Below is a bibliography that will introduce you to significant readings for understanding issues related to hiring and retaining women in science and engineering.
Armenti, Carmen. 2004. "May Babies and Postenure Babies: Maternal Decisions of Women Professors." Review of Higher Education. 211-231.
Bailyn et al. 2004. Site Visit: University of Michigan NSF ADVANCE Program. http://sitemaker.umich.edu/advance/files/sitevisit.pdf.
Baugh, S.G. & Scandura, T.A. 2000. The effect of multiple mentors
on protégé attitudes toward the work setting. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality 14, 503-521.
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan S. 2004. Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. The American Economic Review 94(4), 991-1013; “Employers’ Replies to Racial Names.” NBER Website. Thursday, August 31, 2006. http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html.
Butterwick, S. 2003. Deep listening in a feminist popular theatre project: upsetting the position of audience in participatory education. Adult Education Quarterly 54: 7-22.
Chesler, N. C. 2002. Gender-informed mentoring strategies of women engineering scholars: on establishing a caring community. Journal of Engineering Education 91: 49-55.
Chesler, N. C. et. al. 2002. Peer-mentoring for untenured women faculty: the leadership skills and community-building workshop. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 2389-97.
Fiske, S. T. 2002. What we know about bias and intergroup conflict, the problem of the century. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11(4): 123-128.
Discusses what psychologists, after years of study, now know about intergroup bias and conflict. It is stated that most people reveal unconscious, subtle biases, which are relatively automatic, cool, indirect, ambiguous, and ambivalent. Subtle biases underlie ordinary discrimination: comfort with one's own in-group, plus exclusion and avoidance of out-groups. Such biases result from internal conflict between cultural ideals and cultural biases. On the other hand, a small minority of people, extremists, do harbor blatant biases that are more conscious, hot, direct, and unambiguous. Blatant biases underlie aggression, including hate crimes. Such biases result from perceived intergroup conflict over economics and values, in a world perceived to be hierarchical and dangerous. Reduction of both subtle and blatant bias results from education, economic opportunity, and constructive intergroup contact. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved)
Fox, M. F., 1996. Women, academia, and careers in science and engineering. In C. Davis, et. al., editors. The equity situation: fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. p 265-89.
Frehill, L.M. 1997. Subtle sexism in engineering. In N. V. Benokraitis editor. Subtle sexism: current practice and prospects for change. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Hensel, N. 1991. Revitalizing gender equality in higher education: the need to ntegrate work/family issues. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2. Washington, D. C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Hollenshead, C. S.,1996. Enduring education and career equity for women: a research and policy agenda. In C. Davis, et. al., editors. The equity situation: fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. p 321-33..
Jackson, J. 2004. The story is not in the numbers: academic socialization and diversifying the faculty. NWSA Journal 16: 172-85.
Lange, S. E. and J. W. Yen. 2005. Toolkits for retention and recruitment: utilization and outcomes. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings. 14439-46.
Lawler, A. 1999. Tenured women battle to make it less lonely at the top. Science, 286, 1272-1276.
MIT (March 1999). A study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. MIT Faculty Newsletter, XI, 4 special edition. http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html.
National Science Foundation Engineering Task Force May 2005. The Engineering Workforce: Current State, Issues, and Recommendations. Final Report to the Assistant Director of Engineering. www.nsf.gov/attachments/104206/public/Final_Workforce.doc.
National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. 2003. Gender differences in the careers of academic scientists and engineers: a literature review. NSF 03-22. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf04323/.
Nelson, D. J. and D. Rogers. 2004. A national analysis of diversity in science and engineering faculties at research universities. 2004, Norman, OK. http://cheminfo.chem.ou.edu/faculty/djn/diversity/top50.html.
Schneider, A. 2000. Female scientists turn their backs on jobs at research universities. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, A12-14.
the intellectual identities and performance of women and African-
Americans. American Psychologist, 52,613-629.
This paper reviews empirical data to show that negative stereotypes about academic abilities of women and African Americans can hamper their achievement on standardized tests. A 'stereotype threat' is a situational threat in which members of these groups can fear being judged or treated stereotypically; for those who identify with the domain to which the stereotype is relevant, this predicament can be self-threatening and impair academic performance. Practices and policies that can reduce stereotype threats are discussed.
Steinpreis, R.E., Anders, K.A. & Ritzke, D. 1999. The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles, 41, 7/8, 509-528.
The authors of this study submitted the same c.v. for consideration by academic psychologists, sometimes with a man's name at the top, sometimes with a woman's. In one comparison, applicants for an entry-level faculty position were evaluated. Both men and women were more likely to hire the "male" candidate than the "female" candidate, and rated his qualifications as higher, despite identical credentials. In contrast, men and women were equally likely to recommend tenure for the "male" and "female" candidates (and rated their qualifications equally), though there were signs that they were more tentative in their conclusions about the (identical) "female" candidates for tenure.
Stewart, A. 2004. Advancing women in science and engineering at the University of Michigan: A report at the midpoint. http://www.umich.edu/~advproj/midtermreport.pdf
Tracy, K. B. 1998. From our readers: Women in science: The myth of having it all. Equity and Excellence in Education, 31, 68-72.
Trix, F. & Psenka, C. 2003. Exploring the color of glass: letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society 14(2): 191-220.
This study compares over 300 letters of recommendation for successful candidates for medical school faculty position. Letters written for female applicants differed systematically from those written for male applicants in terms of length, in the percentages lacking basic features, in the percentages with "doubt raising" language, and in the frequency of mention of status terms. In addition, the most common possessive phrases for female and male applicants ("her teaching" and "his research") reinforce gender schemas that emphasize women's roles as teachers and students and men's as researchers and professionals.
Valian, V. 2004. Beyond gender schemes: improving the advancement of women in academia. NWSA Journal 16: 207-20.
Valian, V. 1998. Gender schemas at work. Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Vetter, B. M. 1996. Myths and realities of women's progress in the sciences, matematics, and engineering. In C. Davis, et. al., editors. The equity situation: fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. p 29-56.
Ward, Kelly and Wolf-Wendel, Lisa. 2004. "Academic Motherhood: Managing Complex Roles in Research Universities." Review of Higher Education. 233-257
|Last Modified Date: July 30, 2008|
|Copyright © 1995 - 2013||Grand Valley State University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Institution|