Research shows that college students choose majors for a variety of reasons. Some students are motivated by potential economic returns, others want to take engaging classes, and others still would like opportunities to help people in their jobs. But how do these preferences map onto students’ actual major choices? This question is particularly intriguing in light of gender differences in fields of study, as men and women may take divergent pathways in pursuit of the same outcome. Using data from the Pathways through College Study (N = 2,639), I show that men and women choose very different majors even when they cite the same major preferences—what I call gendered logics of major choice. In addition, I use earnings data from the American Community Survey to assess how these gendered logics of major choice may be associated with broader patterns of earnings inequality. I find that among men and women who have the same major preferences, men’s major choices are tied to significantly higher prospective earnings than women’s major choices. This finding demonstrates that the ways men and women translate their preferences into majors are unequal from an earnings perspective. Implications for research on higher education and gender are discussed.
- Award ID(s):
- 2216561
- PAR ID:
- 10523624
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- ISBN:
- 9798400704055
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 196 to 226
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Computing education Inclusion Women Curriculum Electives
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Turku Finland
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Underrepresentation of women and students of color in science, technology, engineering, and math is a national epidemic. The lack of socioeconomic, gender, and racial/ethnic diversity in computer science is particularly pronounced—only 11% of recent computing graduates were women, while Hispanics comprised only 7% of all Bachelor degree earners in the United States (AUTHORS, 2016). Students of color face isolation in higher education, particularly in STEM majors, lack mentors, role models, and advocates who resemble them, and often experience implicit bias that can put them at risk for poor performance in the classroom (Seymour & Hewitt, 1997; Steele, 1995, Tate & Linn, 2005). Yet underrepresented students persevere in adversity and do become successful professionals in STEM fields, despite the odds. This study aims to reflect an assets-based approach to the study of computer science undergraduates who persevere in the major at 6 public Hispanic-serving institutions (H.S.I.s), colleges and universities in which 25% of the enrolled student body identifies as Hispanic/Latinx. The social contexts of computer science and computer engineering departments at H.S.I.s are rich for the exploration of persistence because, like their students, H.S.I.s are often perceived as lacking in resources and prestige, yet these computing departments are struggling with growth as awareness of computing as a viable career option expands nationally (NASEM, 2018). The lower tuition and policies which make enrollment “open” to “less selective” provide access to students who may not typically have access to a 4 year degree, yet the institutions may lack financial resources needed to provide extensive student support services on par with predominantly white institutions (P.W.I.s). These settings are important contexts for studying persistence from a qualitative, socio cultural perspective that considers the strengths of students’ cultural and familial backgrounds rather than focusing on weaknesses and differences from the dominant culture (in the United States, that of white, middle class individuals). At the same time, our study can shed light on student-developed strategies to persevere in a demanding field of study.more » « less
-
Faculty workload inequities have important consequences for faculty diversity and inclusion. On average, women faculty spend more time engaging in service, teaching, and mentoring, while men, on average, spend more time on research, with women of color facing particularly high workload burdens. We explore how faculty members perceive workload in their departments, identifying mechanisms that can help shape their perceptions of greater equity and fairness. White women perceive that their departments have less equitable workloads and are less committed to workload equity than white men. Women of color perceive that their departments are less likely to credit their important work through departmental rewards systems than white men. Workload transparency and clarity, and consistent approaches to assigning classes, advising, and service, can reduce women’s perceptions of inequitable and unfair workloads. Our research suggests that departments can identify and put in place a number of key practices around workload that will improve gendered and racialized perceptions of workload.
-
Although on average women are underrepresented in academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) departments at universities, an under appreciated fact is that women’s representation varies widely across STEM disciplines. Past research is fairly silent on how local variations in gender composition impact faculty experiences. This study fills that gap. A survey of STEM departments at a large research university finds that women faculty in STEM are less professionally satisfied than male colleagues only if they are housed in departments where women are a small numeric minority. Gender differences in satisfaction are largest in departments with less than 25% women, smaller in departments with 25–35% women, and nonexistent in departments approaching 50% women. Gender differences in professional satisfaction in gender-unbalanced departments are mediated by women’s perception that their department’s climate is uncollegial, faculty governance is non-transparent, and gender relations are inequitable. Unfavorable department climates also predict retention risk for women in departments with few women, but not in departments closer to gender parity. Finally, faculty who find within-department mentors to be useful are more likely to have a favorable view of their department’s climate, which consequently predicts more professional satisfaction. Faculty gender and gender composition does not moderate these findings, suggesting that mentoring is equally effective for all faculty. Keywords: gender; STEM; climate; retention; facultymore » « less
-
With computing impacting most every professional field, it has become essential to provide pathways for students other than those majoring in computer science to acquire computing knowledge and skills. Virtually all employers and graduate and professional schools seek these skills in their employees or students, regardless of discipline. Academia currently leans towards approaches such as double majors or combined majors between computer science and other non-CS disciplines, commonly referred to as “CS+X” programs. These programs tend to require rigorous courses gleaned from the institutions’ courses for computer science majors. Thus, they may not meet the needs of majors in disciplines such as the social and biological sciences, humanities, and others. The University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) is taking an approach more suitably termed “X+CS” to fulfill the computing needs of non-CS majors. As part of a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant, we are developing a “computing” minor specifically to meet their needs. To date, we have piloted the first two of the minor’s approximately six courses. The first is a variation on the existing Computer Science I course required for majors but restricted to nonmajors. Both versions of the course use the Python language and cover the same programming content, but with the non-majors assigned projects with relevance to non-CS disciplines. We use the same student assessment measures of homework, projects, and examinations for both courses. After four semesters, results show that non-CS majors perform comparably to majors. Students also express increased interest in computing and satisfaction with being part of a non- CS major cohort. The second course was piloted in fall 2019. It is a new course intended to enhance and hone programming skills and introduce topics such as web scraping, HTML and CSS, web application development, data formats, and database use. Students again express increased interest in computing and were already beginning to apply the computing skills that they were learning to their non-CS courses. As a welcome side effect, we experienced a significant increase in the number of women and under-represented minorities (URMs) in these two courses when compared with CS-major specific courses. Overall, women comprised 52% of the population, with URMs following a similar upward trend. We are currently developing the third course in the computing minor and exploring options for the remaining three. Possibilities include electives from our Information Systems major. We will also be working with our science, social science, and humanities departments to utilize existing courses in those disciplines that apply computing. The student response that we have received thus far provides us with evidence that our computing minor will be popular among UMBC’s non-CS population, providing them with a more suitable and positive computing education than existing CS+X efforts.more » « less