Gender and the Physics Teacher

A couple of interesting studies on the effect that the gender of the instructor has on science students were recently released. The first takes a look at the perceptions high school students have of their science teachers, the second examines the effect the gender of a professor has on the female student's probability of continuation in a science, math or engineering major. Both fascinating studies speak to the power that perception and expectation have in determining our self-potential.

The first study, lead by Zahra Hazari, a Clemson University professor of engineering and science education, examined biology, chemistry and physics teacher evaluations by 18,000 high school students. They found that although there was no difference in the success in college of students taught by males and those taught by females, the women teachers were rated more poorly than their male counterparts. Interestingly, in biology and chemistry only the male students underrated their women teachers, but in physics both boys and girls perceived their female teachers as less effective. As Geoffrey Potvin, another Clemson professor said, these data suggest that students 'have developed a specific sense of gender-appropriate roles in the sciences by the end of high school'. We see this bias reflected in the number of female college majors in the sciences. In 2005, women made up 52% of chemistry majors, 62% of biology majors, but only 21% of physics majors in the top 50 research universities*.

The second study, by professors at UC Davis and the Air Force Academy, investigates the effect of professor gender on the probability a freshman woman will major in science. They looked at the records of all of the approximately 9,000 Air Force Academy students who graduated between 2000 and 2007 for correlations between the gender of the entry level science course instructors and the probability for a student to choose a science major. At the Academy all students have to take the same classes, so it's an ideal environment to study gender effects, modulo the fact that it is a military institution with a significant history of gender problems. They found that while for women in general gender did not make a difference, women who scored higher than 700 on their math SATs were 26% more likely to major in the sciences if all their intro science teachers were women than if they were all men. There was no effect seen on the male students.

In concert these two studies show that by high school students have developed gender bias in perceptions of scientific aptitude but that putting the female students into contact with professional women scientists (i.e. professors) could reverse some of that bias. It would be very interesting to see the results of the second study divided by major. Would the effect be present in the physics students? At Berkeley there are 5 women active faculty out of about 65 total (or 6 out of 100 including the emeritus professors). The probability that one of them will teach an introductory level class any given semester is low. As an undergrad I never took a class taught by a female physics professor and out of all the classes I took at Berkeley, only 2 were taught by female faculty, one in math and one in anthropology. But, I started doing research in 2001 and in all of the years since I have only spent 2 with male advisors, so I have not lacked for women role models. (I also had my dad, who always supported my interest in science and gave me a working example of what a scientist does). I strongly believe that having role models is vital to increasing the representation of women in the sciences. To that end, I've been doing some outreach to elementary school students, but I'll write about that in another post.

Some have claimed that the lack of women scientists might simply be due to the fact that women don't have the 'aptitude' for science. Those hypotheses infuriate me given the volume of research, such as these studies above, which show profound societal influences of both the success and the perception of success of women in science. The aptitude argument is the easy way out. We don't have to confront bias if it is dictated by biology. Luckily, people have realized that increasing the number of women in science and technology is in our national interest, and are working hard to see it happen.


* I should note that between 1996 and 2005 women recieved only 32% of chemistry PhDs and 46% of biology PhDs while 14% of physics PhDs went to women. In chemistry and biology there is a leaky pipeline--they loose women at every step of the ladder. In physics the pipeline problem is minimal, but we have a source problem--not enough women start in the first place.