Worst academic writing of the year award.

[DonR]

Ah. I hope it doesn't invalidate what I wrote.

To answer your point dirextly, though, if disadvantage means that interested students who didn't geCan anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?t the chance to study the correct maths (or anything else relevant) are to be attracted into STEM subjects, it's surely a matter of giving those students first the opportunity to show aptitude, then to learn what they need,

Math aptitude is a prerequisite for engineering. The first-year courses are about 40% math or math-related and nearly every other course builds on mathematical foundations. If the student doesn't display interest and aptitude in math before entering school, he is taking the valuable place of someone more capable. Technology courses outside of engineering can be less math-centric and might appeal to those with an interest but lacking math skills. When I went to engineering school in the 80s, you needed at least a B in high-school algebra to even be considered. My son squeaked in 30 years later with an A in calculus and still found the math difficult initially. Would you want a doctor who had no interest in human biology? Most universities have equivalence courses if someone never got the chance to study maths in high school. Once completed, he can demonstrate his ability to the admission board that way.

Some countries, like Australia, have no requirement for a formal education to be regarded as an engineer but anyone who wishes to be successful in the profession must have a mastery of mathematics regardless.

 

[Galliardist]

Most universities have equivalence courses if someone never got the chance to study maths in high school. Once completed, he can demonstrate his ability to the admission board that way.

One of my younger relatives did a foundation year and discovered that they wanted to do something completely different to their original intention, and ended up doing far more intense study in that year, as a result, than in the rest of their degree. I think that kind of opportunity should be more widely available, especially where young people are uncertain what their future should be, or have non-academic difficulties that affect their school life.

I've intentionally used those pronouns. You may condemn me as woke, if you wish.

 

[DonR]

One of my younger relatives did a foundation year and discovered that they wanted to do something completely different to their original intention, and ended up doing far more intense study in that year, as a result, than in the rest of their degree. I think that kind of opportunity should be more widely available, especially where young people are uncertain what their future should be, or have non-academic difficulties that affect their school life.

I've intentionally used those pronouns. You may condemn me as woke, if you wish.

My older son was accepted into the English program at university with the intention of going into law after but switched his major to geology before starting. He spent his first year taking high school equivalent science and math to make it in to the program. He is now a software developer so that was an interesting turn. STEM can include everyone but you need to find your niche

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Again, though, this is an introduction to a special edition of a journal. Unless the authors actually made a point of their own later in the article - I didn't read all of it - I'm surprised that it has been cited at all. And of course the studies you want them to use - are actually the rest of the special edition, if they did their job half-decently.

That's what I get for skimming a top speed. It also explains a lot of the language, as they are name/concept checking the articles to follow.

The reason it is cited a few times is likely in the context of "many people say/are concerned with/study". I could check, but no. IOW, just a mention, not a use of the article content beyond that.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Theory of what?

Theoretical physics.

No, that would be silly. Social theory, mostly mid 1800s to 1990 or so. So the kind of stuff mentioned in the article, classics like Marx and Weber, rational choice theory and game theory, various interactional and identity theories, etc etc etc.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Ah. I hope it doesn't invalidate what I wrote.

To answer your point dirextly, though, if disadvantage means that interested students who didn't geCan anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?t the chance to study the correct maths (or anything else relevant) are to be attracted into STEM subjects, it's surely a matter of giving those students first the opportunity to show aptitude, then to learn what they need,

It's not just preparation, but what happens in college and grad school. Who gets the mentoring, who doesn't? Who is encouraged to try harder, who gets the suggestion to change majors? Who gets the 2 page letter of reference and who gets the half page? Who gets invited to join the research group and who doesn't?

This should be available to many if not all: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1211286109 It is NOT from the stance of the OP article, but speaks to some of the subtle biases that exist in this process in higher education.

TL;DR version. part of the abstract:

Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student.

 

[SIY]

Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science.

Amusing, since in my (until this week, I just changed over) department, half the tenured faculty was female, and all but three of the grad students are female.

edit: I forgot about a retirement. More than half of tenured faculty in my erstwhile department is female.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Amusing, since in my (until this week, I just changed over) department, half the tenured faculty was female, and all but three of the grad students are female.

edit: I forgot about a retirement. More than half of tenured faculty in my erstwhile department is female.

There is a lot of research that shows the composition of a department matters, and that as the percent of women increases, problems decrease with retaining women in the jobs.

Things are different in different places, but the general patterns is pretty clear:

"Using a census of 245,270 tenure-track and tenured professors at United States–based PhD-granting departments, we show that women leave academia overall at higher rates than men at every career age, in large part because of strongly gendered attrition at lower-prestige institutions, in non-STEM fields, and among tenured faculty."

Gender and retention patterns among U.S. faculty

Women remain underrepresented among faculty in nearly all academic fields. Using a census of 245,270 tenure-track and tenured professors at United States–based PhD-granting departments, we show that women leave academia overall at higher rates ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[SIY]

There is a lot of research that shows the composition of a department matters, and that as the percent of women increases, problems decrease with retaining women in the jobs.

Things are different in different places, but the general patterns is pretty clear:

"Using a census of 245,270 tenure-track and tenured professors at United States–based PhD-granting departments, we show that women leave academia overall at higher rates than men at every career age, in large part because of strongly gendered attrition at lower-prestige institutions, in non-STEM fields, and among tenured faculty."

Gender and retention patterns among U.S. faculty

Women remain underrepresented among faculty in nearly all academic fields. Using a census of 245,270 tenure-track and tenured professors at United States–based PhD-granting departments, we show that women leave academia overall at higher rates ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

They lost me with the stolen base in the first sentence of the abstract.

Again, limited dataset and it's anecdotal (I have been faculty at only one university), but the female faculty in our departments that we've lost have left almost exclusively because of getting a better or more lucrative position elsewhere, usually in the private sector. Of course, that's mostly been true of the male faculty we've lost as well. I'm the oddball, having moved from private sector to academia.

 

[Axo1989]

They lost me with the stolen base in the first sentence of the abstract.

Again, limited dataset and it's anecdotal (I have been faculty at only one university), but the female faculty in our departments that we've lost have left almost exclusively because of getting a better or more lucrative position elsewhere, usually in the private sector. Of course, that's mostly been true of the male faculty we've lost as well. I'm the oddball, having moved from private sector to academia.

Haha, absolutely line up your anecdotal against a dataset of 245,270. This is Anecdotal Stereo Reminiscing, after all.

But more seriously, there are certainly institutions and contexts where gender bias is not present or not bad (in my experience also). The overall picture is still a work in progress, I'd say (somewhat optimistically).

 

[SIY]

Haha, absolutely line up your anecdotal against a dataset of 245,270

That’s fair, as I cheerfully admitted, but there were a lot of tacit assumptions in that paper. Of course, because I'm in STEM, the opportunity to go into the private sector for significantly more pay is something I see a lot, and because of the checkbox nature of so-called diversity, my female colleagues have been aggressively headhunted.