Regional, institutional, and departmental factors associated with gender diversity among BS-level chemical and electrical engineering graduates


Autoři: Laura R. Jarboe aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States of America aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223568

Souhrn

Engineering remains the least gender diverse of the science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields. Chemical engineering (ChE) and electrical engineering (EE) are exemplars of relatively high and low gender diversity, respectively. Here, we investigate departmental, institutional, and regional factors associated with gender diversity among BS graduates within the US, 2010–2016. For both fields, gender diversity was significantly higher at private institutions (p < 1x10-6) and at historically black institutions (p < 1x10-5). No significant association was observed with gender diversity among tenure-track faculty, PhD-granting status, and variations in departmental name beyond the standard “chemical engineering” or “electrical engineering”. Gender diversity among EE graduates was significantly decreased (p = 8x10-5) when a distinct degree in computer engineering was available; no such association was observed between ChE gender diversity and the presence of biology-associated degrees. States with a highly gender diverse ChE workforce had a significantly higher degree of gender diversity among BS graduates (p = 3x10-5), but a significant association was not observed for EE. State variation in funding of support services for K-12 pupils significantly impacted gender diversity of graduates in both fields (p < 1x10-3), particularly in regards to instructional staff support (p < 5x10-4). Nationwide, gender diversity could not be concluded to be either significantly increasing or significantly decreasing for either field.

Klíčová slova:

Census – Engineering and technology – Engineers – Graduates – Schools – Electrical engineering – Chemical engineering – Computer engineering


Zdroje

1. Bear JB, Woolley AW. The Role of Gender in Team Collaboration and Performance. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews. 2011;36(2):146–53.

2. Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW. Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups. Science. 2010;330(6004):686–8. doi: 10.1126/science.1193147 20929725

3. Jones LK, Jennings BM, Higgins MK, de Waal FBM. Ethological observations of social behavior in the operating room. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2018;115(29):7575–80. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1716883115 29967170

4. Board NS. Science & Engineering Indicators 2018. 2018.

5. Godwin A, Potvin G, Hazari Z, Asee. The Development of Critical Engineering Agency, Identity, and the Impact on Engineering Career Choices. 2013 Asee Annual Conference. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition2013.

6. Gumpertz M, Durodoye R, Griffith E, Wilson A. Retention and promotion of women and underrepresented minority faculty in science and engineering at four large land grant institutions. Plos One. 2017;12(11).

7. Traver C, Amer Soc Engn E. The Challenge of Attracting Women into Electrical Engineering within the Framework of American Culture. 515–20 p.

8. Yoder JD, Schleicher TL. Undergraduates regard deviation from occupational gender stereotypes as costly for women. Sex Roles. 1996;34(3–4):171–88.

9. Blosser E. Gender Segregation Across Engineering Majors: How Engineering Professors Understand Women's Underrepresentation in Undergraduate Engineering. Engineering Studies. 2017;9(1):24–44.

10. Sandrin S, Borror CM, Asee. Student Perceptions and Interest in Engineering: Effects of Gender, Race/Ethnicity, and Grade Level. 2013 Asee Annual Conference. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition2013.

11. Reisslein J, Ozogul G, Johnson AM, Bishop KL, Harvey J, Reisslein M. Circuits Kit K-12 Outreach: Impact of Circuit Element Representation and Student Gender. Ieee Transactions on Education. 2013;56(3):316–21.

12. Botta MC, Stearns E, Mickelson RA, Moller S, Valentino L. Growing the roots of STEM majors: Female math and science high school faculty and the participation of students in STEM. Economics of Education Review. 2015;45:14–27.

13. Amelink CT, Creamer EG. Gender Differences in Elements of the Undergraduate Experience that Influence Satisfaction with the Engineering Major and the Intent to Pursue Engineering as a Career. Journal of Engineering Education. 2010;99(1):81–92.

14. Gayles JG, Ampaw F. The Impact of College Experiences on Degree Completion in STEM Fields at Four-Year Institutions: Does Gender Matter? Journal of Higher Education. 2014;85(4):439–68.

