Society Cannot Continue to Exclude Women from the Fields of Science and Mathematics

Abstract

Introduction During the 1960s-1970s, the American public was besieged with numerous articles asking the questions Johnny and Suzie cannot Read? and in Science: Why so Few? (Rossi, 1965). As we approach the 21st Century, Johnny and Susie still cannot read and females remain underrepresented in careers pertaining to science, mathematics, and engineering. Why have females continued to lag in their pursuit of careers in science? Women have been traditionally underrepresented in the physical sciences compared to their fraction of the total population. Matthews (1990) suggests females have also been underrepresented in the areas of mathematics and engineering. According to Matthews (1990), women accounted for only 16 percent of all scientists and engineers in the year 1988. At the close of the 1980s, women comprised 4 percent of the engineering population and 30 percent of the scientific population, but even fewer of the women scientists and engineers are minorities (5 percent Black, less than 1 percent Native American, and 3 percent Hispanic). These numbers have not noticeably changed in a positive manner since Matthews' 1990 comments. Even in their article of 1994, Sadker and Sadker write girls are still hampered by the sex stereotype perspective girls do not have the mental capacity to master mathematics and science curriculums at both the K-12 and higher educational levels. According to Matthews (1990), the Federal Government statistics suggests there are barriers to participation and how women might over come these barriers will allow them to be participants in the physical sciences at all levels. The understanding of the continued efforts to increase the enrollment and success of women in the physical sciences in higher education is essential to the overall importance of the United States as a continued world leader. Changes in faculty attitudes and educational goals for women are necessary and imperative in implementing modifications to the science and mathematics curriculums in the institutions of higher learning. According to Kramarae and Treichler (1990), women's experiences are different from those of males, and those experiences are `unsatisfactory in ways not recognized by most university faculty and critics of education policy.' They argue women experience the academy differently for several reasons: curricula largely excludes the experiences of women, professional advising restricts their [women] options, and male control of classroom talk. Thus, the messages and socialization patterns established earlier continue to play out in post-secondary education and careers [of women]. In Hartman's 1995 article, the earlier messages and socialization patterns are documented by female students reflecting on their educational experiences in physics classes. For example, one high school student described her experiences as being confined to a shark tank. Even at the higher education level, a female graduate student recounted her experience by explaining that when she turned in an especially good work her professor suspected plagiarism. Review of Related Literature According to American Association of University Women (AAUW) (1992), at a certain age, females are socialized in a manner does not emphasize their possible academic achievements in the areas of mathematics and science. The American Association of University Women made the following observations regarding factors involved in attributing to the general decline in science achievement observed for girls and not boys: 1. An American Association of University Women research review found teachers give boys preferential treatment in school. The researchers found boys ask more questions, are given more detailed and constructive criticism of their work, and are treated more tolerantly than girls during outbursts of temper or resistance. …