Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

On-ramping: following women scientists and engineers through their transition from nonacademic to faculty careers

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A popular strategy for increasing women faculty in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) departments is to hire from other universities, but this strategy fails to increase the number of women faculty nationally. This research investigates a new approach to faculty recruitment called “on-ramping,” the process by which women with PhDs leverage their nonacademic careers and enter academia as faculty members. This study follows women scientists and engineers from their non-academic to faculty career and analyzes their experiences transgressing the boundaries of STEM knowledge production sites. We used qualitative methods to collect and analyze semi-structured interviews about the experiences of ten female PhDs who successfully on-ramped into faculty positions with the support of a feminist professional community. Our data revealed four phases of on-ramping that characterized the transition to academia for our participants. Attention to gender in on-ramping also highlights concerns that span the personal and the professional in women scientists and engineers’ lives. By illuminating cultural and political practices in STEM sites of knowledge production and the effects of feminist interventions on women’s experiences of producing knowledge in STEM fields, this study offers a unique perspective that can elucidate the strengths and weaknesses of these sites, especially in regards to gender politics and knowledge production.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender and Society., 4, 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayre, M., Mills, J., & Gill, J. (2013). ‘Yes, i do belong’: The women who stay in engineering. Engineering Studies, 5(3), 216–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Research Policy, 36(5), 694–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Ponomariov, B. (2009). Sector switching from a business to a government job: Fast-track career or fast track to nowhere? Public Administration Review, 69(1), 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carengie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2001). The Carnegie classification of institutions of higher education: 2000 edition. Available at: http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/resources. Accessed 31 March 2011.

  • Carrell, P., West, M. E., & Scott, J. E. (2010). Sex and science: How professor gender perpetuates the gender gap. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(3), 1101–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrigan, C., Quinn, K., & Riskin, E. (2011). The gendered division of labor among STEM faculty and the effects of critical mass. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4(3), 131–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cech, E. (2013). Ideological wage inequalitites? The technical/social dualism and the gender wage gap in engineering. Social Forces, 91(4), 1147–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). London; New York: Routledge Falmer.

  • Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment (Rev. 10th anniversary ed.). New York: Routledge.

  • Conley, V. M. (2005). Career paths for women faculty: Evidence from NSOPF:99. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(130), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, E., & Gaughan, M. (2005). Scientists’ participation in university research centers: what are the gender differences? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(4), 371–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis-Floyd, R. (1992). Birth as an American rite of passage. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., et al. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: a new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1051–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., Neuschatz, M., et al. (1994). The Paradox of critical mass for women in science. Science, 266(5182), 51–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M., & Colatrella, C. (2006). Participation, performance, and advancement of women in academic science and engineering: What is at issue and why. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 20, 377–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. F., & Xiao, W. (2013). Perceived chances for promotion among women associate professors in computing: individual, departmental, and entrepreneurial factors. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(2), 135–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch, M., & Krabel, S. (2012). Ready to leave the ivory tower?: Academic scientists’ appeal to work in the private sector. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(3), 271–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. (2002). Neoliberalism, corporate culture, and the promise of higher education: The university as a democratic public sphere. Harvard educational review, 72(4), 425–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guest, K. (2013). Cultural Anthropology: A Toolkit for a Global Age. New York: WW Norton & Company Incorporated.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartsock, N. (1998). The feminist standpoint revisited and other essays. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewlett, S. A., & Luce, C. B. (2005). Off-ramps and on-ramps: keeping talented women on the road to success. Harvard Business Review, 83(3), 43–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffer, T. B., Hess, M. D., Welch, V., et al. (2007). Doctorate recipients from United States universities: Summary report 2006. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinman, D. L., & Vallas, S. P. (2001). Science, capitalism, and the rise of the knowledge worker: The changing structure of knowledge production in the United States. Theory and Society, 30(4), 451–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Douglas, E. (2008). State of qualitative research in engineering education: Meta-analysis of JEE articles. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 163–175.

