nach oben

Erschienen in:

2015 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

6. Women in Mathematics: Change, Inertia, Stratification, Segregation

verfasst von : Cathy Kessel

Erschienen in: Advancing Women in Science

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter examines the participation of women in mathematics, focusing on academe. It begins with an overview of the international situation for graduate education in mathematics, illustrating national differences in proportions of female mathematics doctorates. These differences may be associated with national differences in gender segregation in all fields of study. Data collected within the United States illustrate two other statistical phenomena: differences in proportions of women earning degrees and in academic departments, and stratification in professional awards and academic employment. These three phenomena are not unique to the United States or to mathematics but the chapter draws many of its illustrations from the United States for several reasons. The United States is among the major producers of Ph.D.s in mathematics, its universities attract many of the world’s top mathematicians, and it collects extensive statistical information on women in mathematics and other scientific fields. Because the representation of women in mathematics and other fields varies by nation, the chapter concludes by discussing conditions associated with such variations.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel International Status of Women in the Chemical Sciences

Nächstes Kapitel Women in Statistics: Scientific Contributions Versus Rewards

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

See surveys at http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/annual-survey. Note that students in the United States generally fall into one of three categories: citizen, permanent resident, or temporary resident. In contrast to permanent residents, temporary residents are permitted to stay only for a specific purpose such as graduate study or a particular job.

This neglects findings about plasticity. The neuroscientist Lise Eliot notes:

The notion that sex differences in the brain, because they are biological, are necessarily innate or fixed is perhaps the most insidious of the many public misunderstandings on this topic. Neuroscientists know that, in the absence of proof of genetic or hormonal influence, any sex difference in adult neural structure or function could be shaped through experience, practice, and neural plasticity. (2011, p. 897)

“Tenure-track” has two different meanings in the United States. Here it means “faculty who are tenured or eligible for tenure.” Because the other meaning is “eligible for tenure,” this statement affords the very discouraging (and incorrect) interpretation that, relative to their shares of doctorates, women are currently underrepresented in junior faculty positions at top universities in fields such as mathematics, physics, computer science, and engineering.

This figure includes only tenured and tenure-track faculty at 4-year institutions who hold Ph.D.s. It does not include postdocs or other full-time faculty.

See Kessel (2014) for examples.

See e.g., 2009 Survey Third Report, Figure 6.2. The rates for Groups I, II, III, IV, and Va are between 1.25 and 2.5%. These rates increase when M.A.- and B.A.-granting institutions are included.

A look at Blair et al. (2013, Table F.4) suggests this is a correct assumption for Ph.D.-granting institutions, but less so for departments which grant B.A.s and M.A.s.

Although it does not report these trends for mathematics, this may be due to the study design which combines NSF figures for mathematics and statistics with figures for computer science. Many more undergraduates earn B.A.s in computer science than in mathematics and statistics (e.g., in 2001, 43,597 vs. 11,437). But the reverse holds for Ph.D.s (e.g., in 2001, 768 vs. 1,001).

Examples for other professions are given in Kessel (2014).

Note that AMS classifications changed in 2012 to include applied mathematics in Groups I, II, III. See http://www.ams.org/notices/201209/rtx120901262p.pdf.

These were countries which participated in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Survey (TIMSS), thus very low income countries are underrepresented.

The Czech Republic is a counterexample.

According to the Higher Education Act of 1965, institutions are defined as HBCUs if they were “established prior to 1964 [and the] principal mission was, and is, the education of Black Americans…” Source: http://www.house.gov/legcoun/Comps/HEA65_CMD.pdf.

Ambady, Nalini, Margaret Shih, Amy Kim, and Todd L. Pittinsky. 2001. Stereotype Susceptibility in Children. Psychological Science 12(5): 385–390.CrossRef

Andreescu, Titu, Joseph A. Gallian, Jonathan M. Kane, and Janet E. Mertz. 2008. Cross-cultural Analysis of Students With Exceptional Talent in Mathematical Problem Solving. Notices of the American Mathematical Society 55(10): 1248–1260.

Banaji, Mazarin, and Anthony Greenwald. 2013. Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People. New York: Delacorte Press.

Blair, Richelle, Ellen Kirkman, and James Maxwell. 2013. Statistical Abstract of Undergraduate Programs in the Mathematical Sciences in the United States: Fall 2010 CBMS Survey. Providence: American Mathematical Society.

Buchen, Lizzie. 2011. When Geeks Meet. Nature 479: 25–27.CrossRef

Case, Bettye Anne, and Anne M. Leggett (eds.). 2005. Complexities: Women in Mathematics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ceci, Stephen, and Wendy Williams. 2011. Understanding Current Causes of Women’s Underrepresentation in Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(8): 3157–3162.CrossRef

Charles, Maria. 2011. A World of Difference: International Trends in Women’s Economic Status. Annual Review of Sociology 37: 355–371.CrossRef

Charles, Maria, and Karen Bradley. 2009. Indulging Our Gendered Selves? Sex Segregation by Field of Study in 44 Countries. American Journal of Sociology 114(4): 924–976.

Cleary, Richard, James W. Maxwell, and Colleen Rose. 2013. Report on the 2011–2012 New Doctoral Recipients. Notices of the American Mathematical Society 60(7): 874–884.

