If you reply to this long (14 kB) post please don't hit the reply
button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your
reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already
archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
Rick Reis (2006) in "Tomorrow's Professor" Message #717 "Proof and
Prejudice: Women in Mathematics" wrote:
"The posting below looks at culture of mathematics in the U.S. and
women's experience as professional mathematicians. The article. . .
.[Trei (2006)]. . . is by Lisa Trei and is based on a conference
"Proof and Prejudice: Women in Mathematics," sponsored by the
Stanford Institute for Research on Women and Gender (IRWG) on Feb. 7,
2006 and is reprinted with permission."
Herewith is a portion of Trei's report [bracketed by lines "TTTTTT. .
. ."; my inserts at " . . .[....]. . ."; my CAPS]:
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Mathematics has a public relations problem in this country,
particularly among some girls and women, according to Hollywood
actress Danica McKellar . . .
.[<http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005211/>]. . ..
"Nobody out there is saying that smart is sexy and smart is
important," said MCKELLAR, THE CO-AUTHOR OF A MATHEMATICAL PROOF . .
. [the "Chayes-McKellar-Winn Theorem" - see Chayes, McKellar, & Winn
(1998)]. . ."Role models like Paris Hilton . .
<http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0385296/>]. . . have everything to do
with why this country is being dumbed down. We need better PR."
A year after Harvard President Lawrence Summers'. . .[see, e.g..
Jaschik (2006)]. . . remarks suggesting innate gender differences in
science and math ability, the Institute for Research on Women and
Gender (IRWG) . . .[<http://www.stanford.edu/group/IRWG/>]. . . on
Feb. 7 hosted an event titled "Proof and Prejudice: Women in
Mathematics," to examine the culture of mathematics in this country
and women's experience as professional mathematicians.
At the opening, IRWG Director Londa Schiebinger . . .
.[<http://www.stanford.edu/group/IRWG/People/Director.html>]. . .
took stock of what has unfolded since the Summers controversy. "In
the year that has elapsed, many institutions, including Harvard, have
stepped up efforts to remove all subtle and unexamined biases in
institutions in efforts to make universities welcoming to women,"
she said, noting Stanford's recent announcement to support paid
maternity leave for female graduate students.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stanford Associate Professor of Education Jo Boaler . . .
.[<http://ed.stanford.edu/suse/faculty/displayRecord.php?suid=joboaler>.
. .], an expert in mathematics education who spoke as a member of the
audience, said elementary school teachers should not be blamed.
Girls and boys achieve at similar levels in mathematics through
school and at the undergraduate level, she said. "Girls are still
achieving at very high levels across the board-that's the message
that should go out there," she said. "The idea that they're not is
damaging in its own right." But after college, she said, the numbers
drop off. ACCORDING TO SCHIEBINGER, WOMEN EARN 46 PERCENT OF
UNDERGRADUATE MATH DEGREES IN THIS COUNTRY BUT REPRESENT ONLY 8
PERCENT OF MATH PROFESSORS.
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
For a rough comparison to the situation in physics, according to the
study "Women in Physics and Astronomy, 2005" by Rachel Ivie and Kim
Nies Ray [Ivie & Nies (2005)]: in 2001 WOMEN EARNED 22% OF BACHELOR'S
DEGREES IN PHYSICS (Fig. 8); and overall WOMEN HELD 10% OF PHYSICS
FACULTY POSITIONS (Table 6)
(7%, 13%, and 14% of faculty physics positions in institutions
granting, respectively, PhD, Masters, and Bachelors degrees as their
highest degrees).
So evidently the pipeline leak from undergraduate degree to faculty
position is less severe in physics than in mathematics. Ivie & Nies
(2005) wrote in their Executive Summary (my CAPS):
"Examination of the academic 'pipeline' reveals that WOMEN
DISPROPORTIONATELY LEAVE PHYSICS BETWEEN TAKING IT IN HIGH SCHOOL AND
EARNING A BACHELOR'S DEGREE. While almost half of high school physics
students are girls, less that one-fourth of bachelor's degrees in
physics are earned by women. After this initial "leak" in the
pipeline, women are represented at about the levels we would expect
based on degree production in the past. THERE APPEARS TO BE NO LEAK
IN THE PIPELINE AT THE FACULTY LEVEL IN EITHER PHYSICS OR ASTRONOMY
(Figures 11 and 12)."