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydens, J. A., Moskal, B. M., & Pavelich, M. J. (2004). Qualitative methods used in the assessment of engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93, 65–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madison, D. S. (2005). Critical ethnography: Method, ethics, and performance. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschke, R., Laursen, S., Nielsen, J. M., et al. (2007). Demographic inertia revisited: An immodest proposal to achieve equitable gender representation among faculty in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 78(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B., & Hanington, B. M. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Beverly: Rockport Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, M., Driscoll, M., & Gross, M. (2005). Back in the game: Returning to business after a hiatus: Experiences and recommendations for women, employers, and universities. Wharton Center for Leadership and Change.

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty, C. T. (2003). Feminism without borders: Decolonizing theory, practicing solidarity. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation and National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2013). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2013. Special Report NSF 13-304. Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/.

  • Parker, K., & Wang, W. (2013). Modern parenthood: Roles of moms and dads converge as they balance work and family. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawley, A. L., & Hoegh, J. (2011). Exploding pipelines: Mythological metaphors structuring diversity-oriented engineering education research agendas. In Conference proceedings of ASEE annual conference and exposition.

  • Price, J. (2010). The effect of instructor race and gender on student persistence in science and engineering fields. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 901–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reybold, L. E., & Alamia, J. J. (2008). Academic transitions in education: A developmental perspective of women faculty experiences. Journal of Career Development, 35(2), 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robst, J., Keil, J., & Russo, D. (1998). The effect of gender composition of faculty on student retention. Economics of Education Review, 17(4), 429–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, C. A., & Sax, L. J. (2011). Major selection and persistence for women in science and engineering. New Directions for Institutional Research, winter, 152, 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shellenbarger, S. (2006). Employers step up efforts to lure stay-at-home moms back to work. Wall Street Journal, Executive Career Site.

  • Sheran, M. (2007). The career and family choices of women: A dynamic analysis of labor force participation, schooling, marriage, and fertility decisions. Review of Economic Dynamics, 10(3), 367–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: JHU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. E. (1987). The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology, Northeastern series in feminist theory. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soe, L., & Yakura, E. K. (2008). What’s wrong with the pipeline? Assumptions about gender and culture in IT work. Women’s Studies, 37(3), 176–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sowards, S. K., & Renegar, V. (2004). The rhetorical functions of consciousness-raising in third wave feminism. Communication Studies, 55(4), 535–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. E., & El-Ganainy, A. (2007). The entrepreneurial puzzle: Explaining the gender gap. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(5), 475–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., et al. (2011). STEMming the Tide: using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of personality and social psychology, 100(2), 255–270.

  • Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • The American Association of University Women. (2015). The simple truth about the gender pay gap. Avilable at: http://www.aauw.org/resource/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/. Accessed 7 July 2015.

  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2005). Gender patterns of research and licensing activity of science and engineering faculty. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(4), 343–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trower, C. A., & Chait, R. P. (2002). Forum: Faculty Diversity Why women and minorities are underrepresented in the professoriate, and fresh ideas to induce needed reform. Harvard Magazine, 104(4), 33–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, V. W. (1972). Schism and continuity in an African society: A study of Ndembu village life. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weimer, A. W. (2001). Successfully Switch from Industry to Academia: Here’s what you should know if you’re considering making the transition. Chemical Engineering Progress, 97, 86–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. (2000). Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wylie, A. (2012). Feminist Philosophy of Science: Standpoint Matters. Presidential Address: Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division of The American Philosophical Society, Seattle, WA, 47–73.

  • Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: career processes and outcomes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the interview participants and Priti Mody-Pan for her valuable feedback on an earlier draft of this manuscript. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant HRD-0819407 and EEC-1136916. Any opinion, finding, and conclusion or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Social Science Department, California State Polytechnic University, 1 Grande St, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93407, USA

    Coleen Carrigan

  2. University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Katie O’Leary, Eve Riskin, Joyce Yen & Matt O’Donnell

Authors
  1. Coleen Carrigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katie O’Leary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eve Riskin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joyce Yen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matt O’Donnell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Coleen Carrigan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carrigan, C., O’Leary, K., Riskin, E. et al. On-ramping: following women scientists and engineers through their transition from nonacademic to faculty careers. J Technol Transf 42, 98–115 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9460-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9460-5

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation