Cogprints

Should there be more women in science and engineering?

Bouville, Mathieu (2006) Should there be more women in science and engineering? (Unpublished)

Warning

There is a more recent version of this eprint available. Click here to view it.

Full text available as:

[img]
Preview
 PDF
211Kb

Abstract

Many people hold this truth to be self-evident, that there should be more female students in science and engineering. We first examine four usual arguments: higher salaries, the possibility to help others, the positive impact of diversity on designs, and the increasing need for engineers. These indicate that there ought to be a mutual attraction between women and scientific fields, so that there should be more women in these fields inasmuch as women are motivated to graduate in science and engineering. Another common argument is that women are under-represented in scientific fields. Yet under-representation is morally neutral and cannot by itself be a justification. Focusing on ethics rather than statistics, we conclude that every woman should be allowed to graduate in a field congruent with her abilities and desires. This is similar to the result of mutual attraction. Outreach programs towards K-12 girls must therefore purport to allow them to choose a field freely, rather than try to draw as many of them to scientific disciplines as possible. At the very minimum, this will require an evaluation of the impact of outreach and a change of mindset.

Item Type:Other
Keywords:female students, gender equity, higher education, university, ethics, policy, outreach programs, minority students
Subjects:Philosophy > Ethics
ID Code:5367
Deposited By: Bouville, Mathieu
Deposited On:18 Jan 2007
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:56

Available Versions of this Item

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

Alexander, G. M. & Hines, M. (2002). Sex differences in response to children’s toys in nonhuman primates (cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus). Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 467–479.

Anderson, L. & Northwood, D. (2002). Recruitment and retention programmes to increase diversity in engineering. International Conference on Engineering Education. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://www.ineer.org/Events/ICEE2002/Proceedings/Papers/Index/O065-O070/O069.pdf.

Baum, E. (1990). Recruiting and graduating women — The underrepresented student. IEEE Communications Magazine, 28, 47–50.

Bentham, J. (1789). The Principles of Morals and Legislation.

Brainard, S. G. & Carlin, L. (1998). A longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 369–375.

Browne, K. R. (2005). Women in science: Biological factors should not be ignored. Cardozo Women’s Law Journal, 11, 509–528.

Chen, J. C., Owusu-Ofori, S., Pai, D., Toca-McDowell, E., Wang, S.-L., & Waters, C. K. (1996). A Study of Female Academic Performance in Mechanical Engineering. Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie96/papers/276.pdf.

Connellan, J., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Batki, A., & Ahluwalia, J. (2000). Sex differences in human neonatal social perception. Infant Behavior and Development, 23, 113–118.

Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1691–1730.

Cuny, J., & Aspray, W. (2000). Recruitment and retention of women graduate students in Computer Science and Engineering: Results of a workshop organized by the Computing Research Association. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://www.cra.org/reports/r&rwomen.pdf.

Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices — Applying the Eccles et-al model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585–609.

Felder, R. M., Felder, G. N., Mauney, M., Hamrin, C. E., & Dietz, E. J. (1995). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. III. Gender differences in student performance and attitudes. Journal of Engineering Education, 84, 151–163.

Gosink, J. (2001) Women in Engineering. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://alum.mit.edu/ne/whatmatters/200104/.

Gurin, P., Dey, E., Hurtado, S., & Gurin G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 330–366.

Hedges, L. V. & Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269, 41–45.

Hume, D. (1739–40). Treatise of Human Nature. III.i.1.

Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., Ryan, M., Frost, L. A., & Hoop, C. (1990). Gender comparisons of mathematics attitudes and affect: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 299–324.

Jacobs, J. E. & Eccles, J. S. (1985). Gender differences in math ability: The impact of media reports on parents. Educational Researcher, 14, 20–25.

Kant, I. (1785). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten [The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals].

Kaufman, A. S. & McLean, J. E. (1998). An investigation into the relationship between interests and intelligence. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 279–295.

Kleinfeld, J. (1998). The myth that schools shortchange girls: Social science in the service of deception. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://www.uaf.edu/northern/schools/myth.html.

Kleinfeld, J. (1999). MIT tarnishes its reputation with gender junk science. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://www.uaf.edu/northern/mitstudy/.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–122.

Mill, J. S. (1871). Utilitarianism.

Morgan, C., Isaac, J. D., & Sansone, C. (2001). The role of interest in understanding the career choices of female and male college students. Sex Roles, 44, 295–320.

Moskal, B. M. (2000). Looking to the future: Women in science and engineering. Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2000/papers/1516.pdf.

Muller, C. B. & Pavone, M. L. (1997). Retaining undergraduate women in science, math, and engineering: A model program. Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie97/papers/1267.pdf.

National Science Foundation (1994). Women, Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 1994. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Powell, L. (1978). Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.

Rockland, R. H., Kimmel, H., & Bloom, J. (2002). Engineering the future enhancement of preengineering programs though outreach. International Conference on Engineering Education. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://www.ineer.org/Events/ICEE2002/Proceedings/Papers/Index/O065-O070/O068.pdf.

Serbin, L. A., Poulin-Dubois, D., Colburne, K. A., Sen, M. G., & Eichstedt, J. A. (2001). Gender stereotyping in infancy: Visual preferences for and knowledge of gender-stereotyped toys in the second year. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 7–15.

Sullivan, J. F., Reamon, D., & Louie, B. (2003). Girls embrace technology: A summer internship for high school girls. Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved December 17, 2006, from http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2003/papers/1159.pdf.

White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333.

Wulf, W. A. (1998). Diversity in engineering. The Bridge, 28(4), 8–13.

Zywno, M. S., Gilbride, K. A., Hiscocks, P. D., Waalen, J. K., & Kennedy, D. C. (1999). Attracting women into engineering — A case study. IEEE Transactions on Education 42, 364.

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Cogprints is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.