Are STEM Fields Really More Gender-Imbalanced Than Other Fields?
Hint: They’re not. In fact, STEM seems to be doing quite well for itself.
Colleen Flaherty at Inside Higher Ed has the story:
Are STEM fields more gender-balanced than non-STEM fields in Ph.D. production?
Conventional wisdom says that while there are many barriers for women pursuing advanced degrees, the “pipeline” to the sciences, technology, engineering and math is particularly leaky. But a new paper from the American Institutes for Research suggests that that overrepresentation of men Ph.D.s compared to women isn’t a worse problem in STEM than in non-STEM fields, when preparation and interest are taken into account.
“That’s kind of the headline finding to me, that in three-quarters of academic fields there’s a gender imbalance towards men,” said Andrew Gillen, a senior researcher in the institutes’ education program and co-author of Exploring Gender Imbalance Among STEM Doctoral Degree Recipients. “You have a huge number of fields [beyond STEM] where you see a strong gender imbalance, and that’s definitely surprising, to me at least.”
To arrive at their results, Gillen and his co-author, Courtney Tanenbaum, a fellow education researcher at the institutes, didn’t just focus – as other research has – on the total number of men and women receiving doctoral degrees in STEM and other fields. Arguing that such an approach is only valuable if enrollment of men and women in degree programs is equally split, they aim instead to compare the number of “prepared and interested” men and women – those who majored in STEM as undergraduates – to the number of eventual Ph.D. recipients.
Using data from the Education Department’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Gillen and Tanenbaum calculated the number of doctoral degrees awarded per 100 bachelor’s degrees in scores of disciplines. (They averaged the number of baccalaureate degrees awarded in each year from 2002 to 2007, and did the same for Ph.D.s awarded from 2010 to 2012).
In the animal sciences, for example, seven Ph.D.s were awarded to men for every 100 baccalaureate degrees. For women, that figure was just about 3 out of 100 – 41 percent of the Ph.D. earning rate for qualified and interested men, as defined by the study. (A rate of 100 percent indicates perfect gender balance). The authors argue that figure is much more telling than a one-to-one comparison of Ph.D.s awarded to men and women in the animal sciences in the relevant time period: 71 and 70, respectively.
Applied to 135 disciplines, the analysis paints an interesting picture: Men are over-represented in 103 fields, or 76 percent – and not just in STEM. In fact, the STEM fields are slightly more gender-balanced than non-STEM fields. Among the 55 STEM fields analyzed, men are over-represented in 75 percent and women are over-represented in 26 percent. In the 80 other fields, men are over-represented in approximately 77 percent and women are over-represented in 23 percent.
Are STEM fields more gender-balanced than non-STEM fields in Ph.D. production? (Inside Higher Ed | News)
Comments
This is just so stupid. It is not as if women are being prevented from going into science and math. And stop with the STEM garbage. We got this far without having science and math labeled that way. If science and math don’t float someone’s boat then the person will major in something else. Why do we have to constantly have some lefty wackos trying to inject gender equality or racial diversity where it doesn’t belong? Gender imbalance is a crock. People will study what they like and no amount of “studying” on behalf of the diversity head counters will matter at all. We want the best skilled people in science and math and not a group chosen because there is a phenotype quota.