Women in Computer Sciences in Romania: Success and Sacrifice
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of International Education and Leadership Volume 4 Issue 2 Fall 2014 http://www.jielusa.org/ ISSN: 2161-7252 Women in Computer Sciences in Romania: Success and Sacrifice Kelly Ward Washington State University Cornelia Dragne Independent Scholar Angelina J Lucas Washington State University The purpose of this article is to more fully understand the professional lives of women academics in computer sciences in six Romanian universities. The work is exploratory and relies on a qualitative framework to more fully understand what it means to be a woman academic in high-tech disciplines in a second world economy. We conducted in-depth, face-to-face interviews and reviewed a number of documents to create a context for the major social and political changes in Eastern Europe that affected the professional journeys of women academics in Romania. Results convey the ways in which gender, technology, and higher education are bound together by a multiplicity of conscious and unconscious inclusionary and exclusionary practices at universities. Findings also suggest that further research is needed on the theoretical underpinnings and practice of gender equality in Romanian higher education institutions. Women academics in computing face a complex interplay of discouraging factors, including severe financial austerity and the masculine domination of the disciplines, necessitating the establishment of structures and mechanisms to foster honest debate around the dilemma regarding equality of opportunity or equality of outcome. Keywords: Women in Computer Sciences; Women Academics; STEM; Romania A growing body of literature on gender equality faculty in science, technology, engineering, and in science points to an imbalance in the number, mathematical (STEM) disciplines. seniority, and influence of women and men in Historically in Romania, as in other Eastern the scientific professions. Some fields are European countries, women’s participation in heavily staffed by women, while others seem the STEM professions has exceeded 30%, which less female-friendly. In the government sector of is considered by some to be the mark of a the European Union (EU-27), equivalent critical mass (Trauth, 2007). However, the lack numbers of women and men work in the of studies with a focus on women, combined humanities; yet only 27% of researchers are with the lack of a feminist movement in that women in Engineering and Technology, while country has left a gap in our understanding of women account for 59% of graduates, they only how increased participation has shaped one’s account for 18% of full professors (She Figures, experience. Moreover, for more than two 2009). These figures highlight the need to decades, the study of education has been identify the successes and sacrifices of female removed from universities, necessitating studies Women in Computer Science Ward, Dragne, & Lucas on academic life in ‘general and gender 2010). Academic departments follow a number relations’ within higher education in particular. of organizational practices based on gender The purpose of this study is to explore assumptions and beliefs that are culturally women’s participation and understand the embedded (Williams, 1995). For example, experiences in the fields of computer sciences in technology and engineering are generally Romanian universities. The experience of considered to be related to masculinity, due to women in these fields is of particular interest for perceptions about the stable image and culture of three reasons. First, the world of computer engineering, and because the male represents the science is traditionally dominated by male- stereotyped image of ‘an engineer and a centered perspectives and a masculine ethos, scientist’ in the work force (e.g., Carter and which contributes to the marginalization of Kirkup 1990; MciIlwee & Robinson 1992; women in these spheres (Harding, 1986, 1991; Mellström 1995; Faulkner 2000). Researchers Longino, 1990; Keller, 2001; Hubbard, 2001; argue that STEM fields are powerful institutions Hoonakker, Carayon, and Schoepke, 2006). The with reinforced levels of equity in the society second is that information technologies and (Fox, 1999). Therefore, women suffer computer sciences are deeply connected with a proportional discrepancies, in turn reinforcing nation’s economic and democratic aspirations. inequity in work experiences at all stages of Third, the critical mass of woman faculty in training and career development (Nolan, Romanian higher education in Computer Buckner, Marzabadi, & Kuck, 2008). Some Sciences makes for a fertile ground to study experiences related to differential treatment may gender in a historically male field. look meager at the start, but compound