Cvencek, Dario, Andrew Meltzoff, and Antony Greenwald. 2011. Math–Gender Stereotypes in Elementary Children. Child Development 82(3): 766–779.CrossRef

Eliot, Lise. 2011. The Trouble with Sex Differences. Neuron 72: 895–898.CrossRef

Else-Quest, Nicole. 2007. Biological Determinism and the Never-Ending Quest For Gender Differences [Review of The Female Brain]. Psychology of Women Quarterly 31: 322.CrossRef

European Commission. 2013. She Figures 2012: Gender in Research and Innovation. Statistics and Indicators. Brussels: Publications Office of the European Union.

Flahive, Mary, and Marie Vitulli. 2010. An Update: Are Women Getting all the Jobs? Notices of the American Mathematical Society 54(8): 984–986.

Glossary. n.d. Colorado Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Plan, http://wildlife.state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/DOW/WildlifeSpecies/SpeciesOfConcern/GreaterSageGrouse/StatewideConsPlan/Glossary.pdf (accessed January 2014).

Green, Judy, and Jeanne LaDuke. 2009. Pioneering Women in American Mathematics: The Pre-1940 PhD’s. Providence: American Mathematical Society and London Mathematical Society.

Green, Judy and Jeanne LaDuke. 2011. Newsom, Mary (Winston). In Supplementary Material for Pioneering Women in American Mathematics: the pre-1940 PhD’s, 453–458. http://www.ams.org/publications/authors/books/postpub/hmath-34-PioneeringWomen.pdf. Accessed 24 March 2014.

Herzig, Abbe. 2004. Becoming Mathematicians: Women and Students of Color Choosing and Leaving Doctoral Mathematics. Review of Educational Research 74(2): 171–214.CrossRef

Hill, Theodore, and Erica Rogers. 2012. Gender Gaps in Science: The Creativity Factor. The Mathematical Intelligencer 34(2): 19–26.CrossRef

Hobbs, Catherine and Esmyr Koomen. 2006. Statistics on Women in Mathematics. European Women in Mathematics. http://www.europeanwomeninmaths.org/women-in-math/report/statistics-women-in-maths-in-europe-1993-and-2005. Accessed 5 April 2014.

Kessel, Cathy. 2009. Notes on the Two-Body Problem. Association for Women in Mathematics Newsletter 39(6): 14–16.

_____. Kessel, Cathy. 2014. Understanding Underrepresentation. Mathematical Intelligencer, 36(4): 10–18.

Kirkman, Ellen E., and Olivia A. Scriven. 2008. Promoting Diversity at the Graduate Level in Mathematics: A National Forum. Berkeley: Mathematical Sciences Research Institute.

Koblitz, Ann Hibner. 1999. Science, Women, and the Russian Intelligensia. In History of Women in the Sciences: Readings from Isis, ed. S. G. Kohlstedt, 201–219. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Long, J. Scott (ed.). 2001. From Scarcity to Visibility: Gender Differences in the Careers of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Lutzer, David, Stephen Rodi, Ellen Kirkman, and James Maxwell. 2007. Statistical Abstract of Undergraduate Programs in the United States. Fall 2005 CBMS survey. Providence: American Mathematical Society.

McWhinnie, Sean, and Caroline Fox. 2013. Advancing Women in Mathematics: Good Practice in UK University Departments. London: London Mathematical Society.

Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., John F. Dovidio, Victoria L. Brescoll, Mark J. Graham, and Jo. Handelsman. 2012. Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109(41): 16474–16479.CrossRef

Murray, Margaret A. M. 2012. Women Mathematicians on the Web, Part II: Finding the First. Association for Women in Mathematics Newsletter 42(4): 11–15.

National Research Council. 2013. The Mathematical Sciences in 2025. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Science Board. 2014. Science and Engineering Indicators 2014. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

Nelson, Donna J., and Christopher Brammer. 2010. A National Analysis of Minorities and Women in Science and Engineering Faculties at Research Universities. Norman: Diversity in Science Association and University of Oklahoma.

Parshall, Karen, and Adrian Rice (eds.). 2002. Mathematics Unbound: The Evolution of an International Community, 1800–1945. Providence: American Mathematical Society and London Mathematical Society.

Pollack, Eileen. 2013. Why Are There Still So Few Women In Science? New York Times. October 3

Popejoy, Alice, and Phoebe Starbird Leboy. 2012. Is Math Still Just A Man’s World? Journal of Mathematics and System Science 2: 292–298.

Shaw, Allison, and Daniel Stanton. 2012. Leaks in the Pipeline: Separating Demographic Inertia from Ongoing Gender Differences in Academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 279: 3736–3741.CrossRef

Shen, Helen. 2013. Mind the Gender Gap. Nature, 475: 22–24.

Tallis, Raymond. 2012. Wit and Wickedness: Is it All in the Brain? Brain 136: 980–984.CrossRef

UNESCO Institute of Statistics. 2014. Higher Education in Asia: Expanding Out, Expanding Up. The Rise of Graduate Education and University Research. Montreal: Author.

Walker, Erica N. 2009. ‘A Border State’: A Historical Exploration of the Formative, Educational, and Professional Experiences of Black Mathematicians in the United States. International Journal of the History of Mathematics Education 4(2): 53–78.

Wiegand, Sylvia. 2005. My Grandmother, Grace Chisholm Young. In Complexities: Women in Mathematics, ed. B. A. Case and A. Leggett, 39–45. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Young, Rebecca M., and Evan Balaban. 2006. Psychoneuroindoctrinology [Review of The Female Brain]. Nature 443(12): 634.CrossRef

Titel: Women in Mathematics: Change, Inertia, Stratification, Segregation
verfasst von: Cathy Kessel
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Advancing Women in Science
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08628-6

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-08629-3

Copyright-Jahr: 2015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08629-3_6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner