Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 13:43:29 -0500 (EST)
Subject: CSWA Newsletter of 6/16/99
To: AASMAIL:;;wellesley.edu

            AAS Committee on the Status of Women
     weekly issues of  6/16/99, ed. by Priscilla Benson
***  send email and addresses to aaswomenwellesley.edu  ***

This week's issues:

1. A new Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and 
Engineering
2. Statistics on women in astronomy

------------------------------------------------------------
1. A new Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and 
Engineering
From:	IN%"duncandei.uchicago.edu"

CALL FOR PAPERS -VOLUME 6, 2000

Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering
Center for Interdisciplinary Studies Virginia Polytechnic 
Institute and State University Carol J. Burger, Ph.D., 
Editor-in-Chief

Now welcoming submissions for Volume 6, the Journal of Women 
and Minorities in Science and Engineering publishes 
original, peer-reviewed papers that report innovative ideas 
and programs, scientific studies, and formulation of 
concepts related to the education, recruitment, and 
retention of underrepresented groups in science and 
engineering. Issues related to women and minorities in 
science and engineering are consolidated to address the 
entire professional and educational environment.

Subjects for papers submitted can include:

empirical studies of current qualitative or quantitative 
research;

historical investigations of how minority status impacts 
science and engineering;

original theoretical or conceptual analyses of science from 
feminist, racial, and ethnic perspectives

reviews of literature to help develop new ideas and 
directions for future research;

explorations of feminist teaching methods, minority 
student/white teacher interactions;

cultural phenomena that affect the classroom climate.

To receive guidelines for manuscript preparation or to 
submit a curriculum vita if you are interested in reviewing 
papers for the journal contact:

Editorial Assistant
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering
Center for Interdisciplinary Studies
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0227
Phone: 540-231-6296  Fax: 540-231-7013
E-mail: JRLWMSEVT.EDU
 
Inquiries about SUBSCRIPTIONS, TABLE OF CONTENTS, 
ADVERTISING and a SAMPLE COPY should be directed to the 
publisher:

Begell House, Inc.
79 Madison Ave.,
New York, N.Y. 10016-7892;
E-mail:  	BEGELLHOUSEWORLDNET.ATT.NET.
PHONE: 	212 725-1999.
FAX:  	212 213-8368

Information available online at:

WWW.BEGELLHOUSE.COM/JWMSE/JWMSE.HTML
 
Sample Contents of Volume 5, 1999:
 
Race, Gender and the Baccalaureate Origins of PhD Chemists 
by Willie Pearson, Jr., Craig Ness and Emily Hoban

Proportions of Women Faculty and Students in the 
Mathematical Sciences;  A Trend Analysis by Institutional 
Group by Norean Radke Sharpe and Gerhard Sonnert

Feminism and Science Education:   An Interdisciplinary 
Knowledge and Practice Project by Maralee Mayberry , Leigh 
Welling, Jaime Phillips, Cheryl Radeloff and Margaret Rees

Black Women in the Agronomic Sciences:  Factors Influencing 
Career Development by Diann Jordan

If I Knew Then What I Know Now:  A Portable Mentor for Women 
Beginning Professorial Careers in Science and Engineering by 
Catherine Riordan, Linda M. Manning, AnneMarie Daniel, Susan 
L. Murray, Philip B. Thompson and Elizabeth Cummins

Using Technology to Strengthen Mathematics and Science 
Instruction in Elementary and Middle Schools by Sharon 
Sherman and Robert Weber

Supporting Minority Mathematics Achievement;  The Emerging 
Scholars Program at the University of Texas at Austin by 
Susan E. Moreno et al

Using Technology to Strengthen Mathematics and Science 
Instruction in Elementary and Middle Schools by Sharon J. 
Sherman and Robert Weber

The Effects of a Summer Mathematics Enrichment Program on 
Hispanic Mathematical Achievement by Betsy McShea and 
Maureen Yarnevich

Girls Summer Lab:  An Intervention by Dale R. Baker, Robert 
Lindsey and Colleen Blair.

------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statistics on women in astronomy
From:	IN%"cmustsci.edu"

Dear CSWA members (and friends),

Here is the summary of the results from the STScI surveys on 
women in astronomy. These are the only data covering faculty 
for which astronomy is separated from other physical 
sciences. The institutions surveyed are only a subset of the  
field: all are academic organizations with graduate 
students, and most have large (>=10) faculties.

The AAS has just completed a 4-5 times larger survey of 
institutional members, which will be repeated on an annual 
basis. Those data, like the STScI data, will be available 
online for anyone to access and analyze further. Preliminary 
results look quite consistent with the STScI results 
described below.

