Women in science: looking beyond bias and barriers

Inside and outside of the higher-education community, the debate has raged: Why aren't there more women in science and engineering?

This should matter to us because, unless we tap the talents of all our citizens, it will be difficult for our country to remain competitive. Here in Washington we already face a shortage of skilled workers that causes many companies to recruit heavily elsewhere.

A committee of The National Academies recently issued a report, "Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Science and Engineering," that refuted many unproven beliefs on the subject — beliefs that play a role in the treatment of women and their work.

These beliefs include:

• Women lack the talent or preparation in mathematics to be good scientists and engineers;

• Increasing the number of women in the "pipeline" will solve the problem of their underrepresentation in leadership positions;

• Women don't want jobs in research universities;

• Women and minorities are recipients of favoritism through affirmative-action programs;

• Academe is a meritocracy, and changing the rules means that standards of excellence will be deleteriously affected;

• The system as currently configured has worked well in producing great science; why change it?

The committee found no sound evidence to support these tenets, and in some cases, persuasive evidence to the contrary.

Over the past 40 years, female performance in high-school mathematics has improved and now matches that of males. High-school girls now take and pass as many advanced courses in mathematics and science as do boys. Even the relatively large differences between girls and boys among the highest 5 percent of math performers are diminishing. So, while biological differences between men and women in some of the skills that underlie mathematics ability may exist, there is no evidence that those account for the lower representation of women in academic faculty and science-leadership positions in science and engineering fields.

The committee found that, in most fields, the pipeline is not the problem. Even in fields where women have earned more than a quarter of all doctorates since 1970, their representation as full professors and in leadership positions is below 15 percent.

Similar proportions of women and men express plans to enter the professoriate. However, women with children are 45 percent less likely to be professors than men with children. For those female scientists and engineers who persist in their pursuit of academic careers, despite severe conflicts between their roles as parents and as scientists and engineers, these efforts often are not recognized as representing an extraordinarily high level of dedication.

Affirmative action is meant to broaden searches to include more women and minority-group members in the pool that receives serious consideration for faculty positions, not to select candidates on the basis of race or sex, which is illegal.

Although academic scientists generally believe that they "choose the best" based on objective criteria, judgments of performance can be affected by implicit bias and disproportionate weighting of qualities that are stereotypically male, such as assertiveness.

Neither our universities nor our nation can afford the underuse of precious human capital. This is all the more so in Washington state, which has been a strong beneficiary of an economy fueled by scientific and technological advances.

Transforming institutional structures and procedures in the academy to eliminate bias and barriers and to be more family-friendly will surely help us come closer to gender parity in science and engineering. Just as importantly, it will create better work environments for both men and women.

Faculty, university leaders, professional and scientific societies, federal agencies and the federal government must unite to ensure that all our nation's people are welcomed and encouraged to excel in science and engineering in our research universities. America's future depends on it.

Ana Mari Cauce is executive vice provost and Earl R. Carlson Professor of Psychology at the University of Washington. She is a member of The National Academies' Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering.