why so few? technology, engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in...

25

Upload: others

Post on 13-Oct-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46
Page 2: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Why So Few? Women in ScienceWomen in Science, Technology,Engineering, and MathematicsMathematics

Page 3: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

High School Performance

SOURCE: Nord, C., Roey, S., Perkins, R., Lyons, M., Lemanski, N., Brown, J., and Schuknecht, J. (2011). The Nation’s Report Card: America’s High School Graduates (NCES 2011-462) U S Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics Washington DC: U S Government Printing Office(NCES 2011-462). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Page 4: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Percentage of Bachelor's Degrees Earned by Women in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006

50

60

52

60

70

1966

3331

4146

36

46

36

50

43 46

33

45 4140

501976

1986

25

1915

31

22

1811

2022

15 1518 18

28

2120 20

20

30

1996

20069.45

0.4

11

3

0

10

Biological Chemistry Mathematics Earth Physics Engineering Computer

2006

Biological and

agricultural sciences

Chemistry Mathematics Earth, atmospheric and ocean sciences

Physics Engineering Computer Science

Source: National Science Foundation/Division of Science Resources Statistics; data from Department of Education/National Center for Education Statistics: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Completions Survey.

Page 5: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46
Page 6: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Why So Few?

presents evidencep

that social and

environmental factors

contribute to the

underrepresentation of

d i l i STEMwomen and girls in STEM.

Page 7: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 1B li f b t I t lliBeliefs about Intelligence

Believing in the potential for intellectualBelieving in the potential for intellectual growth, in and of itself, improves

toutcomes.

Page 8: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

In math and science, a growth mindset benefits girls.

Fixed Mindset Growth MindsetIntelligence is static. Intelligence can be

developed.pLeads to a desire to look smart and therefore a tendency to

Leads to a desire to learn and therefore a tendency to • Teach children that

intellectual skills can be• avoid challenges • embrace challenges

• give up easily due to obstacles

• persist despite obstacles

intellectual skills can be acquired.

obstacles obstacles • see effort as fruitless • see effort as path to

mastery• ignore useful • learn from criticism

• Praise children (and adults) for effort.

gfeedback

• be threatened by others’ success

• be inspired by others’ success

Page 9: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 2StereotypesStereotypes

Negative stereotypesg ypabout girls’ math abilities

can adversely affect girls’ performance in mathcan adversely affect girls performance in math

Page 10: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Performance on a Challenging Math Test, by 

E i l t

g g , yStereotype Threat Condition and Gender

• Expose girls to successful female role models in math and science.

• Teach students about• Teach students about stereotype threat.

S S S J St l C M & Q i D M 1999 "St t th t d ' th f " J l f E i t l S i l P h l 35(1) 13Source: Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M., 1999, "Stereotype threat and women's math performance," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), p. 13.

Page 11: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Fi di 3Finding 3Self-Assessment

Girls are “harder on themselves”d h ld th l t hi h t d dand hold themselves to a higher standard

when assessing their abilities in “male” fields like science and math.

Page 12: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Does this rectangle have more black or more white?

Page 13: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Gender differences in self-assessment

Page 14: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

• Set clear performance standards• Help girls recognize their career-relevant skills

Page 15: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 4Spatial Skills

S ti l kill t i tSpatial skills are not innateand can be improved with training.

Page 16: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Spatial skills are not innate and can be improved with trainingimproved with training.

This is a sample question on mental rotation.

D k th i ht ?Do you know the right answer?

Encourage girls to play with building g g p y gtoys and to draw to develop their

spatial skills.

Page 17: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 5The College Student Experience

At colleges and universities,little things can make a big differencelittle things can make a big difference

for female students in science and engineering.

Page 18: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Small changes in college and university STEM departmentscan make a big difference

• Actively recruit female students

Intent of first‐year college students to major in science and engineering fields, 

by gender, 2006

• Emphasize broad applications of science 25

30

35

e

Physical sciences

Mathematics/  ppand engineering in introductory courses.

10

15

20

Percen

tag statistics

Engineering

Computer sciences

• Consider pre-requisites carefully.

0

5

Female Male

Biological/ agricultural sciences

Page 19: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 6University and College FacultyUniversity and College Faculty

Women STEM faculty are less likelythan their male peers

to feel that they fit or belong in their departmentsin their departments.

Page 20: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Female STEM Faculty in Four-Year Educational Institutions, by Discipline and Tenure Status, 2006

P id t i f• Provide mentoring for junior faculty.

• Implement effective work-life balance policies to support faculty.

Source: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, 2009, Characteristics of doctoral scientists and engineers in the UnitedS 2006 ( il d S i i l bl ) ( S 09 31 ) (A li VA) A h ' l i f bl 20States: 2006 (Detailed Statistical Tables) (NSF 09‐317) (Arlington, VA), Author's analysis of Table 20.

Page 21: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 7Finding 7Implicit Bias

In a test of implicit bias, most people associate science and math fieldsassociate science and math fields

with “male” and humanities and arts fields

with “female”.

Page 22: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

O i b li f bOur unconscious beliefs may be morepowerful than our explicitly held beliefs

simply because we are not aware of them.

• Take a test to learn about your unconscious bias at https://implicit harvard eduhttps://implicit.harvard.edu.

• Take steps to address your biases.

Page 23: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Finding 8Finding 8Bias against Women

i N t diti l Fi ldin Non-traditional Fields

Women in “male” jobs are viewed as lessWomen in male jobs are viewed as less competent than their male peers.

When women are clearly competent, they are often considered less “likable.”

Page 24: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Raise awareness about bias against women in STEM fields.

Create clear criteria for success Create clear criteria for success.

Page 25: Why So Few? Technology, Engineering, andceramics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/presentiation...in selected STEM fields, 1966 to 2006 50 60 52 60 70 1966 33 31 41 46 36 46 36 43 46

Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics g g,

To download a pdf of the report:www.aauw.org/learn/research/whysofew.cfmwww.aauw.org/learn/research/whysofew.cfm

To order hard copies of the report:http://aauw.source4.comhttp://aauw.source4.com