Please feel free to circulate the attached summary to 
interested parties. I am fully responsible for any errors or 
miscalculations therein (and would appreciate being notified 
if you find any).

Thanks,
Meg Urry

p.s. We will try to put the data and some summary numbers on 
the Web within the next two weeks. The bar graph is in the 
current issue of STATUS.

Summary of the STScI Surveys on Women in Astronomy: the new 
1999 Survey, and Comparison to 1992 Survey

1. Description of Survey Data

We surveyed 32 departments of astronomy in U.S. universities 
and  4 observatories with equivalent science faculties 
(STScI, NOAO, CfA, and NRAO) --- essentially the top Ph.D.-
producing programs in the U.S., representing an elite but 
relatively large part of the profession,  ~1500 Ph.D. 
astronomers in 1999.

The first survey was done in summer 1992 (Schreier 1992,  
www.stsci.edu/stsci/meetings/WiA), the second in January 
1999. Both had 100% response rates; they differed in one 
university (U. New Mexico, 1992 only; U. Colorado, 1999 
only), which might account for about 2% larger numbers in 
1999 (41 Ph.D. astronomers  at Colorado in 1999, of 1497 
total sample, compared to 14 at  New Mexico in 1992, of 1157 
total sample).

Both surveys counted numbers of women and men in each of 5 
professional levels: graduate student, postdoc, assistant 
professor, associate professor, and full professor. The 1999 
survey further separated each level into tenured/tenure-
track and research track (soft money) positions.

The seven-year interval is approximately the time required 
for movement from one category to the next (give or take a 
few years), making it possible to estimate the advancement 
of women and men in astronomy.

2. First result -- more astronomers than ever

There has been huge growth in the field --- an overall 1/3 
increase in the number of Ph.D. astronomers active in these 
top institutions (1497 Ph.Ds in 1999 compared to 1157 in 
1992). Thus these have been relatively good times for 
astronomy, and perhaps contrary to popular impression, a 
good time for getting jobs.

By far the largest increase is at the entry and middle 
faculty levels:  a 52% (+/- 5%) increase in the number of 
assistant professors (169 in 1992 to 257 in 1999) and a 43% 
(+/- 5%) increase in the number of  associate professors 
(180 to 257). Postdocs have increased by 21% (+/- 1.5%; 364 
to 440) and full professors by 24 (+/- 1.5%; 444 to 550).  
There are more women at all levels, both in absolute terms 
and in the percentage of astronomers at each level. Thus the 
"bulge" of women at entry levels is propagating through the 
profession. The percentages of women are as follows:
                 1992     1999
     grad stud	  23%      26%
     postdoc      17%      20%
     asst prof    17%      18%
     assoc prof   10%      14%
     full prof     5%       7%

These numbers refer to tenure-track and research positions 
collectively; we have no way to compare them separately 
(because of the limitations of the 1992 data) and therefore 
to assess whether the growth has occurred  preferentially in 
tenure-track or in soft money positions. We do know  that 
the percentage of women in astronomy is similar in the 
tenure track (11+/-1%) and research track (13+/-2%) in the 
1999 data.

3. Advancement from graduate school to postdoc -- still not 
equal

The 1992 data, although only a snapshot in time, suggested 
that either the percentage of women in graduate school was 
evolving rapidly or that women were less successful than men 
in making the transition from graduate school to postdoc. 
Basically, the ratio of postdocs to graduate students was 
1/2 for men (301 to 602) and 1/3 for women (63 to 176), 
different at the three sigma level (50% +/- 4% vs. 36% +/- 
5%). 

In 1999, these ratios are higher for both women and men but 
still not equal. The ratio for men is 359 postdocs to 616 
graduate students (58% +/- 4%), compared to 90:217 (41% +/- 
5%) for women. The differential is of similar magnitude, 
significance, and sign.

Now that there are two epochs of data, one can ask a 
different question: assuming all of the 1992 graduate 
students are postdocs in 1999, how does the advancement of 
women and men compare? Then 176 women advanced to 90 postdoc 
positions (51% +/- 7% "success" rate), compared to 602 men 
advancing to 359 postdocs (60% +/- 4%). Women lag behind but 
the result is at lower significance.

4. Advancement from postdoc to assistant professor -- 
similar for men and women

The time scale for advancement from postdoc to assistant 
professor is not very different from the 7 years between the 
two surveys. Therefore it makes sense to compare the numbers 
of postdocs in  1992 to the numbers of assistant professors 
in 1999, and to see if that transition is different for 
women and men. (As always, bear in mind that this is within 
a limited corner of astronomy).

