Skip to main content

Gender Differences in STEM Disciplines: From the Aspects of Informal Professional Networking and Faculty Career Development

Abstract

This study examines informal professional networks (IPNs) and their role in the underrepresentation of women faculty in traditionally male-dominated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. A mixed-methods design was taken in which interviews were conducted during the qualitative phase to gather information of faculty networking experiences and the importance of IPNs in their career development. An online survey was developed based on the findings from the interviews and used to gather data during the quantitative phase to further probe the patterns and functions of IPNs. Major findings are reported, including the meaningful impact of IPNs on the career development of faculty in STEM disciplines and some significant gender differences in networking patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    The survey questions, item scaling, and the response patterns will be made available by sending a request to the first author.

References

  1. 1.

    American Council on Education (ACE). (1988). Educating the majority: Women challenge tradition in higher education. American Council on Education (ACE), Commission on Women in Higher Education.

  2. 2.

    August, L., & Waltman, J. (2004). Culture, climate, and contribution: Career satisfaction among female faculty. Research in Higher Education, 45, 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Barber, L. A. (1995). US Women in Science and Engineering, 1960–1990: Progress toward equity? Journal of Higher Education, 66, 213–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Basow, S., & Howe, K. (1985). Role-model influence: Effects of sex and sex-role attitudes in college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 4, 558–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Bentley, J. T., & Adamson, R. (2003). Gender differences in the careers of academic scientists and engineers: A literature review. National Science Foundation Special Report, (NSF 00-327).

  6. 6.

    Berg, H. S., & Ferber, M. A. (1983). Men and women graduate students: Who succeeds and why? Journal of Higher Education, 54, 629–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and topology. Journal of Management, 29, 991–1013.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Chesler, M. A., & Chesler, N. C. (2002). Gender-informed mentoring strategies for women engineering scholars: On establishing a caring community. Journal of Engineering Education, 91, 49–55.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Clark, S. M., & Corcoran, M. (1986). Perspectives on the professional socialization of women faculty: A case of accumulative disadvantage? The Journal of Higher Education, 57, 20–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Downing, R. A., Crosby, F. J., & Blake-Beard, S. (2005). The importance of developmental relationships on women undergraduates’ pursuit of science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 419–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Fox, M. F., & Mohapatra, S. (2007). Social-organizational characteristics of work and publication productivity among academic scientists in doctoral-granting departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 78, 542–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Frehill, L., Javurek-Humig, A., & Jeser-Cannavale, C. (2006). Women in engineering: A review of the 2005 literature. Magazine of the Society of Women Engineering, 52, 34–63.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Garvey, W. D. (1979). Communication: The essence of science. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Goldstein, E. (1979). Effect of same-sex and cross-sex role models on the subsequent productivity of scholars. American Psychologist, 34, 407–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Hess, E. (1972). Friendship. In M. W. Riley, M. Johnson, & A. Foner (Eds.), Aging and society (Vol. 3, pp. 357–393). New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Hurtado, S., Cabrera, N. L., Lin, M. H., Arellano, L., & Espinosa, L. L. (2009). Diversifying science: Underrepresented student experiences in structured research programs. Research in Higher Education, 50, 189–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 18, 56–87.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kansas State University. (2009). Summary for NSF ADVANCE site visit. Accessed April 26, 2009, from http://www.k-state.edu/advance/ReportsProgress/Summary%20for%20NSF%20Site%20Visit.doc.

  19. 19.

    Kimbrough, W., & Harper, S. R. (2006). African American men at historically Black Colleges and Universities: Different environments, similar challenges. In M. J. Cuyjet and associates (Eds.), African American men in college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  20. 20.

    Kulis, S., Sicotte, D., & Collins, S. (2002). More than a pipeline problem: Labor supply constraints and gender stratification across academic science disciplines. Research in Higher Education, 43, 657–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Lewis, B. F. (2003). A critique of the literature on the underrepresentation of African Americans in science: Directions for future research. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9, 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Leviton, L. C., & Whitely, S. E. (1981). Job seeking patterns of female and male Ph.D. recipients. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 690–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Mehra, A., Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (1998). At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups. Academy of Management Review, 41, 441–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Menges, R. J., & Exum, W. H. (1985). Barriers to the progress of women and minority faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 54, 123–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Mitchell, R. E., & Trickett, E. J. (1980). Social networks as mediators of social support. Community Mental Health Journal, 16, 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Morris, L. K., & Daniel, L. G. (2008). Perceptions of a chilly climate: Differences in traditional and non-traditional majors for women. Research in Higher Education, 49, 256–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    National Research Council, Committee on Women in Science, Engineering. (1991). Women in science and engineering: Increasing their numbers in the 1990s. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resouces Statistics. (2009). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

  31. 31.

    Nebus, J. (2006). Building collegial information networks: A theory of advice network generation. Academy of Management Review, 31, 615–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Nelson, D., & Rogers, D. (2005). A national analysis of diversity in science and engineering faculties at research universities. University of Oklahoma, Department of Chemistry. Accessed March 06, 2006 http://cheminfo.chem.ou.edu/~djn/diversity/briefings/Diversity%20Report%20Final.pdf.

  33. 33.

    Neumark, D., & Gardecki, R. (1998). Women helping women? Role model and mentoring effects on female Ph.D. students in economics. The Journal of Human Resources, 33, 220–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Olsen, D., Maple, S. A., & Stage, F. K. (1995). Women and minority faculty job satisfaction: Professional role interests, professional satisfactions, and institutional fit. The Journal of Higher Education, 66, 267–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Palepu, A., Friedman, R. H., Barnett, R. C., Carr, P. L., Ash, A. S., Szalacha, L., et al. (1998). Junior faculty members’ Mentoring relationships and their professional development in US medical schools. Academic Medicine, 73(318), 318–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Palmer, R., & Gasman, M. (2008). ‘It takes a village’: Social capital and academic success at Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Journal of College Student Development, 49, 52–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Pell, A. N. (1996). Fixing the leaky pipeline: Women scientists in academia. Journal of Animal Science, 74, 2843–2848.

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Perna, L., Lundy-Wagner, V., Drezner, N. D., Gasman, M., Yoon, S., Bose, E., et al. (2009). The contribution Of HBCUS to the preparation of African American women for STEM careers: A case study. Research in Higher Education, 50, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Rose, S. M. (1985). Professional networks of junior faculty in psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 533–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Rosser, S. V. (2003). Attracting and retaining women in science and engineering. Academe, 89, 24–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Settles, I. H., Cortina, L. M., Malley, J., & Stewart, A. J. (2006). The climate for women in academic science: The good, the bad, and the changeable. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Sonnert, G., & Holton, G. (1996). Career patterns of women and men in the sciences. American Scientists, 84, 63–71.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Terborg, J. R. (1977). Women in management: A research review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 647–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Valian, V. (2005). Beyond gender schemas: Improving the advancement of women in academia. Hypatia, 20, 198–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Vogt, C. M., Hocevar, D., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2007). A social cognitive construct validation: Determining women’s and men’s success in engineering programs. The Journal of Higher Education, 78, 337–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Wyche, K. F., & Graves, S. B. (1992). Minority women in academia: Access and barriers to professional participation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 429–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Xu, Y. J. (2008). Gender disparity in STEM disciplines: A study of faculty attrition and turnover intentions. Research in Higher Education, 49, 607–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in full or in part by a grant from The University of Memphis Faculty Research Grant Fund. This support does not necessarily imply endorsement by the University of research conclusions.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yonghong Jade Xu.

Appendix

Appendix

Semi-Structured Interview Questions

Thank you for participating in this study. We are gathering information on faculty members’ informal professional networking patterns (explain what “informal” means). You were selected because you are a professional in one of the academic fields that is traditionally dominated by males, which include science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

  1. 1.

    Do you have any questions before we start?

  2. 2.

    Could you briefly introduce yourself? Please include your current title, how many years you have been in academia, and your specialty areas.

  3. 3.

    Of how many informal professional networks do you consider yourself a member? Networks should only be counted separately if they have little or no overlap in memberships.

  4. 4.

    Can you describe each of your networks in terms of

    1. a.

      the size (how many people you know in the network),

    2. b.

      strength (how often you contact other members),

    3. c.

      density (whether other members know one another), and

    4. d.

      diversity (in terms of gender, location, and work responsibilities)?

  5. 5.

    What is the primary function of each of the networks? The function can be emotional support/friendship, instrumental/professional exchanges, or a combination of both.

  6. 6.

    How did you become a member of each of the networks?

  7. 7.

    How long have you been a member of each of the networks?

  8. 8.

    If any of the networks helped your career development?

  9. 9.

    In what manner did the networks help your career development (e.g., resources, information, support, and upward mobility)?

  10. 10.

    How important do you think informal professional networking is for career advancement? Please explain.

  11. 11.

    Do you think minority status (in terms of gender or race) is a factor in your access to and your role in those networks? How so (e.g., fairness, accessibility, and equality)?

  12. 12.

    How would you describe your networking skills and strategies? Please give examples.

  13. 13.

    If there were any changes you would like to make in your informal professional networking, what would they be?

  14. 14.

    If there were training programs offered to new assistant level professors to improve their networking skills and strategies, what would you expect to see in those programs?

  15. 15.

    Are there any other thoughts you would like to share about your experiences and opinions about informal professional networking?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xu, Y.J., Martin, C.L. Gender Differences in STEM Disciplines: From the Aspects of Informal Professional Networking and Faculty Career Development. Gend. Issues 28, 134 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-011-9104-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Informal professional networks
  • Faculty career development
  • STEM
  • Gender differences