2. Relevant Literature
2.1. Women in Engineering
2.2. Measures of Scientific Success
2.3. Other Barriers to Achieving Success in STEM
3. Data and Methods
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Formal Measures in Accounts of Success
The typical goals for my field are publish, publish, publish. Develop a name and reputation. Finances are useful but not critical. Although the bigger schools tend to pay better. First and foremost publish. Secondly, being a good teacher. Being able to relate to students, because if you’re not a good teacher your horizons are limited.(Male Ph.D. candidate 2)
Primarily the number of research publications followed by teaching evaluations. And if you do those well, if you do those two things well, the rest of the stuff helps, but those are the primary criteria.(Male Ph.D. candidate 1)
So, it is basically the number of papers, the number of grants, and number of grad students. Not so much the number of dollars, but, that’s part of it too because with more dollars you can have more number of students, more papers, it is just sort of a thing.(Male professor 2)
Okay, well the easy answer is it’s kind of the cumulative track record or an upward trend of activities and accomplishments. Accomplishments have to be documented. Activities are just sort of the necessary things that you do that do not get any kind of documented thing for.(Male professor 2)
There have been guidelines established and provided to us in terms of what our teaching expectations are and by teaching expectations it is really the teaching evaluations and feedback provided by students. There is a baseline expectation that we will provide the material to the students and it will be conveyed in an effective manner. So, there’s the teaching component. There is also an expectation to conduct research and publish the results of that research. And then thirdly, an expectation to bring in funding, primarily grant funding to support both the research as well as being able to support some students down the road.(Female associate professor 1)
4.2. Informal Measures in Accounts of Success
I got tenure at a research university, you could consider that as a level of success. There are some publications that I thought were pretty good, that have not been cited much. Although I think they are good, my community of fellow researchers have not determined them to be good enough. To me, in the position I am at right now, success is doing what I like to do, and publishing work that I think is good. Even if a lot of people don’t cite it, if it is something that brings me joy and happiness, and I am ok with it.(Male professor 1)
In general, I can think of a lot of women who have similar definitions of success as I do, but I also have, I feel like it’s broader than just my work here… For some people it might be research, having a big lab, having a lot of grants, having a lot of papers. I guess my definition of success might be not that far off. Or, maybe I’m not as successful as other people. I guess that’s it… People looking at things like grants or papers or that type of thing, probably would not view me as successful.(Female associate professor 1)
4.2.1. Differing Conceptualizations of Relationships
I was here for almost twenty years, and I came from industry, and I did establish a research program, and we were able to get funding on a reasonably regular basis to have a steady group of students coming through the labs, and so I did feel successful in doing that, on a small scale.(Female professor 2)
I do have a few people who have, what do I mean, helped me define areas of research, worked on projects with me. My husband is in the same field, so I talk to him a lot, he gives me a lot of good advice. Collaborators, like my advisor, helped me a lot at one point.(Female associate professor 1)
I think it was a couple of things. One, my dad. Two, my major professor. He helped me write my application for the fellowship, because it is an internal grant.(Female Ph.D. candidate 3)
Not so much [mentoring] in grad school… I guess I can think of a couple people back at the high school level. They sort of have, there aren’t particular individuals that I can identify in college or grad school. I mean other than I was always pretty active with my peer group, so I would, as you expect I learned probably more from my peers than I did from faculty.(Male professor 2)
4.2.2. The Influence of Gendered Stereotypes
I think men are generally more competitive as a stereotype, and they compare themselves tremendously and they have to do better than the other person, and women are more satisfied, generally again a stereotype, if they are happy with what they have done and they don’t necessarily compare themselves so much to other people which I think maybe a healthier personality profile. But, then again that is totally my bias and subjective thought and a gut instinct as to what it will be. But, I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case, because that’s my guess.(Male professor 2)
I would also say that success would be, I mean like, getting along with your colleagues is really important. I don’t really like conflict, I would rather talk about a problem in a mature way than it is building up in another way… I would say having collaborative versus competitive (relationships), because a lot of the time the attitude coming in is I’m in it for myself and I need to do whatever I can to propel my career or make myself have a better reputation, you know? And if I can use someone to get there, then that’s okay, but I don’t think that is okay.(Female Ph.D. candidate 3)
4.3. ‘Engineering for Women’
But I definitely feel that women are more concerned about the overall system versus men who are concerned about the specific design which is why I feel like a lot more women go into humanitarian engineering because it’s much more system based versus fix this one design.(Female Masters student 3)
I think that’s why the future direction of our department started going into more biological and biomedical engineering. There’s a lot more women interested in that than I see in more traditional agricultural engineering. And so yeah, maybe the field of study is, maybe there’s more opportunities that are better suited for women.(Male assistant professor 1)
4.4. Doing Engineering, Undoing Gender
As a female, I do not think there is a difference between male and female engineering. We need to basically follow the same steps as everyone else. So there is no such thing as we need more women or we need to give them more opportunities. I just think that everything need to be equal for men and women. And that’s actually what makes women more successful, because they feel that they are treated equally. So that’s my very personal opinion. But I know that they need to give more opportunities to women because there are simply just not enough women in the field.(Female assistant professor 1)
I advocate for blindness when it comes to gender and race.(Male associate professor 1)
That [gender] is beyond Engineering.(Male professor 2)
I was talking to my dad… and he asked me why I was doing so okay, and I didn’t know, and he was like you act like a man. My default is logic and I don’t like drama and I feel like females can be so petty so maybe that’s it… Like most of my friends are male and if they are female they are most likely in the STEM fields. So, I don’t know if that means anything, but I think it is interesting.(Female Ph.D. candidate 3)
Conflicts of Interest
- What made you decide to go to grad school? (or pursue a higher degree?)
