Social Lives
Authors: Dr Katriona O’Sullivan, Digital Skills Lecturer, ALL Institute, Maynooth University. Dr Serena Clarke, Post-Doctoral Researcher, ALL Institute, Maynooth University. Dr Holly Foley, Programme Manager, STEM Passport for Inclusion, ALL Institute Maynooth University.
When thinking about women’s participation in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM), we often use the leaky pipeline as an analogy. There are specific places where women ‘leak’ out. For example, in school, young girls who show an early interest in science careers have often changed their minds by the time they reach secondary school due to a lack of STEM subjects and STEM supports being offered to them. In college women who opt for STEM often change their minds before graduation. Those who do graduate with a STEM degree often leak out of the pipeline after graduation -opting for careers that are suitable to their family life. While others hit the glass ceiling when trying to progress into STEM leadership roles. In all cases, we see that women leak out of the STEM pipeline more than men do (Clark Blickenstaff, 2005). When considering the pipeline analogy, it is about time that we admitted as a society, especially on a day like today –International Women and Girl in STEM Day– that the STEM pipeline is well and truly broken– in fact, we need a whole new plumbing system… and we could probably do with a group of female scientists and engineers on hand to make sure it doesn’t break again.
So, what is the problem? Why are women less represented in STEM than men? The first thing to note is that this has nothing to do with potential or capability. Men are not more scientific or mathematical; there is no biological basis for gender disparities in STEM participation (and men are not more natural-born leaders either). The truth is that several complex and inter-related social, political, structural, and psychological factors intersect to impact female participation in STEM. Some are easily changed; others will probably take several generations to shift.
Role Models
The fact that we have fewer women in STEM is in of itself a barrier. We can’t be what we can’t see. When we look at the number of women who participate, we see that women barely make up a quarter of the science and technology sector; furthermore, only 30% of the world’s researchers are female. When considering women in leadership roles, these numbers get even smaller- only 6% of women are CEOs in S&P 500 companies (mostly STEM), and only 24% of senior leaders in technology companies are females. As an exercise, write a list of 10 famous female scientists (apart from Marie Curie)? Go on, try it- they do exist! There is Katherine Freese, Rosalind Franklin and Gertrude Elion, to name a few. Or Cynthia Breazeal, who has pioneered the work on social robotics or Katherine Sullivan, the first US woman to complete a spacewalk and the first woman to travel almost seven miles (11km) to reach the lowest known point in the ocean. One of the fundamental issues with encouraging more women into STEM is that we do not have enough role models to celebrate and aspire to be like; this is not a man issue or a woman issue- it is just an issue. We need to find a way to showcase the excellent women scientists in society so that young women can learn that STEM is for THEM. We also need to make sure that we showcase diversity in the women who succeed in STEM. Us women are not all the same, so having diverse women scientists as role models- showcasing successful women from minority groups- will ensure that diverse women aspire to and progress into STEM courses and careers.
Mothering
We also need to make sure that women can stay in the workforce when they have families. Research shows that female scientists in academia struggle to reach leadership positions because there is an incompatibility of tenure and their biological clocks. The pressure to perform and the lack of national and local policies to support women to stay fully engaged often mean that female scientists either do not stay in the workforce or sacrifice progression opportunities. Extended absences from the workplace, like maternity leave, can lead to a loss of opportunities, affecting the likelihood of accomplishments such as being selected for promotion. One issue is unequal parental leave, this contributes to women being out of the workforce for a longer time than their male counterparts, placing her at a disadvantage as she may seem less devoted to her work than her male counterparts. Conversely, women who stay in the workforce, rather than taking leave, may also be socially punished by appearing to be less devoted to her children. Why don’t we recognise the skills such as empathy, multi-tasking etc which become critical on maternity leave, these should be seen as huge asset to an organisation. The motherhood affect is well noted. Women’s hourly rate decreases by up to 20% when they have 2+ young children, while men’s remain relatively stable. This drop-in wages after having children, combined with a high cost of childcare and a lack of workplace flexibility, can often lead to women cutting down hours or leaving the workforce altogether to take care of children as it is more cost effective than continuing to work for a lower rate.
This information is not new, we have known for years that women are under-represented in STEM. However, there is now an urgency to this issue. We are in a STEM revolution; by 2030, it is estimated that up to 80% of all jobs will require some form of STEM skills. This means that if we don’t start attracting women into STEM courses and careers, they are at real risk of poverty. If girls and women do not start taking up STEM roles, we will continue to have a skills gap, and the economy will suffer. Hence, giving women equal opportunities to pursue STEM careers will narrow the gender pay gap, enhance women’s economic security, and ensure a diverse and talented STEM workforce, preventing biases in the products and services they produce.
So how do we solve this complex issue? First, and most importantly, all girls MUST take STEM courses (including computer science) in primary and secondary school. This cannot be optional. Whatever boys are doing, girls must be doing- and the content must represent and celebrate male and female scientists. Second, we need to penalise public and private industry who do not meet quotas for gender participation at all levels- especially in leadership roles. Third, we need national policies that support equal distribution of parental leave, which encourage equal responsibility for parenting. We need a national system which properly supports childcare costs. And finally, we need to challenge gender biases in all areas without fear. It is not ok that all the STEM gender participation groups are made up of disenfranchised women. Where are the men in this fight? We need to celebrate female achievements in the same way we do men. Let’s not talk about what she wears, or who she is married to anymore, let’s talk about her brains, her awards and her successes.
Without a new plumbing system, the pipe will continue to leak!