Abstract of "Women Science Majors: What Makes a Difference in Persistence after Graduation?"
Author(s):
Paula Rayman and Belle Brett
Introduction
Nearly thirty years ago, sociologist Alice Rossi posed the
question, "Women in Science: Why So Few?" Since then, the
situation improved modestly but was never substantially
altered. A close examination of the distribution of women
Ph.D.'s in the sciences presents a picture of uneven
advancement. In a 1991 report the National Research Council
stated that while women received 50 percent of bachelor's
degrees in the life sciences, they received 31 percent in
computer and information sciences, 30 percent in the physical
sciences, and 14 percent in engineering.
Social-Psychological Perspectives
Social-psychological issues such as self-confidence,
perceived ability, and resiliency have been linked to female
persistence in science. Research also indicates that women
attribute their success to extrinsic factors, such as luck,
rather than intrinsic factors, such as ability. It has been
found that undergraduate males adapted better to the
outcome-oriented environment of science than females, who often
prefer a more interactive environment. Affiliation activities
such as advising, encouragement, and mentoring have been noted
as playing a role in women's persistence in science. Studies
have pointed to a variety of "encouragement mechanisms," such
as a supportive faculty environment, career advising support,
and parental encouragement during the undergraduate years.
Back to Top
Institutional Perspectives
Among many other things, the researchers focused on what
types of institutions are most successful in terms of female
students' persistence in science.
- Liberal colleges have been praised for reasons such
as:
- emphasis on teaching rather than research
- small class size
- frequent contact with faculty in the classroom
- a concern for the individual student
- emphasis on breadth and context rather than
specialization
- lack of competition between undergraduate and graduate
students for faculty time, attention and the use of
equipment
Single-sex colleges have also been recognized as being
particularly successful at contributing to young women's
persistence in science. It was found that women from the latter
colleges had higher persistence rates in the sciences than did
women from coeducational colleges.
Back to Top
The Present Study
The present study examines factors associated with
persistence in the sciences for young women who majored in
sciences and mathematics as undergraduates at a leading women's
college. Three groups of women are compared: those who left the
sciences after graduation (Leavers), those who switched to some
other occupation at some point after college (Changers), and
those who remained in the sciences (Stayers).
Subjects
Who participated in the study? All women who graduated
between 1983 and 1991 from a leading women's college with
majors in science or mathematics. Because the authors of the
survey were primarily interested in those graduates who had
made the choice to pursue areas of science that have lesser
representation of women, all those who were in medical/health
professions were not considered. The final sample consisted of
369 women.
Back to Top
Measures
The independent variables used
in the study were:
- cohort
- major
- family characteristics/academic preparations/plans
- parental encouragement
- college experiences
- advising and encouragement from college teachers
- perceived characteristics of the college environment
The dependent variable was "whether or not the subject left
science within six months after graduation."
Back to Top
Results
For descriptive purposes the sample was divided into three
groups: Stayers (255), Leavers (103) and Changers (41). First,
however, the authors looked at the sample as a whole. Most of
the alumnae came from families with well-educated fathers and
mothers. More than three-fifths of the alumnae felt they were
well prepared to pursue science before they entered college and
felt generally well prepared academically. In college, contact
with faculty was generally high. Over a half of the students
received career advice from faculty. Self-esteem was quite high
and about three-quarters were likely to ascribe their career
success to internal traits, such as ability and effort, rather
than external factors, such as connections or luck. Experiences
with sexual harassment or sexual discrimination were common
among the students, with approximately half of the sample
experiencing each, either at work, in graduate school, or
both.
Back to Top
Differences among the Three Groups
- The Stayers, who were still in science fields at the time
of the study, were:
- the group most likely to have received encouragement by
both their college teachers and their parents, especially
their mothers, to pursue a career in science. They were least
likely to believe that their current occupation was
compatible with family life, but least likely to have had
their career affected by family needs so far.
- The Changers left the science pathway sometime during
their graduate school or early career years.
- This group was more likely to have felt well prepared
academically and in science.
They were less likely than the Stayers to:
- have received a lot of encouragement from their mothers
to pursue a career in science
- have received encouragement from college teachers to
major or pursue a career in science
- have a mentor
- have had undergraduate research experiences outside of
the classroom.
The Leavers, who left science within a few months of
graduation, were less likely than other groups to have had a
father or mother in science, to have had a mother who went to
college, and to have received significant encouragement from
mothers, fathers, or college teachers to major in science. They
were the group least likely to see themselves as having high
interest in science, but their sense of their overall ability
was comparable to that of the Stayers, and their overall
self-confidence was a little higher than that of the other two
groups.
Back to Top
Discussion
The results of the study indicate that several factors,
including institutional factors, not highlighted in the
literature on women's persistence in the science, are worth our
attention.
- Cohort Factor
- The cohort that graduated in the period 1985 to 1989 was
far more likely to leave the sciences than the earlier or
later cohorts. Considering the boom economy of that time, it
is possible that these women saw a far greater array of
attractive job opportunities open to them than the two groups
who graduated in other periods.
- Science Fields Differences
- Previous studies have tended to group all sciences and
mathematics together. We noted that all sciences were indeed
not equal in the area of retention after college. Those who
majored in chemistry or computer science were much more
likely to continue on in the sciences than those in other
majors.
- Number of Courses
- Number of science and mathematics courses taken is
another example of an important factor that occurs during the
college years. Those who took fewer science and mathematics
courses may simply have had a broader range of other
interests that they wished to study in the context of a
liberal arts education. However, the more classes the student
took, the more likely he/she was to driven to learn more
about these areas.
- Grades and Persistence
- It was found that grades in science and mathematics were
not highly related to taking the science pathway. Students
can do well but still not consider themselves to be as able
as their classmates, or they may do less well and feel more
able.
- Family Background Versus Family Encouragement
- Strong encouragement and good advising were found to be
related strongly to persistence in the sciences. Family
encouragement, more than family background, was significantly
related to women's persistence in science. For the majority
of women in the sample, family characteristics, such as
having parents in science and academic preparation, were not
significantly related to persistence in the sciences after
graduation, although they are often very important in the
choice to major in science or mathematics. This finding is
positive in that it suggests that earlier history need not
continue to play such an active role once the decision to
major in mathematics and science has been made.
Back to Top
Career Advising
Our finding was that Stayers were more likely to have
received career advice from advisors and from faculty. The
implication is that more is better when it comes to providing
an environment of support.
- Single-sex School Advantage
- Some research would support the argument that single-sex
schools provide women with too much of a nurturing
environment and, thus, do not mirror the "real world."
However, it is possible that by providing encouragement and
support during the college years and earlier, students,
especially female students, will develop sufficient
self-confidence in their abilities that they are able to
persist in the face of the greater environment of graduate
school and the marketplace. The relatively high retention
rate in this study lends credence to previous studies, which
contend that single-sex women's colleges offer an advantage
in women's pursuit of science and increased resiliency in
facing obstacles.
- Past College Experiences
- From this study we found that some of the women in the
sample who had the advantage of the single-sex college
environment still faced difficult decisions in the world of
science beyond the undergraduate years. It was found, for
example, that the Changers were more likely to have had
family experiences that influenced their work lives,
including moving for a spouse and working less than full time
to provide care-giving. Because Changers were also more
likely to report being in non-science occupations that were
compatible with family life and most likely to plan to be
working part time in ten years, we surmise that science
occupations did not give them some of the conditions they
wanted for combining work and family.
In summary, we return to the question, "Women in
science--why so few?" The research presented above confirms
that science, like all human endeavors, is socially
constructed. The answer is not just how each individual woman
fares, but how institutions can provide welcoming climates for
women's success in science. Women will have a much better
chance of persisting in science when the appropriate
environmental supports are present.
--abstract by Online Ethics Center staff.
Original article by Paula Rayman and Belle Brett
Paula Rayman and Belle Brett
"Women Science Majors: What Makes a Difference in Persistence after Graduation?"
Journal of Higher Education
66
.4
(July/August 1995 ):
388-414