- What was [is] your research topic for your dissertation/thesis?
- Were you happy with that work? Were you happy with how it ended?
- Did you accomplish what you wanted to as a grad student? What were your goals for afterwards?
- What brought you to this university?
- What department do you work in?
- Do you also teach classes?
- Which do you like better, teaching or research?
- Do you like the research you are doing currently? Did you choose the research agenda yourself?
- What are your other research interests?
- Do you have plans of pursuing them?
- How much control do you have of your research agenda?
- Are you pleased with the direction of your current research?
- Do you think it’s been successful?
- What are some shortfalls?
- Is research what you envisioned it would be? (as an undergrad, grad, faculty)
- Did you meet the professional goals you set as a grad student?
- Did you set other goals that you met or didn’t meet?
- Do you think/know whether your colleagues had similar goals?
- What do you think are the “typical” goals for your field?
- What are you personal goals?
- What were your goals going into research at this university?
- Why did/do you want to do research?
- What do you like most about your work?
- How would you define being successful in your field?
- Would you say you are a successful scientist? What criteria do you use to determine your level of success?
- Who or what else would you say has contributed to your success in your field?
- Is there anything else that might have contributed to your success that we missed?
- Acker, Sandra, and Grace Feuerverger. 1996. Doing Good and Feeling Bad: The Work of Women University Teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education 26: 401–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bellas, Marcia L. 1999. Emotional Labor in Academia. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 561: 96–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beyer, Sylvia. 2015. Women and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM). Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Blickenstaff, Jacob Clark. 2005. Women and Science Careers: Leaky Pipeline or Gender Filter? Gender and Education 17: 369–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butler, Judith. 2004. Undoing Gender. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Ceci, Stephen J., and Wendy M. Williams. 2011. Understanding Current Causes of Women’s Underrepresentation in Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108: 3157–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ceci, Stephen J., Donna K. Ginther, Shulamit Kahn, and Wendy M. Williams. 2014. Women in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 15: 75–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Correll, Shelley J., Stephen Benard, and In Paik. 2007. Getting a Job: Is There a Motherhood Penalty? American Journal of Sociology 112: 1297–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuddy, Amy, Susan T. Fiske, and Peter Glick. 2004. When Professionals Become Mothers, Warmth Doesn’t Cut Ice. Journal of Social Issues 60: 701–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davison, Heather K., and Michael J. Burke. 1999. Sex Discrimination in Simulated Employment Contexts: A Meta-analytic Investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior 56: 225–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delamont, Sara, and Pauln Atkinson. 2001. Doctoring Uncertainty: Mastering Craft Knowledge. Social Studies of Science 31: 87–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dryburgh, Heather. 1999. Work Hard, Play Hard: Women and Professionalization in Engineering—Adapting to the Culture. Gender and Society 13: 664–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erickson, Shelley K. 2012. Women Ph.D. Students in Engineering and a Nuanced Terrain: Avoiding and Revealing Gender. The Review of Higher Education 35: 355–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Etzkowitz, Henry, Carol Kemelgor, and Brian Uzzi. 2000. Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Evetts, Julia. 1997. Women and Careers in Engineering: Management Changes in the Work Organization. Women in Management Review 12: 228–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evetts, Julia. 1998. Managing the Technology but Not the Organization: Women and Career in Engineering. Women in Management Review 13: 283–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farrell, Elizabeth F. 2002. Engineering a Warmer Welcome for Female Students: The Discipline Tries to Stress its Social Relevance, an Important Factor for Many Women. Chronicle Higher Education (22 February 2002). Available online: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Engineering-a-Warmer-Welcome/30982 (accessed on 2 December 2017).
