Clearing The Path For Women Scientists

Editor's Note: In 1991, with funding support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation of New York, a sociologist and a chemist at Wellesley College led an interdisciplinary research team- -including social scientists, physical and life scientists, and mathematicians--in the first phase of an extensive study, called "Pathways for Women in the Sciences." The study addressed the issues of why undergraduate women set their sights on careers in scientific fields and what promotes or impedes their success. Subjects of the study were the women enrolled in the Massachusetts college's class of 1995 in addition to several cohorts of former Wellesley math and science majors now in their early career years. Part II of the study, begun in the fall of 1993, focuses on the years after graduation and the factors that influence whether a woman decides to pursue a science career or to abandon it for other professional options. For Part II, the researchers, while continuing to follow the experiences of the class of 1995 through their graduation, will study the work and graduate school experiences of both science and nonscience graduates in their middle career years. In the following essay, two of the key researchers--Paula M. Rayman, director of the project, and Belle Brett, senior research associate--discuss some of their salient Part I findings. The history of modern science demonstrates that women, in terms of their professional involvement, have been "weeded out of," rather than "cultivated into," the field. It is abundantly clear that, while females have made certain gains in specific disciplines, they remain woefully underrepresented overall in science, mathematics, and engineering. The situation begs for strong corrective measures. Scientific advancement in today's world depends upon the ability of each society to enlist the talents and skills of all people. And the effort to ensure equity for women in science is essential for excellence in science. In the past, research on women's persistence in pursuing science careers has focused too often on individually formative characteristics, such as the occupation of a young woman's father, that generally are not subject to mitigation by subsequently experienced social forces. Part I of the Pathways for Women in the Sciences project, however, focused on women's persistence in science over a long time--during their undergraduate, graduate, and early- to middle-career years. We found that--in addition to initially formative influences--prevailing factors in the educational environment are highly associated with whether or not a woman chooses a major and/or career in the sciences. This discovery provides a hope and a challenge: a hope that adjustment of academic programs and policies can indeed make a difference in achieving equity, and a challenge to the appropriate institutions to make the necessary changes. In the Pathways project, we studied how students choose majors. Interest in the subject was the No. 1 reason that students chose a particular major, followed by consideration of their future goals and their perceived aptitude for that course of study. Generally, a woman's interest in science was clearly developed before her college years. If a student did not report having enjoyed a science or mathematics course in high school, she was much less likely to choose a science or mathematics major. However, even students who came in with an interest were influenced by their experiences in their introductory and other early courses. A strong predictor of whether a young woman would choose a major in science was if she indicated a preference for subjects in which the material has precise answers, as compared with multiple interpretations. Thus, choice of major is associated with how students think as well as how science is taught. Pathways I was also concerned with the post-graduation retention in science-related professional roles of women who had majored in science and mathematics in college. We found, first, that science majors who participated in undergraduate research opportunities were more likely to continue in science after college. Additionally, we found that graduates who reported receiving a lot of encouragement from their college teachers to pursue science, those who had mentors, and those who received career advice both from their advisers and from other faculty continued on in science in larger numbers than those who did not have these kinds of contact with faculty. Thus, both formal and informal advising systems figure prominently in a young woman's career pathway. Parental encouragement--both mother's and father's--was a more important factor than family background, we discovered. Our findings demonstrated that scientific workplaces are often not "user friendly" for women. Those women who left science careers at some point after graduation were more likely to feel that their new choices were more compatible with family life, suggesting that science was not as hospitable to the dual lives that most women lead as are some other fields. In addition, experiences with sexual harassment and discrimination were common among those in the sciences and medicine, both in graduate school and in the workplace. Although many women showed resilience in the face of these problems, they often had to settle for working in hostile or unsupportive environments. The Pathways findings suggest programs and policies that institutions can adopt to ensure that larger numbers of talented women will opt for science careers: Supporting parental encouragement. Despite their own anxiety about or lack of accomplishment in science and math, parents need to be careful about the messages they transmit to their daughters about these fields. Encouragement seems to be a key factor in future choices. Thus, schools and colleges can help by providing opportunities for parents to learn more about science as a career option and more about how to encourage their daughters. Providing undergraduate research opportunities. Colleges can provide undergraduate research opportunities that allow students close contact with faculty and hands-on exposure to the work of scientists. Many of these opportunities are now restricted to graduate students. Enabling support and encouragement from faculty. Colleges need to ensure that students have regular access to support and advice from faculty through informal encounters as well as through more formal mentoring programs. Research on what students remember about their college experiences reveals the importance of dialogue conducted in informal contexts. Offering solid career advice. Schools and colleges should provide better information about career alternatives in science and engineering and should encourage faculty and teachers to be the links between students and this information through a career center or other kinds of programs. This information should cover career options in industry and government as well as academia. Valuing different styles. Schools and colleges should be encouraged to explore a variety of ways of teaching to accommodate different ways of learning. Different modes of teaching are especially important as students are forming their interests during their school years. Hands-on experience, cooperative learning, and connections of subject matter to daily life are all key ingredients. Making science more inclusive. Colleges should shift from the "weeding out" mentality to a more inclusive attitude by encouraging smaller class sizes in introductory courses and promoting in the classroom a greater awareness of cultural diversity. Fostering supportive work environments. Science workplaces need to institute and enforce strong policies that not only help thwart and punish hostile attitudes and behaviors toward women, but also provide a "family-friendly" environment that does not penalize women and men who have other responsibilities. All of us--educators, bench scientists, policy developers, and members of the industrial sector--need to take up the challenge of how to bring about equity for women within our own schools and workplaces. Let us start by promoting open discussion on what makes a difference in achieving this goal in order to create models for success from which we all could learn and as a result of which the science community stands to gain immeasurably. Paula M. Rayman is director and Belle Brett is senior research associate of the Pathways Project at Wellesley College Center for Research on Women, Wellesley College. For copies of the Pathways I report, contact the Center for Research on Women, Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass. 02181.

Clearing The Path For Women Scientists

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of