Women represent only one-fifth of engineering Bachelor’s degree recipients in the U.S. This gender gap has
stubbornly held for the past several years. Our study uses survey and interview data to examine the experience
and perspectives of 40 first-year women and men intending to study engineering at a public, research extensive
university.
Implications of Findings
Findings from this study present a complex picture suggesting why women as a group may be less likely to be attracted
to engineering study in the first place. Gender identity development literature provides evidence of the cultural
association of physical science and scientific ways of thinking—reason, fact, objectivity—with males and masculinity.
At the same time, feelings, values, and subjectivity are associated with females and femininity (14). Using this
framework, “male” ways of thinking seem to loom large in the minds of first-year students as they think about what
engineering is and what it takes to be a successful engineer.
When participants were allowed to brainstorm the kinds of skills they thought necessary for engineering, women were
much less likely than men to cite active-experiential ways of knowing. This suggests that women generally have not
had as much exposure as men to hands-on, engineering problem solving prior to their entry into higher education.
Our study supports the claim that more first-year students and women in particular would choose engineering if they
had a broader, more accurate understanding of the field. K-12 outreach and recruitment strategies should
emphasize the importance of creativity, design, and communication (as well as math and science) in the study of
engineering. Ensuring hands-on science, technology, and math opportunities for pre-college women may help them to
better envision the active-experiential nature of engineering study and practice.
Women were much less likely than men to cite active-experiential ways of knowing. This suggests that women generally have not had as much exposure as men to hands-on, engineering problem solving prior to their entry into higher education. |
Method and Background
In addition to providing a basis for our findings, use of the survey and interview data demonstrate the unique
strengths of mixed-methods research through the integration of quantitative and qualitative data. This research
is part of the Academic Pathways Study (APS), a multi-institutional, longitudinal study of engineering student
learning and development that is part of the NSF-funded Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education.
To explore the intersection of gender and first-year students’ expectations of what it means to study and
practice engineering, the team considered three APS data sets (referenced above):
Authors: Deborah Kilgore, Ken Yasuhara, Jason Saleem, and Cindy Atman
Source: Proceedings of the 36th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2006
For a printable pdf of this research brief, click here.
Brief created August 2007
Back to Research Briefs