1 / 19

Holly R. Lord J. McGrath Cohoon Gender Diversity in Computing Workshop

Defining Academic “Quality”: The Gendered Effects of Admissions Criteria in Doctoral CS and CE Programs. Holly R. Lord J. McGrath Cohoon Gender Diversity in Computing Workshop. Big Picture, Bottom Line, Overview . Recruitment practices affect women’s representation

marlon
Download Presentation

Holly R. Lord J. McGrath Cohoon Gender Diversity in Computing Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Defining Academic “Quality”: The Gendered Effects of Admissions Criteria in Doctoral CS and CE Programs Holly R. Lord J. McGrath Cohoon Gender Diversity in Computing Workshop

  2. Big Picture, Bottom Line, Overview • Recruitment practices affect women’s representation • Admission criteria affect women’s representation • Institutional characteristics affect women’s representation

  3. Data are from a large study • Three surveys in Fall 2003 • Stratified random sample of 48 departments • 775 faculty members • 1976 students Master’s and PhD • Response rates • 94% chair • 63% faculty • 55% grad students

  4. Notable Gender Differences in Program Choice • Women more than men emphasized • Geographic preferences or constraints • Impression of faculty from campus visit • Department culture • Flexibility in program content

  5. Recruitment Model

  6. How do admissions criteria affect women’s representation? • Admissions criteria • formal index • ambiguous index • other criteria • Admissions-related attitudes

  7. Dependent Variable: female proportion PhD students

  8. Controls • Public/private • 1993 National Research Council rank • Program size • Student/faculty ratio • Proportion of female faculty • Carnegie classification

  9. Ambiguous criteria are commonly used to assess applicant quality • #1 General quality of academic record • #2 Motivation • #4 Academic letters of recommendation • #6 Communication skills

  10. Extensive & Intensive differ in emphasis % of faculty rating criteria very or extremely important

  11. Faculty want to increase diversity • Most agree their department should actively recruit underrepresented groups (80%) • Few faculty believe CSE is inherently unattractive to women (21%)

  12. Women’s Representation is Lower in Research Extensive Institutions Research extensive - Female proportion PhDs

  13. Formal index exhibited no effect • Formal index (functionally relevant, specific) • grades in computing courses • math background • GRE Score • reputation of undergraduate institution/program • No measurable relationship with women’s representation

  14. Ambiguous criteria has a positive affect • Ambiguity Index • general quality of academic record • motivation • communication skills • maturity • academic letters of recommendation women’s representation +

  15. Life experience criterion favors women Female Proportion of PhDs + Consider life experiences Ambiguous criteria + +

  16. Diversity as a criterion favors women • Membership in an underrepresented group

  17. Gendered criteria has an affect • Computing work/volunteer experience negatively affects the gender balance www.cptc.edu/.../Computer%20Work%20Station.jpg

  18. Final Model

  19. Questions?

More Related