15. Brawner CE, Lord SM, Layton RA, Ohland MW, Long RA. Factors Affecting Women's Persistence in Chemical Engineering. International Journal of Engineering Education. 2015;31(6):1431–47.

16. Dennehy TC, Dasgupta N. Female peer mentors early in college increase women's positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2017;114(23):5964–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1613117114 28533360

17. Dasgupta N, Scircle MM, Hunsinger M. Female peers in small work groups enhance women's motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2015;112(16):4988–93. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1422822112 25848061

18. Diekman AB, Brown ER, Johnston AM, Clark EK. Seeking Congruity Between Goals and Roles: A New Look at Why Women Opt Out of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Careers. Psychological Science. 2010;21(8):1051–7. doi: 10.1177/0956797610377342 20631322

19. Evans CD, Diekman AB. On Motivated Role Selection: Gender Beliefs, Distant Goals, and Career Interest. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2009;33(2):235–49.

20. Ganley CM, George CE, Cimpian JR, Makowski MB. Gender Equity in College Majors: Looking Beyond the STEM/Non-STEM Dichotomy for Answers Regarding Female Participation. American Educational Research Journal. 2018;55(3):453–87.

21. Gibbons MT. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2010.

22. Yoder BL. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2011.

23. Yoder BL. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2012.

24. Yoder BL. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2013.

25. Yoder BL. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2014.

26. Yoder BL. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2015.

27. Yoder BL. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education; 2016.

28. Women AAoU. The Simple Truth about the Gender Pay Gap. Washington, DC: AAUW; 2017.

29. Robst J, Keil J, Russo D. The effect of gender composition of faculty on student retention. Economics of Education Review. 1998;17(4):429–39.

30. Sonnert G, Fox MF, Adkins K. Undergraduate women in science and engineering: Effects of faculty, fields, and institutions over time. Social Science Quarterly. 2007;88(5):1333–56.

31. Griffith AL. Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review. 2010;29(6):911–22.

32. Gender pay gap persists. Nature. 2018;553.

33. Sage SK, Gerberich SG, Ryan AD, Nachreiner NM, Church TR, Alexander BH, et al. School resources, resource allocation, and risk of physical assault against Minnesota educators. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2010;42(1):1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.04.019 19887138

34. Price J. The effect of instructor race and gender on student persistence in STEM fields. Economics of Education Review. 2010;29(6):901–10.

35. Stout JG, Dasgupta N, Hunsinger M, McManus MA. STEMing the Tide: Using Ingroup Experts to Inoculate Women's Self-Concept in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2011;100(2):255–70. doi: 10.1037/a0021385 21142376

36. The Lyda Hill Foundation TGDIoGiM. Portray Her: Representations of Women STEM Characters in Media. 2018.


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 10

Nejčtenější v tomto čísle

Tomuto tématu se dále věnují…


Kurzy

Zvyšte si kvalifikaci online z pohodlí domova

Léčba bolesti v ordinaci praktického lékaře
nový kurz
Autoři: MUDr. PhDr. Zdeňka Nováková, Ph.D.

Revmatoidní artritida: včas a k cíli
Autoři: MUDr. Heřman Mann

Jistoty a nástrahy antikoagulační léčby aneb kardiolog - neurolog - farmakolog - nefrolog - právník diskutují
Autoři: doc. MUDr. Štěpán Havránek, Ph.D., prof. MUDr. Roman Herzig, Ph.D., doc. MUDr. Karel Urbánek, Ph.D., prim. MUDr. Jan Vachek, MUDr. et Mgr. Jolana Těšínová, Ph.D.

Léčba akutní pooperační bolesti
Autoři: doc. MUDr. Jiří Málek, CSc.

Nové antipsychotikum kariprazin v léčbě schizofrenie
Autoři: prof. MUDr. Cyril Höschl, DrSc., FRCPsych.

Všechny kurzy
Kurzy Doporučená témata Časopisy
Přihlášení
Zapomenuté heslo

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

Zapomenuté heslo

Zadejte e-mailovou adresu se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.

Přihlášení

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se