Advertisement

Women in Technology in the U.S.

Glass Ceiling Still not Broken
  • Sue V. Rosser

Abstract

In the United States, the National Science Foundation collects data on the participation of women and racial/ethnic minorities in science and engineering education and employment under a mandate of a law passed by Congress called the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act. Women and blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians are considered to be underrepresented in science and engineering because of their smaller percentages of degree recipients and employed scientists and engineers relative to their percentages in the U.S. population.

Keywords

Technology Transfer Woman Faculty Glass Ceiling Free Body Diagram Woman Scientist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ADVANCE. 2011. http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm.summ.jsp?pims_id=5383. Retrieved July 11, 2011.
  2. Ashcraft, Catherine and Anthony Breitzman. 2007 Who invents IT? An analysis of women’s participation in information technology patenting. Boulder, CO: National Center for Women in Technology (NCWIT).Google Scholar
  3. Bunker Whittington, Kjersten and Laurel Smith-Doerr. 2005. “Gender and commercial science: Women’s patenting in the life sciences.” Journal of Technology Transfer, 30: 355–370. Google Scholar
  4. Ding, Waverly, Fiona Murray, and Toby Stuart. 2006. “Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences”. Science, 313 (5787)p. 665–667.Google Scholar
  5. Engineers Dedicated to a Better Tomorrow. 2006a. “Improving Engineering’s Public Image--Ten Guiding principles”. D-E Communications--Critical Issues Series. Google Scholar
  6. Engineers Dedicated to a Better Tomorrow. 2006b. “Minorities in Engineering and Related Fields - Diversity Analysis of Students Earning Bachelor’s Degrees.” D-E Communications--Critical issues Series. Google Scholar
  7. Fox MF. “Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among Scientists.” Social Studies of Science. 2005;35(1):131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Frietsch R, Haller I, Vrohlings M, Grupp H. “Battle of the sexes? Main areas of gender-specific technological and scientific activities in industrialized countries.” Unpublished paper presented at Georgia Tech, October. 2007;16:2007.Google Scholar
  9. Long, Scott. 1993. “Women in science. Part 1. The productivity puzzle”. Essays of an Information Scientist, 15, p. 248.Google Scholar
  10. Margolis J, Fisher A. Unlocking the clubhouse. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2002.Google Scholar
  11. Mason MA, Ekman EM. Mothers on the fast track. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
  12. Murray F, Graham L. “Buying and selling science: Gender stratification in commercial science.” Industrial and Corporate Change Special Issue on Technology Transfer. 2007;16(4):657–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Naldi F, Prenti IV. Scientific and Technological Performance by Gender. A feasibility study on patents and biometric indicators. Luxembourg:European Union Commission; 2002.Google Scholar
  14. National Academy of Engineering. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  15. National Science Board. 2011. Science and Engineering Indicators. www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind11/ Retrieved May 19, 2011.
  16. National Science Foundation. 2011. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/women. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
  17. Rosser S V. Re-Engineering Female Friendly Science. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University; 1997.Google Scholar
  18. Rosser S V. “The Gender Gap in Patenting: Is Technology Transfer a Feminist Issue?” NWSA Journal. 2009a;21(2):65–84.Google Scholar
  19. Rosser S V. 2001. “Will EC 2000 Make Engineering More Female Friendly?” Women’s Studies Quarterly, XXIX(3–4): 164–186.Google Scholar
  20. Rosser S V The science glass ceiling: Academic women scientists and the struggle to succeed. New York: Routledge; 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rosser S V. “The Gender Gap in Patenting: Is Technology Transfer a Feminist Issue?” NWSA Journal. 2009b;21(2):65–84.Google Scholar
  22. Rosser S V. and Chameau, Jean-Lou. 2006. “Institutionalization, Sustainability, and Repeatability of ADVANCE for Institutional Transformation”, Journal of Technology Transfer, 32,: 331–340.Google Scholar
  23. Stephan P, El-Ganainy A. “The entrepreneurial puzzle: Explaining the gender gap.” Journal of Technology Transfer. 2007;32:475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thursby J, Thursby M. “Gender patterns of research and licensing activity of science and engineering faculty.” Journal of Technology Transfer. 2005;30:343–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (2003). U.S. Patenting by women. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.Google Scholar
  26. Whittington, Kristin B. and Laurel Smith-Doerr. 2008. “Women inventors in context: Disparities in patenting across academia and industry”. Gender and Society 22: 194.Google Scholar
  27. Xie, Yu and Kimberlee Shauman. 2003. Women in science. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sue V. Rosser
    • 1
  1. 1.San Francisco State UniversityUnited States

Personalised recommendations