over time, creating large gaps between groups that Theoretical background lead to negative outcomes such as job dissatisfaction and higher turnover (Preston, Extant literature offers multiple perspectives 2006; Spector & Jex, 1998; Valian, 1999). on the causes of female under-representation in Women may also find that their opportunities STEM fields. Some of the widely studied factors are limited when they are treated as if they are include bias against female science students invisible, when their contributions are (Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham & marginalized, or when they are detached from Handelsman, 2012; Etzkowitz, Kemelgor and the informal social networks of their laboratories Uzzi, 2000); beliefs about innate intelligence or departments (Becker, 1990; Committee on the (Dweck, 2006) and differences in how males Participation of Women, 2003; Etzkowitz et al., and females think (Ceci & Williams, 2007); 1992, 2000; Sonnert & Holton, 1995; Stage & accumulated disadvantage (Zuckerman, 1989); Maple, 1996). adverse effects of tokenism (Kanter, 1977); The literature also offers culture-based gender role stereotypes and schemas (AAUW, perspectives for under-representation of women 2010; Ceci &Williams, 2007; Valian, 2000); in STEM fields. For instance, past research gendered universities and the normalization of shows that women and men experience male working styles including “ideal worker” academic structures and cultures differently. norms (Currie, Thiele & Harris, 2002; Drago, Women are generally less satisfied with their 2007; Eisenhart & Finkel, 1998); implicit bias positions than their male colleagues, in terms of (AAUW, 2010); opinions that environments and the quality of colleague interactions and support cultures are unwelcoming to women (Fabio, (Bilimoria, Perry, Liang, Stoller, Higgins & Brandi & Frehill, 2008; Sonnert & Holton, Taylor, 2006; Trower, 2008) as well as 1995); choice/opting out (Diekman, Brown, departmental climate (Callister, 2006), culture, Johnston, & Clark, 2010); and the challenges of and fit in their departments (Trower, 2008). balancing both work and family (Ward & Wolf- Extant research also reveals a culture of bias Wendel, 2012). against females by both genders. For example, Research suggests that scientific excellence Moss-Racusin (2012) identified that male and is a social construction that is open to several female science faculty at research-intensive biases, including gender bias (Husu & Koskinen, universities perceive female students as less 2 Women in Computer Science Ward, Dragne, & Lucas competent and less worthy of being hired as Feminist Critique of Science and Technology laboratory managers than identical males. They and the Glass Ceiling Theory also found that male and female faculty offer A feminist critique of science and female employees a lower starting salary and technology breaks from Western philosophical less career mentoring. Ecklund, Lincoln, and traditions by including non-white and non-male Tansey (2012) showed that gender voices. It posits that science and technology still discrimination is a decisive factor of a woman constitute both a masculine kingdom and an either to not pursue careers in science at all or instrument of domination and with such choose biology over physics. Regardless of their perspectives tend to exclude women (Keller, own gender, scientists “used gender reasoning 1982). A comprehensive review of the literature that stressed innate differences between men and on women in academia in computer sciences women as well as personal choices to explain revealed two salient, interconnected themes: that the gender composition differences” (p. 710) in women constitute a minority (under- biology and physics. representation), and that the disciplinary culture Research also suggests that national cultures is masculine. The feminist critique of can affect the cultures of academic departments information technologies contends that one of (e.g., Hofstede, 1991). Organizations function in the main reasons for women’s low participation a national context, and are guided by theories of in computer sciences is that the field is imbued the nation's scientists or dominant minds with cultural views, attitudes, and norms that do (Hofstede, 1994). Hence, in an academic setting, not appeal to girl’s cognitive development STEM departments are susceptible to the (Miller, 2005; Rosser, 2005). When women influence exerted by national culture because enter such careers such as computer sciences they operate in the same context. Hofstede found they find themselves needing to make extra that the differences in national culture rest on effort to acculturate themselves to its masculine four dimensions: power distance, uncertainty ethos in order to succeed. avoidance, individualism, and masculinity.