial differences may exist between them

• NOT suggesting "feminizing" the pages


Research Questions• At first glance, might websites give

subtle gender cues, whether intentional or not?

• Do applied fields differ in their online recruitment practices from Computer Science and Engineering departments?


Findings - Photographs

Applied

Computer Science

• More photographs of women

• More clearly posed pictures

• Higher representation of women relative to their enrollment statistics

• More intimate photographs (eye contact)• Higher percentage of candid photographs


Findings - Text

Applied

Computer Science

• Had more quotes, but a relatively low overall number of 8. All 8 were male quotes.

• Listed more accomplishments • Listed more female than male

accomplishments• Used full names more often


Findings - Navigation

Applied

Computer Science

• Used more search boxes, site maps, and consistently placed "contact us" buttons on their pages.

• Had more consistent layouts from page to page.

• Linked to more female and minority organizations and did so from more pages.


Findings - Qualitative

• Mentorship programs – More on CS pages

• Diversity statements – Found on both CS and Applied pages – few mention gender as a representation

issue.

• Several departments have family oriented student groups – suggest an attempt to help with

work/life balance issues which might be important to women


Overall Impressions

Applied

Computer Science

• Elements which better suit female information processing and culture preferences

• Less elements emphasizing gender equity as a high priority

• Obvious effort to reverse low enrollment statistics• Project an image of inclusion• Structural/navigation elements indicate male

information processing patterns


A word of caution• Equating the findings with intention

– CS links to female organizations more • higher priority? • older department with more ties?

– Applied pages have navigation elements which map better to female processing strategies

• “just good design”? • more female webmasters/staff who contributed to the

design?

• Future Studies are needed– much larger sample size– breaking down the "Applied" departments by

type– testing whether the elements which are

significantly different make a real difference to real women


Applying the Current Study

• Representation of females in website photographs

• Posted diversity statements • Links to female organizations• Consistent page layouts and navigation

element• Opportunities for departmental contact

First Steps:


A Final Note

Prospective students will see through superficial changes which do not

reflect valuing the work and contribution of the women in the

department.

gender and it education conference, indiana university, 2007 gender & it education recruitment...

Documents

engineering departments

online recruitment practices

women value

program websites

subtle cues

subtle gender cues

photos of groups

pages research questionsat