Recent Posts
- 07/02 Foreign Born TAs
- 06/29 Science Prizes
- 06/24 phds.org Facelift
- 06/04 Larry Summers Revisited
- 06/02 Women in Science in the News
- 05/28 Remember all those imminent faculty retirements?
- 05/21 Japan worried about engineering "shortages," too
- 05/19 Hard times in physics?
- 05/18 Tolstoy Syndrome
- 05/13 Manufacturing Innovation
- 05/06 Making the Grade
- 05/03 Privacy paranoia at NSF?
- 04/23 PE for grad students, part 2
- 04/22 PE for grad students?
- 04/19 "How Scientific Gains Abroad Pay Off in the U.S."
Categories
Funding
Fiscal Sponsor
Re Greenspun’s Perspective
I agree that academe is not particularly attractive these days. However, if Greenspun gave any statistics indicating that a higher percentage of women than of men go into industry, I missed them. From Scarcity to Visibility suggests it's not the case (see p. 104), at least up to 1995. It certainly might be that things have changed since.
Several years ago, I looked at From Scarcity to Visibility and picked out pieces of interest to me. For Ph.Ds. surveyed in mathematical sciences, in 1995:
• Approximately the same proportion of men and of women had full time academic jobs (p. 127).
From Scarcity to Visibility concludes (about science in general):
• The transition from the Ph.D. to the full-time labor force is a critical point at which relatively, more women than men are lost (p. 221).
• Throughout the career, proportionally more women than men leave science and engineering entirely (p. 221).
Long, J. Scott. (Ed.). (2001). From Scarcity to Visibility: Gender Differences in the Careers of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers. Can be read on the Web Washington, DC: National Academy Press.