By Alvin P. Sanoff
It’s no secret
that most young women aren’t
drawn to engineering. They flock
to medical and law schools. Even
M.B.A. programs, which have had
problems attracting women, do better
than schools of engineering. Most
college-bound women don’t
even consider engineering an option.
The numbers tell the story. About
half the students in medical school
and just under half in law school
are women. Female enrollment in
M.B.A. programs is estimated to
be slightly above 30 percent, while
at the undergraduate level, women
account for slightly more than half
of business majors. By contrast,
women earn only 20 percent of undergraduate
engineering degrees and a slightly
higher percentage of master’s
degrees. (Since there are many more
degrees awarded in engineering than
in medicine or law, the total number
of degrees women receive in engineering
exceeds that of the other two professions.)
Admittedly, it’s impossible
to draw an exact parallel between
engineering and the other fields.
For example, an undergraduate diploma
is not the first professional degree
in law and medicine, so students
can major in art history and still
be viable candidates for admission
if they have a strong academic record
and solid scores on the required
standardized tests. But in engineering,
the undergraduate diploma is the
first professional degree. Moreover,
the course requirements for entry
are substantial. So, unlike potential
lawyers and doctors, most would-be
engineers must decide on their major
no later than their freshman year.
Nonetheless, the experiences of
educators in other fields offer
lessons that engineering educators
can draw from as they strive to
increase the number of women in
the profession. If engineering remains
alien to most women, the United
States may be unable to produce
the number of engineers needed for
the nation to retain its technological
edge.
A study of admissions data shows
that law and medical schools have
had the easiest time attracting
women. The slow flow of women into
both turned into a veritable torrent
in the 1970s. Herma Hill Kay, who
holds a named chair at Boalt Hall—the
law school of the University of
California, Berkeley—and is
the school’s former dean,
says that women became interested
in the civil rights movement in
the 1960s, and that led many to
pursue a legal career. Other legal
educators say that Watergate also
served as a catalyst.
In 1963, just 3 percent of those
enrolled in American Bar Association-accredited
law schools were women. Twenty years
later, that figure had soared to
38 percent. During the 1970s, the
number of women in law schools grew
more than six-fold, from just under
6,700 to almost 41,000. Today, there
are more than 67,000 women enrolled
in ABA-accredited schools.
In medicine, the transformation
was more gradual but no less dramatic.
In 1970, women accounted for under
10 percent of enrollees. Ten years
later, that number had risen to
27 percent, according to the Association
of American Medical Colleges. The
numbers have continued to increase
year after year, and now women have
achieved virtual parity with men.
At many schools, they make up a
substantial majority of the student
body. “Medicine began to attract
women who in an earlier time would
have become nurses,” observes
sociologist Carroll Seron of the
University of California, Irvine.
Adds Diana Magrane, an associate
vice president of the Association
of American Medical Colleges and
director of its Women in Medicine
programs: “Women saw entry
into medicine as an opportunity
to make a social contribution with
a high probability that they would
succeed in medical school and in
life.”
Observers say that the rise of
feminism and the 1972 passage of
Title IX, the landmark legislation
that banned sex discrimination in
admissions, energized women who
felt that both medicine and law
were now open to them. Law and medical
schools did not have to actively
recruit women; they simply had to
open their doors wide and not stand
in the way.
Business
Not Booming
Engineering and M.B.A. programs
did not reap comparable benefits
from the transformations in society.
In part, say observers, women did
not view the fields as offering
the same opportunities as law and
medicine to bring about social change,
a priority for many young women
of the baby boomer generation.
M.B.A. programs have also had to
grapple with life cycle issues that
discourage many women from pursuing
the degree. Typically, there is
a break of three to six years between
the time potential M.B.A.s graduate
from college and enter business
school. By then, some women are
starting a family and decide that
enrolling in an M.B.A. program is
too disruptive. “The top business
schools target students who are
between 25 and 28 years old, and
at that particular time many women
are focused on having their children,”
says Sabrina White, admissions director
of the Robert H. Smith School of
Business at the University of Maryland,
College Park. “Many full-time
programs are not designed so that
women can take a year off to have
a child. But if men choose to have
a child, their studies are rarely
interrupted.” Engineering
is also affected by life cycle issues
in the sense that students must
decide at a young age whether to
pursue a career in the field. If
youngsters do not take the proper
science and math courses in high
school, it can be an uphill battle
for them to major in engineering.
Like schools of engineering, business
schools are working hard to attract
women. One of the things they have
learned is that women believe that
business and engineering offer less
opportunity than medicine and law.