- Faulkner, Wendy. 2009. Doing Gender in Engineering Workplace Cultures. I. Observations from the Field. Engineering Studies 1: 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, Mary Frank. 2005. Gender, Family Characteristics, and Publication Productivity among Scientists. Social Studies of Science 35: 131–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, Mary Frank, Mary Lynn Realff, Diana Roldan Rueda, and Jillian Morn. 2016. International Research Collaboration among Women Engineers: Frequency and Perceived Barriers, by Regions. Journal of Technology Transfer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gherardi, Silvia. 1994. The Gender We Think, the Gender We Do in Our Everyday Lives. Human Relations 47: 591–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilbert, G. Nigel, and Michael Mulkay. 1984. Opening Pandora’s Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists’ Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Glover, Judith, Jane Fielding, and Deborah Smeaton. 1996. What Happens to Women and Men with SET Degrees? Labour Market Trends 104: 63–67. [Google Scholar]
- Heilman, Madeline E., and Alice H. Eagly. 2008. Gender Stereotypes Are Alive, Well, and Busy Producing Workplace Discrimination. Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1: 393–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heilman, Madeline E., and Elizabeth J. Parks-Stamm. 2007. Gender Stereotypes in the Workplace: Obstacles to Women’s Career Progress. In Social Psychology of Gender. Edited by Shelley J. Correll. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 47–77. [Google Scholar]
- Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1985. Reflections on Gender and Science. New Haven: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Kierstead, Diane, Patti D’agostino, and Heidi Dill. 1988. Sex role stereotyping of college professors. Journal of Educational Psychology 80: 342–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kray, Laura J., Adam D. Galinsky, and Leigh Thompson. 2002. Reversing the Gender Gap in Negotiations: An Exploration of Stereotype Regeneration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 87: 386–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Leahey, Erin. 2007. Not by Productivity Alone: How Visibility and Specialization Contribute to Academic Earnings. American Sociological Review 72: 533–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leahey, Erin, and Cindy L. Cain. 2013. Straight from the Source: Accounting for Scientific Success. Social Studies of Science 43: 927–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lemons, Mary A., and Monica Parzinger. 2007. A Cognitive Explanation of Discrimination of Women in Technology. Journal of Business and Psychology 22: 91–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lincoln, Anne E., Stephanie Pincus, Janet Bandows Koster, and Phoebe S. Leboy. 2012. The Matilda Effect in Science: Awards and Prizes. Social Studies of Science 42: 307–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Link, Albert N., Christopher A. Swann, and Barry Bozeman. 2008. A Time Allocation Study of University Faculty. Economics of Education Review 27: 363–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, J. Scott. 1990. The Origins of Sex Differences in Science. Social Forces 68: 1297–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, J. Scott, Paul D. Allison, and Robert McGinnis. 1993. Rank Advancement in Academic Careers: Sex Differences and the Effects of Productivity. American Sociological Review 58: 703–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDowell, George R. 2003. Engaged Universities: Lessons from the Land-Grant Universities and Extension. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 585: 31–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, JoAnn, and Marilyn Chamberlin. 2000. Women are Teachers, Men are Professors. Teaching Sociology 28: 283–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Powell, Abigail, Barbara Bagilhole, and Andrew Dainty. 2009. How Women Engineers Do and Undo Gender: Consequences for Gender Equality. Gender, Work and Organization 16: 411–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Pugliesi, Karen. 1999. The Consequences of Emotional Labor. Motivation and Emotion 23: 125–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rhoten, Diana, and Stephanie Pfirman. 2007. Women in Interdisciplinary Science: Exploring Preferences and Consequences. Research Policy 36: 56–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rhoton, Laura A. 2011. Distancing as a Gendered Barrier: Understanding Women Scientists’ Gender Practices. Gender and Society 25: 696–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ridgeway, Cecilia L. 1997. Interaction and the Conservation of Gender Inequality: Considering Employment. American Sociological Review 62: 218–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarathchandra, Dilshani. 2017. Risky Science? Perception & Negotiation of Risk in University Bioscience. Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schuh, G. Edward. 1986. Revitalizing Land Grant Universities: It’s Time to Regain Relevance. Choices 1: 6–10. [Google Scholar]
- Silverman, David. 2004. Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage. [Google Scholar]
- Tao, Yu, Wei Hong, and Ying Ma. 2017. Gender Differences in Publication Productivity among Academic Scientists and Engineers in the U.S. and China: Similarities and Differences. Minerva 55: 459–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Widnall, Sheila E. 1988. AAAS Presidential Lecture: Voices from the Pipeline. Science 241: 1740–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xie, Yu, and Alexandra Killewald. 2012. Is American Science in Decline? Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, Yu, and Kimberlee A. Shauman. 1998. Sex Differences in Research Productivity: New Evidence about an Old Puzzle. American Sociological Review 63: 847–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Yu, and Kimberlee A. Shauman. 2003. Women in Science: Career Processes and Outcomes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Yoder, Brian L. 2017. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education. Available online: https://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/college-profiles/15EngineeringbytheNumbersPart1.pdf (accessed on 2 December 2017).
|Graduate student—Ph.D. stream||3||3|
|Graduate student—MS stream||3||1|
|Formal Measures||Informal Measures|
|Publications, citations, publication venue|
Grants, contracts, external funding
|Ability to help people and communities|
Mentoring relationships (as mentor and mentee)
Personal relationships, family support
|Reputation, recognition, awards||Happiness|
|Graduate student training, placement||Satisfaction from research|
|Teaching excellence||Failure as a form of success|
|Products, design outputs||Overcoming personal struggles|
|Commercialization, patents, utility||Maintaining quality of life|
Results ‘standing the test of time’
|Ability to handle stress|
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).