Women: 
  63 postdocs ---> 45 asst.prof. (all) or 18 asst. prof 
(tenure-track)
                   71% +/- 14%            29% +/- 8%

Men:
  301 postdocs ---> 212 asst.prof. (all) or 70 asst. prof 
(tenure-track)
                   71% +/- 14%            23% +/- 3%

Here the rates are quite similar, suggesting that women, 
once they have a postdoc in a top institution, are as likely 
to get a junior faculty position as men.

5. Advancement from assistant to associate professor -- 
unclear result

Of all the estimates presented, this is the least 
satisfactory because the category of associate professor is 
open ended. Basically, for those institutions which tenure 
at the associate level, faculty can remain there forever. 
Further, there is movement into the associate level 
(promotion of assistant professors) and out (promotion to 
full professor), and with these few data (and only two 
epochs) it's extremely difficult to assess the meaning. 

The numbers show that people remain in the associate 
position for longer than 7 years (more people move in than 
move out):
            1992 asst.    1999 assoc.
	Women:   29           37		
	Men:    140          220

6. Advancement to full professor -- comparable? or not? 
(small number statistics) -- either way, relatively few 
senior women

Assessing this step, too, is confused by the indefinite 
length of the associate professor stage. We therefore added 
together assistant  and associate professors, and compared 
the sum to the number of  *new* full professors. The latter 
is the number in 1999, minus the number in 1992, minus the 
number of retirements, which we assumed to be 10% of the 
full professors in 1992. (This is based on data for  
physicists, who retired at 1-2% per year in the period 1994-
1995. We assume the same rate for women and men, which is 
conservative  since women are generally younger and less 
affected by retirement; if fewer women retire than we 
assumed, then there are even fewer  new women full 
professors than the numbers given below.)

With those assumptions, the results are as follows:

  		tenure-track and research positions together
		1992 asst+assoc		1999 new full
	Women	 47			 26 (55+/-14%)
	Men	302			124 (41+/-4%)

  		tenure-track only*
		1992 asst+assoc		1999 new full
	Women	 23			 16 (70+/-23%)
	Men	109			108 (99+/-13%)
    *number of tenure-track faculty in 1992 was estimated 
assuming that the fraction in research, for women and for 
men, was the same in 1992 and 1999; i.e., the value 23 for 
women asst+assoc in 1992 comes from the ratio 40/81 in 1999 
times 47 tt+res in 1992, and similarly for men, 109 is the 
ratio of tt/total in 1999 (157/432) times the total 
asst+assoc in 1992 (302).

The numbers are obviously uncertain, but we can conclude 
that women and men may be advancing to full professor with 
similar success; depending on assumptions, women may be 
doing slightly better (1 sigma; tenure-track plus research), 
or vice-versa (1 sigma; tenure track only).

The absolute numbers of tenured full professors bear 
thinking about:
		Tenured Full Prof in 1999
	Women		 30 
	Men		427
Each woman tenured at these elite and semi-elite 
institutions increases the number of tenured women by 
several percent. Conversely, each loss of a woman at this 
level makes a significant difference.

One other note: men are preferentially at the top end of the 
profession (73% of male faculty are full professors), while 
the situation is reversed for women (43% of female faculty 
are full professors). So the guiding forces for the junior 
women are overwhelmingly men.

7. Some summary numbers: percentages of women graduate 
students and faculty

				1992		1999
   grad students		23%		26%
   faculty (all)		 9%		12%
   faculty (tenure-track)	 -		11%
   faculty (research equiv)	 -		13%

8. Conclusions

The bar chart comparing astronomy statistics for 1992 and 
1999 illustrates the basic trends. (The percentage of women 
at each level is written in by hand.) 

Summarizing, there is some good news and some less 
encouraging news:

     1. The numbers of women are up across the board --- so 
there is improvement at all levels.

     2. The numbers in category N+1, 1999 are similar to, 
but slightly below, the numbers for category N in 1992 (the 
statistical significance will be higher with the AAS survey 
data), suggesting that women are advancing no faster than 
men, and perhaps still a bit slower.
     23% grad st 1992 --> 20% postdoc 1999
     17% postdoc 1992 --> 18% asst prof 1999
     17% asst.p  1992 --> 14% assoc prof 1999
     10% assoc.p 1992 -->  7% full prof 1999 (pile-up effect)

------------------------------------------------------------
End of CSWA Newsletter of 6/16/99