How Can We Do A Better Job Of Tapping The Scientific Talent Of American Women?

The Scientist's recent coverage of women's role in science (Oct. 15, 1990) is certainly timely. While demographic studies of employment needs in the United States indicate an increasing demand for scientists and engineers, the actual supply of Americans into the pipeline has declined to nearly half of what it was 10 years ago. And while this drop largely is due to a decrease in American white male entrants, the number of women in science--while doubling during this period--remains small and now appears to be leveling off, if not decreasing. Regarding undergraduate science programs overall, many U.S. academic institutions have yet to reach what can be considered a critical mass of women students. I believe that without at least 15 percent of their own gender in a degree program, women feel isolated and tend not to take part in the give-and-take that leads to mastery of the subject matter. It is clear to me that there is a vast amount of untapped scientific talent among American women. What can be done to improve the situation? First, through high school intervention programs, girls need to get more exposure to math and science before they reach college. In addition, college admission policies that give more emphasis to math and science interest and ability are needed. (Such policies would, of course, be salutary for young men as well.) This could reinforce enhancement programs in precollege math and science. More training in the scientific method, logic, and quantitative thinking and skills also would be beneficial to public education in general. Meanwhile, a major factor for the success of women science students at the undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate levels is the academic climate. When measured by retention rates, or the percentage of women degree recipients at the various levels, we find enormous variation from one American university to another, with little correlation with national rankings of the departments. If the practices of those departments that have been most successful at retaining women could be adopted by those experiencing serious problems, it should be very easy to double the number of women degree recipients in fields such as physics and engineering. Universities with good academic climates for women students tend to have more women faculty role models, as well as a structure to encourage mentoring. They also usually have well-established equal-opportunity environments, career development networks, and, most important, the commitment of their top academic officers. Those industrial and national labs that are considered desirable workplaces for women have similarly good employment climates. Once a critical mass of about 15 percent is achieved in a department or lab, the performance of women as students or as professionals seems to become equal to that of men, and women seem to be more successful in achieving further gains in improving the academic climate through their own networking. But to increase the national Ph.D. production for both men and women, the actual research opportunities will need to approach more closely the expectations, salaries, and prestige enjoyed by young people in other professions. With research funding at only about half the perceived needs of the research community, many young people see major roadblocks to careers in science and engineering. If the U.S. is serious about attracting and retaining American women--as well as men, for that matter--in science careers, the problem of keeping the number of researchers and available resources in reasonable balance needs to be addressed. M.S. Dresselhaus is Institute Professor of Electrical Engineering and Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

How Can We Do A Better Job Of Tapping The Scientific Talent Of American Women?

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of