Forty-one percent of women considering
applying to an M.B.A. program saw
a glass ceiling in both business
and engineering as “very real,”
says Daphne Atkinson, vice president
for industry relations at the Graduate
Management Admission Council, which
did the survey and sponsors the
GMAT, the standardized test for
M.B.A. applicants. A glass ceiling
is less of an issue in law and medicine,
where the comparable figures are
25 and 17 percent, respectively.
The fact that most engineering jobs
are in the corporate sector could
help explain why women view business
and engineering in a similar light.
Both are widely regarded as fields
in which often hostile, male-dominated
cultures are the norm. “Companies
that have shown themselves to be
family-friendly are more likely
to attract women,” says Wendy
Huber, assistant director of admissions
at the University of Virginia’s
Darden Graduate School of Business.
Julie Strong, associate director
of M.B.A. admissions at MIT’s
Sloan School of Management, says
that the differences in the priorities
of men and women are evident in
how they go about choosing M.B.A.
programs. While men put the top
priority on prestige and rankings,
women are more likely to care about
a sense of community at the school,
the quality of teaching and the
opportunity to develop relationships
with the faculty. By focusing more
on women’s priorities in its
recruiting, Sloan has increased
the proportion of women in its classes
from 25 to 30 percent. Carnegie
Mellon University’s Tepper
School of Business has developed
a brochure designed specifically
for women that emphasizes the school’s
sense of community and the close
relationships that exist between
students and faculty. The brochure
also features several of the school’s
female graduates talking about their
careers and their experiences in
the M.B.A. program.
Educators say that women who are
considering applying to a school
look to see whether there are role
models among alumni, administrators
and faculty members. John Fernandes,
president of AACSB International,
the major accrediting body for business
schools, says that “there
is nothing better for a prospective
applicant than to look across the
table and see someone who looks
like you. If a school wants more
women, then it needs a good share
of women in admission and counseling
positions.” Having women on
the faculty is even more important,
many educators say.
Nationally, law schools have a
higher proportion of women on their
faculties than medicine, business
or engineering. Twenty-five percent
of full professors, 47 percent of
associate professors and 50 percent
of assistant professors in the 2002-03
academic year were women, according
to the Association of American Law
Schools. At medical schools in 2003,
11 percent of full professors, 19
percent of associate professors
and 50 percent of assistant professors
were women, according to the Association
of American Medical Colleges. In
business schools in the 2003-04
academic year, 14 percent of full
professors, 25 percent of associate
professors and 34 percent of assistant
professors were women, reports AACSB
International.
Engineering schools lag far behind.
ASEE data show that just 6 percent
of full professors, 12 percent of
associate professors and 18 percent
of assistant professors are women.
These numbers reflect the fact that
relatively few women pursue engineering
careers. But because women look
to faculty members as role models,
the low numbers may do more than
reflect reality. In all likelihood,
they also reinforce the lack of
interest women show in engineering.
When the Olin College of Engineering
was born several years ago, its
founders were mindful of the importance
of having women on its faculty in
order to attract a high proportion
of female students. Duncan Murdoch,
vice president for external relations
and dean of admission at Olin, says
that engineering schools need to
do more than simply say they are
a good place for women—they
need to prove it, and female faculty
members offer compelling proof.
Today, women make up about 40 percent
of the Olin faculty. And while the
college has fallen short of its
goal of having a student body that
is evenly divided between men and
women, more than 40 percent of its
students are female, one of the
highest proportions among U.S. engineering
schools.
An Image
Problem
Educators and administrators in
medicine, law and business have
learned that a profession’s
image can also make a significant
difference. Lawyers and doctors
are often portrayed favorably in
the mass media, for example in TV
series such as “Perry Mason,”
“ER” and the various
permutations of “Law and Order.”
By contrast, business executives
are frequently portrayed negatively
on television and in such movies
as “Wall Street” and
“Boiler Room,” where
rapacious characters wheel and deal
without regard to the law, ethics
or simple decency. “Nobility
is associated with being a doctor
or lawyer,” says Maryland’s
Sabrina White. “But few TV
shows are written about M.B.A.s
using their powers for good.”
The recent convictions of high-profile
business executives for an assortment
of transgressions reinforce the
image that those in business care
only about money. “The M.B.A.
has not had a reputation as a degree
that has a positive impact on the
community,” White says.
Educators say that, in contrast
to the other fields, engineering
is relatively invisible in the mass
media. It isn’t the subject
of TV shows or movies, positive
or negative, and engineers rarely
make headlines. If they do, the
fact that they are engineers is
rarely the main focus of the story.
