The New York Times article "Bias Called Persistent Hurdle for Women in Sciences" describes the report by the American Association of University Women that addresses the underpresentation of women in scientific fields such as math and technology.
The report talks about the factors that may influence this underpresentation, including the controversial issue of innate differences. When discussing the differences in male and female brains, the leading author of the report, Catherine Hill, said: "None of the research convincingly links those differences to specific skills, so we don't know what they mean in terms of mathematical abilities."
Thus, the report also focused on the cultural factors that influence this phenomenon, with findings such as this: "One study of postdoctoral applicants, for example, found that women had to publish 3 more papers in prestigious journals, or 20 more in less-known publications, to be judged as productive as male applicants."
Cultural stereotypes affect the performance of women, as the findings in stereotype threat research suggest, and therefore, prevention of that effect becomes important. The authors of the report searched for ways in which women can be encouraged to enter scientific fields, finding things such as teaching girls that math is not a static ability, teaching special courses for women entering the fields, and teaching girls about stereotype threat and its effect on performance.
Although the report indicates that the number of women in scientific fields is growing, equality has not been achieved: "But even as women earn a growing share of the doctorates in the STEM fields, the university women's report found, they do not show up, a decade later, in a proportionate number of tenured faculty positions."
For the New York Times Article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/science/22women.html
For the full report (Why so Few?) click here: http://www.aauw.org/research/whysofew.cfm
Leave a comment