Leaving Science

Leaving Science Leaving Science Occupational Exit from Scientific Careers Anne E. Preston Russell Sage Foundation New York The Russell Sage Foundation The Russell Sage Foundation, one of the oldest of America’s general purpose founda- tions, was established in 1907 by Mrs. Margaret Olivia Sage for “the improvement of social and living conditions in the United States.” The Foundation seeks to fulfill this mandate by fostering the development and dissemination of knowledge about the country’s political, social, and economic problems. While the Foundation endeavors to assure the accuracy and objectivity of each book it publishes, the conclusions and interpretations in Russell Sage Foundation publications are those of the authors and not of the Foundation, its Trustees, or its staff. Publication by Russell Sage, therefore, does not imply Foundation endorsement. BOARD OF TRUSTEES Robert E. Denham, Chair Alan S. Blinder Jennifer L. Hochschild Cora B. Marrett Christine K. Cassel Timothy A. Hultquist Eugene Smolensky Thomas D. Cook Kathleen Hall Jamieson Eric Wanner John A. Ferejohn Melvin Konner Mary C. Waters Larry V. Hedges Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Preston, Anne Elizabeth. Leaving science : occupational exit from scientific careers / Anne E. Preston. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-87154-694-9 1. Scientists—Employment—United States—History—20th century. 2. Sex discrimination in employment—United States—History—20th century. 3. Discrimination in employment—United States—History—20th century. I. Russell Sage Foundation. II. Title. Q149.U5P74 2004 331.12؅615؅0973—dc22 2003065968 Copyright © 2004 by Russell Sage Foundation. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Reproduction by the United States Government in whole or in part is permitted for any purpose. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American Na- tional Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials. ANSI Z39.48-1992. Text design by Genna Patacsil. RUSSELL SAGE FOUNDATION 112 East 64th Street, New York, New York 10021 10987654321 To Casey CONTENTS About the Author ix Introduction xi 1 Science: The Period and the People 1 2 The Magnitude and Character of Exit 17 3 Leaving Science for Income and Opportunity 36 4 Family Responsibilities and Their Effects on a Scientific Career 64 5 Mentoring 92 6 Leaving Science Because of Discontent with Science Itself 111 7 Does the Rapidly Changing Knowledge Within Science Affect Exit? 123 8 Perceptions of Discriminatory Treatment 139 9 Policy Initiatives 158 Appendix: Selected Analyses by Chapter 171 Notes 187 References 191 Index 197 ABOUT THE AUTHOR ANNE E. PRESTON is associate professor of economics at Haverford College. INTRODUCTION ith the reduction in the percentage of U.S.-born men choos- ing science and engineering majors over the last thirty Wyears, national attention has turned to recruiting and retaining women and minorities in science. In the 1980s, pipeline issues were prominent as it became clear that the educational conduit through which career scientists must travel was leaking, especially at critical junctures. Research into these phenomena created a host of ex- planations behind the leakage and has been the impetus behind the im- plementation of a number of seemingly effective policy proposals. But as the educational system graduates a growing number of women and minorities with a strong scientific education, researchers need to un- derstand that although the pipeline, as defined, ends when a scientific degree is earned, the problem of attrition continues. This book exam- ines attrition from scientific careers for both men and women. This study estimates the rate of occupational exit from science during the period roughly between 1965 and 1995, identifies the differing factors behind exit for male and female scientists, and discusses the conse- quences for them of leaving science. Over the last thirty-five years, high school students have become better prepared for careers in science and mathematics at the same time that the percentages of bachelor’s degrees awarded in these fields have declined. Since the early 1980s, the average number of high school mathematics courses completed has increased from 2.6 to 3.4, and the average number of science courses completed has increased xii Introduction from 2.2 to 3.1 (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES] 2002). The percentages of high school graduates taking calculus, physics, and chemistry have roughly dou- bled over the same period (National Science Board 2002). As the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded has increased by almost 50 percent since 1970, the percentages of these degrees awarded in engineering, the physical sciences, and mathematics have declined. Only biological sciences and computer sciences have experienced relative increases, to- gether increasing from 4.6 percent of all degrees in 1970 to 8 percent in 2000. In fact, the absolute number of mathematics and physical science degrees fell over the period. Similarly, although total Ph.D.s awarded have increased more than 50 percent during the same period, the percentage of doctoral degrees awarded in the natural sciences has declined from 40.6 percent to 32.9 percent and there were absolute declines in mathematics and physical science Ph.D.s (U.S. Department of Education 2002). Only computer science Ph.D.s have increased in relative terms. This relative decline in science-oriented bachelor’s and doctoral degrees over the last thirty years has been especially prominent for U.S.-born nonminority white men. These men are receiving absolutely fewer bachelor’s and doctoral degrees than they did in 1976 (U.S. De- partment of Education 2002). These declines are especially evident in the natural sciences, where there has been a large influx of foreign students. For example, from 1992 to 2001, the absolute number of white male U.S. citizens earning a Ph.D. in the natural sciences or engineering declined by 13.6 percent (U.S. Department of Education 2002). Science policymakers have turned to women and minorities, who had traditionally been underrepresented in science and engineering, to fill the gap. Starting in the early 1980s, governmental organizations such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) and private organizations, including the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, began financing research programs into the causes of underrepresentation and educational programs at the elementary, secondary, and collegiate level to attract and retain young women and minorities. Although failure to persist is still greater for women and minorities than for white men and certain fields are better at attracting and retaining women and minorities than oth- Introduction xiii ers, if one judges these programs according to growth in degree recipients, they have been very effective. Since 1970, the percentage of natural science and engineering bachelor’s degrees awarded to women has increased from 12 percent to 38 percent; smaller but still significant is the increase from 9.4 percent to 15.8 percent of the portion of Ph.D.s in these areas earned by women. The number of doctoral recipients who are American Indian, African American, or Hispanic has increased from 3.3 percent to 6.7 percent in engineering, from 2.9 percent to 8.1 percent in biological sciences, and from 2.3 percent to 6.3 percent in physical sciences. These same minorities currently make up more than 13 percent of the bachelor’s degree recipients in the natural sciences and engineering (U.S. Department of Education 2002). Although larger numbers of women and minorities are graduating from the science pipeline, little attention has been paid to survival in the workplace for science graduates, regardless of race or gender. But the numbers are striking. Data collected by the Bureau of the Census in the 1980s (Survey of Natural and Social Scientists and Engineers [SSE], 1982–1989) reveal that approximately 8.6 percent of men and 17.4 percent of women left natural science and engineering jobs between 1982 and 1989. In the study, which is the basis for this book and which follows the careers of men and women who graduated with science degrees from a large public university between 1965 and 1990, this two-to-one ratio persists. For science graduates with an average work experience of twelve and a half years, 31.5 percent of the women and 15.5 percent of the men who had started science careers were not employed in science at the time of the survey. The data from the more recent NSF surveys (Division of Science Resource Statistics 1999) al- low examination of the younger cohorts of scientists whose degrees were received in the late 1980s through the mid-1990s. In 1999, focus- ing on individuals under the age of thirty whose highest degree was a B.S. and individuals under the age of thirty-four whose highest degree was either an M.S. or a science Ph.D., women were one and a half times as likely as men to have left science. The statistics are not wholly comparable to the earlier data, since we do not know if these exiting graduates ever entered science careers after the degree was earned, and these individuals are relatively young and inexperienced. Comparably xiv Introduction constructed statistics from the public university data reveal that, over the period in which careers were analyzed, 1965 to 1995, female exit rates from science for all science graduates, not just those who start a scientific career, were roughly one and a half times as high as male exit rates five years into the career.

Load more