A recent Gallup Poll may offer one
indication of engineering’s
low profile. When a national random
sample of adults was asked “what
kind of career or work would you
recommend” to a young woman,
medicine came in first. Engineering
trailed far behind.
To the extent that engineers are
depicted on television and in movies,
say educators, it is often as stereotypical
nerds whose social skills are wanting.
The profession is seen as populated
by “very shrink-wrapped people,”
says Sherra Kerns, vice president
for innovation and research at Olin
College.
In part as a result of the profession’s
relative invisibility, college-bound
women can graduate from high school
with little or no idea of what engineers
do. “From the day you are
a little girl, you know what doctors
do,” but the same is not true
of either lab scientists or engineers,
observes Paula Tracy, professor
of biochemistry and medicine at
the University of Vermont, whose
father was an engineer.
Educators say that young women
are socialized to believe that math
and physics are the province of
males, and that discourages them
from pursuing engineering. “We
have to show adolescent girls that
engineering, math and science are
cool things that create opportunities
for them,” Diane Magrane says.
Comments such as those from Harvard
University President Lawrence Summers
suggesting that innate differences
between men and women might help
explain why fewer females succeed
in science and math reflect a mindset
that has discouraged women from
pursuing scientific careers, medicine
excepted.
Medicine, unlike engineering, is
regarded as a field that places
a high priority on the betterment
of humankind, a characteristic that
educators say is very important
to young women. Domenico Grasso,
founding dean of Smith College’s
engineering program and current
dean of engineering and mathematical
sciences at the University of Vermont,
says that “women see law and
medicine as offering an opportunity
to make a difference in society.
They don’t see that opportunity
in engineering. We have treated
engineering as an end in itself,
not as a vehicle to help make society
better.”
It’s no coincidence that
women in engineering are more likely
to pursue degrees in biomedical
and environmental engineering, which
are clearly linked to the betterment
of society. According to ASEE, 46
percent of undergraduate degrees
in biomedical engineering and 41
percent in environmental engineering
are awarded to women, an extraordinarily
high proportion considering the
number of women studying engineering.
Research has also shown that women
are “a high-touch population”
that values human interaction, says
Atkinson of the Graduate Management
Admission Council. Yet engineering
is not seen as offering that, despite
the fact that working in teams and
collaborative learning now play
an important role in engineering
programs and have been incorporated
into ABET’s assessment criteria.
Educators in other fields say that
engineering has simply not gotten
the message across that it places
a high priority on teamwork and
interpersonal skills. “Engineering
appeals more to individuals who
want to work as individuals,”
says AACSB’s Fernandes. He
says that if that is no longer the
case, then “schools need to
make it clear to women that engineering
can be as fulfilling as business
from the standpoint of social and
group interaction.”
Sociologist Seron, who is engaged
in a study of engineering students
at four institutions, views “engineering
as a very conservative profession.
There is a strong sense of what
students need to do and an attitude
of ‘get with the agenda or
leave.’” Olin’s
Kerns says that engineering educators
“are very attached to the
concept that engineering education
is painful, dry and difficult.”
She recalls that earlier in her
career, when students told her that
they liked her course, a colleague
said to her, “ ‘You
must not be teaching it right.’
”
Kerns says that if engineering
is to attract more women, the field
needs to redefine itself as a profession
that offers “hard fun.”
Moreover, she says, to the extent
that engineering curricula are inflexible
and require students to “sacrifice
something that they feel passionate
about, such as dance or the arts,
to devote the time and effort necessary
to get a degree, many women will
say to themselves, ‘Thank
you, but I will provide my talent
to the planet in some other way.’
”
For engineering educators, the
future may prove even more challenging
than the present. Atkinson says
that the generation of young people
born between the early 1980s and
2000, who have been dubbed “millennials”
by demographers, want their jobs
to have “socially redeeming
value.” Members of this generation
are “idealistic and believe
that they will fix what the baby
boomers and the generation that
followed them—generation X—have
messed up,” she adds. If Atkinson
is correct, then unless there is
a major transformation both within
engineering education and in the
way engineering presents itself
to the world, the profession’s
inability to attract women could
deepen. Engineering educators need
to bear in mind, Atkinson says,
that “only if you first talk
to women about the things that they
care about will you then be able
to talk to them about what you care
about. Remember, it is not about
you. It is about them.”
Al Sanoff is a freelance writer
based in Bethesda, Md.
|