Considering the first and last sentences of the above Executive
Summary statement:
*************************************************
FIRST SENTENCE - "women disproportionately leave physics between
taking it in high school and earning a bachelor's degree":
It would appear that the physics pipeline leak of females between
high school and earning a bachelor's degree might be reduced by the
incorporation of more interactive engagement strategies in
introductory physics courses.
The abstract of "Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom"
[Lorenzo et al. (2006)] reads:
"We investigate if the gender gap in conceptual understanding in an
introductory university physics course can be reduced by using
interactive engagement . . . (IE). . . methods that promote in-class
interaction, reduce competition, foster collaboration, and emphasize
conceptual understanding. To this end we analyzed data from the
introductory calculus-based physics course for non-majors at Harvard
University taught traditionally or using different degrees of
interactive engagement. OUR RESULTS SHOW THAT TEACHING WITH CERTAIN
INTERACTIVE STRATEGIES NOT ONLY YIELDS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED
UNDERSTANDING FOR BOTH MALES AND FEMALES, BUT ALSO REDUCES THE GENDER
GAP. In the most interactively taught courses, the pre-instruction
gender gap was gone by the end of the semester."
Is there a gender gap in conceptual understanding for students taking
MATHEMATICS courses? And if so, might it be reduced by the use of
interactive engagement strategies? In my opinion, definitive research
on these questions awaits the development of diagnostic tests of
mathematics conceptual understanding similar to those available in
physics [see e.g., NCSU (2006), Hake (2005)].
*************************************************
LAST SENTENCE - "there appears to be no leak in the pipeline at the
faculty level in either physics or astronomy:
In "Frequently Asked Questions: Women in Physics and Astronomy,
2005," Czujko & Ivie (2005) wrote [bracketed by lines "C&I-C&I-C&I-
. . . ":
C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I
Perhaps the most controversial and most publicized finding of the
women's report is the finding that in physics and astronomy, there is
no "leaky pipeline" at the faculty level. In other words, women are
represented on the faculty at about the levels we would expect based
on degree production in the past. Below are several frequently asked
questions about this conclusion.
Q: Do your conclusions mean that there are no problems for women in physics?
A: No. The situation for women in physics and astronomy still needs
improvement. Although women are hired into tenured and tenure-track
positions at respectable rates, they are hired into part-time faculty
positions at even higher rates. Controlling for sector of employment
and for time since degree, women earn significantly lower salaries
than men. Very few minority women earn degrees in physics. Finally,
the fact that women are represented on the faculty at expected levels
does not mean that they got those positions without tremendous
personal sacrifices. In many physics departments, women encounter
climates that range from chilly to hostile. Nevertheless, the results
of our analysis send a positive message to younger women considering
a career in physics. Women can, in spite of obstacles, make it to the
top faculty positions in physics and astronomy.
C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I-C&I
For a now somewhat dated compilation of references on "Gender Issues
in Physics/Science Education (GIPSE)" see Mallow & Hake (2002).
REFERENCES
AIP. 2005. "FYI: The AIP Bulletin of Science Policy News, 22 March,
"New Report on Women in Physics and Astronomy," online at
<http://www.aip.org/fyi/2005/035.html>.
Chayes, L., D. McKellar, and B. Winn. 1998. "Percolation and Gibbs
state multiplicity for ferromagnetic Ashkin-Teller models on Z2. J.
Phys. A31: 9055-9063.
NCSU. 2005. "Assessment Instrument Information Page," Physics
Education R & D Group, North Carolina State University; online at
<http://www.ncsu.edu/per/TestInfo.html>.