Assessing and Reducing Gender Bias in STEM Recruitment, Mentorship and Evaluation

描述（由申请人提供）：许多委员会、小组和专题讨论会都哀叹女性在科学领域的缺乏，特别是在女性代表性最不足的数学密集型领域（Ceci, Williams, & Barnett, 2009；国家科学院，2005；国家科学委员会，2006）。将更多女性纳入学术队伍已被确定为一项关键的国家需求（Shalala et al., 2006）；有才华的女性完成了博士学位，但她们并没有按照她们的数量所保证的速度过渡到终身教职的学术职位（例如，Ceci等人，2009;Ginther, 2001, 2004； Shalala等人，2006）。拟议的项目“评估和减少STEM招聘、指导和评估中的性别偏见”，探讨了博士前女性和男性如何被招募到研究生院并在研究生院接受非正式培训，以及他们在申请第一个终身职位时如何被评估。我们试图更好地理解并最终改进那些可能有意或无意地导致现任教授创造性别偏见的招聘、指导和评估环境的行为规范。拟议的研究探讨了当前的做法是否会对未来的女性STEM研究生造成身份威胁（从而减少女性入学率和保留率），以及STEM教授是否在提供建议和培训时对男性和女性研究生有不同的待遇。这些研究还调查了当前教授在评估助理教授职位申请人时使用性别和与性别相关的信息的情况。在全国范围内对院长和教务长进行调查，以确定研究1-3中提出的建议的可取性和可行性，并开展宣传研究结果的教育活动，这是研究计划的一部分。拟议的研究（包括两项国家数据收集，一项实验室研究，一项教务长和院长调查，以及一项广泛的教育传播组成部分）跨越了生物学，物理学和社会/行为科学，以扩大我们对与性别相关的招聘，指导和评估规范和行为的理解，以及它们在不同领域的差异。这项研究将阐明女性与男性在从大学到研究生院并最终进入学术界的过渡中成功（或不成功）的原因。我们的研究结果将有助于完善公正、有效的招聘、指导和评估实践，从而在科学的招聘、培训和就业安置过程中实现更大的性别公平。我们计划广泛传播我们的成果，目的是发起和加强对专业培训关键方面的明确讨论，这些方面往往没有公开讨论，甚至没有得到承认。这些经历可能会对男女研究生的成功产生不同的影响，因为有偏见的招聘、教师指导和工作选择实践，特别是由于男女科学家的职业/生活轨迹不同。公共健康相关性：许多委员会、小组和专题讨论会都哀叹女性在科学领域的缺乏，特别是在女性代表性最不足的数学密集型领域——物理、化学、工程、计算机科学和数学（Ceci, Williams, & Barnett, 2009；国家科学院，2005；国家科学委员会，2006）。将更多女性纳入学术队伍已被确定为一项关键的国家需求（见Shalala等人的NAS报告，2006年）；“漏水的管道”的比喻已经被这样的认识所取代，即大量有才华的女性在完成博士学位后仍在管道中，但她们并没有按照她们的数量所保证的速度过渡到终身教职的学术职位（例如，Ginther, 2001,2004; Shalala et al. 2006）。拟议的研究将阐明女性与男性从本科到研究生并最终进入学术界成功或缺乏成功的原因，并将展示如何通过磨合公正和有效的招聘、指导和评估实践来改善当前的做法，从而在整个科学培训和就业安置过程中实现性别公平，从而使美国在科学方面的潜力充分实现。

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Numerous commissions, panels, and symposia have lamented the dearth of women in science, especially in math-intensive fields where women's underrepresentation is greatest (Ceci, Williams, & Barnett, 2009; National Academy of Science, 2005; National Science Board, 2006). The inclusion of more women in the academic workforce has been identified as a critical national need (Shalala et al., 2006); talented women complete Ph.D.s, yet they do not transition into tenure track academic positions at the rate their numbers appear to warrant (e.g., Ceci et al., 2009; Ginther, 2001, 2004; Shalala et al., 2006). The proposed project, Assessing and Reducing Gender Bias in STEM Recruitment, Mentorship and Evaluation, explores how predoctoral women and men are recruited to and informally trained in graduate school, and how they are evaluated when they apply for their first tenure-track position. We seek to better understand, and ultimately improve, norms of behavior that may consciously or unconsciously lead current professors to create gender-biased recruitment, mentorship, and evaluation environments. The proposed studies explore whether current practices induce identity threat in prospective women STEM graduate students (thus reducing female enrollments and retention), and whether STEM professors treat their male and female graduate students differently in the advice and training they dispense. The studies also examine current professors' use of gender and gender-related information in evaluation of applicants for assistant professorships. A national canvass of deans and provosts to ascertain the desirability and feasibility of recommendations emerging from studies 1-3 and an educational campaign disseminating the findings are part of the research plan. The proposed research (consisting of two national data collections, one laboratory study, one canvass of provosts and deans, and one widescale educational dissemination component) spans the biological, physical, and social/behavioral sciences, to broaden our understanding of gender-related recruitment, mentorship, and evaluation norms and behaviors and how they vary across fields. This research will illuminate reasons for the success-or lack thereof-of women's versus men's transition from college to graduate school and ultimately to academia. Our results will help hone unbiased, effective recruitment, mentorship, and evaluation practices, leading to greater gender-fairness in the scientific recruitment, training, and job-placement processes. We plan to disseminate broadly our results with the goal of initiating and enhancing explicit discussions of key aspects of professional training often not discussed openly or even acknowledged. These experiences may differentially impact success of male versus female graduate students due to biased recruitment, faculty mentorship, and job-selection practices, particularly as a consequence of differential career/life trajectories of women and men scientists. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: Numerous commissions, panels, and symposia have lamented the dearth of women in science, especially in math-intensive fields where women's underrepresentation is greatest--physics, chemistry, engineering, computer science, and mathematics (Ceci, Williams, & Barnett, 2009; National Academy of Science, 2005; National Science Board, 2006). The inclusion of more women in the academic workforce has been identified as a critical national need (see NAS report by Shalala et al., 2006); the metaphor of a "leaky pipeline" has been replaced with the realization that plenty of talented women are still in the pipeline through completion of the Ph.D., yet they do not transition into tenure track academic positions at the rate their numbers would appear to warrant (e.g., Ginther, 2001, 2004; Shalala et al. 2006). The proposed research will illuminate reasons for the success-or lack thereof-of women's versus men's transitions from undergraduate to graduate school and ultimately to academia, and it will show how to improve current practices by honing unbiased and effective recruitment, mentorship, and evaluation practices resulting in gender-fairness throughout the scientific training and job- placement processes, thus bringing to fruition the full U.S. potential in science.