The Science Glass Ceiling: Academic Women Scientist and the Struggle to Succeed

The Science Glass Ceiling: Academic Women Scientist and the Struggle to Succeed

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 1-168

  Rosser, Sue V ^a  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 21844454851     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203337752     Document Type: Book

References (88)

1. Aisenberg, N., & Harrington, M. (1988). Women of academe: Outsiders in the sacred grove. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
2. Allaire, Y., &, Firsirotu, M. (1984). Theories of organizational culture. Organization Studies, 5, 193-226.
3. Ambrose, S., Dunkle, K., Lazarus, B., Nair, I., & Harkus, D. (1997). Journeys of women in science and engineering: No universal constants. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC:
5. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
6. American Association of University Women. (1992). How schools shortchange girls. Washington, DC: AAUW Educational Foundation.
7. American Chemical Society. (1999). Percentage of chemistry degrees earned by women from 1967 to 1999. ACS Starting Salary Survey. retrieved October 1,2001 from http://center.acs.org/applications/acscomparator.
8. Barad, K. (1995). A feminist approach to teaching quantum physics. In S.V. Rosser (Ed.), Teaching the majority pp. 43-75. Teachers College Press. New York.
9. Bohonak, N. (1995). Attracting and retaining women in graduate programs in computer science. In S.V. Rosser (Ed.), Teaching the majority. New York: Teachers College Press.
10. Britton, D.M. (1997). Perceptions of the work environment among correctional officers: Do race and sex matter? Criminology, 35, 75-105.
11. Bush, V. (1945). Science-The endless frontier: A report to the president on a program for postwar scientific research. Reprinted 1990. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
12. Campbell, K. (2001). Leaders of 9 universities and 25 women faculty meet at MIT, agree to equity reviews. MIT News Office. Retrieved January 31, 2001 from http://web.mit.edu/newsofflce/nr/2001/gender.html.
13. Carroll, B. (2001). Reflections on "2000 subversions: Women's studies and the 21st century." NWSA Journal 13(1). 139-149.
14. Chemical and Engineering News. (2002, September). 110-111.
15. Clutter, M. (1998). Background programs to POWRE. Appendix B. In S.V. Rosser & M. L. Zieseniss (Eds.), Final report on professional opportunities for women in research and education (POWRE) workshop. Gainesville, FL: Center for Women's Studies and Gender Research.
16. Commission on Professionals in Science & Technology. (2000). Professional women & minorities: A total resources data compendium. 13th ed. Washington, DC: Author.
17. Cook, S.G. (2001). Negotiating family accommodation practices on your campus. Women in Higher Education, 10(4); 25-26.
18. Curry, D. (2001, July 6). Prime numbers. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A9.
19. Davis, C.S., Ginorio, A.B., Hollenshead, C.S., Lazarus, B.B., Rayman, P.M., & Associates (Eds.). (1996). The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics and engineering. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20. DeGroot, J., &, Maynard, M. (1993). Women's studies in the 1990's: Doing things differently? New York: St. Martin's Press.
21. Eastman, C. (1995). Accommodating diversity in computer science education. In S.V. Rosser, (Ed.), Teaching the majority (pp. 160-168). Teachers College Press. New York.
22. Edsall, T. (1995, August 15). Pollsters view gender gap as political fixture: White men heed GOP call; women lean to democrats. Washington Post, A-1.
23. Elliott, S.T. (2001). Does your school discriminate against pregnant faculty? Women in Higher Education, 10(7); 23-24.
24. Fox, M. (1985). Publication, performance, and reward in science and scholarship. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 255-282). New York: Agathon Press.
25. Fox, M. (1991). Gender, environment milieu, and productivity in science and scholarship. In H.Zuckerman, J.Cole, & J.Bruer (Eds.), The outer circle: Women in the scientific community (pp. 188-204). New York: W.W.Norton.
26. Fox, M. (1995). Women and scientific careers. In S.Jasanoff, J.Marble, J.Petersen, & T. Pinch (Eds.). Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 205-233). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27. Fox, M. (1996). Women, academia and careers in science. In C.S.Davis, A.B.Ginorio, C. S.Hollenshead, B.B.Lazarus, P.M.Rayman, & Associates (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 265-269). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28. Fox, M. (2001). Women, men, and engineering. In D.Vannoy (Ed.), Gender Mosaics (pp. 249-257). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
29. Glazer, P, &, Slater, M. (1987). Unequal colleagues. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
30. Heckman, D. (1997, Winter). On the eve of Title IX's 25th anniversary: Sex discrimination in the gym and classroom. Nova Law Review, 21, 545-661.
31. Henry Luce Foundation. (2000). The Clare Boothe Luce program for women in science, mathematics and engineering. New York. Author.
32. Hopkins, N. (1999, December 3). MIT and gender bias: Following up on victory. Chronicle of Higher Education. Vol. XLVI, No. 15, B-4.
33. Hopkins, N. Bailyn, L., Gibson, L., & Hammonds, E. (2002). The status of women faculty at MIT. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/faculty/reports/overview.html.
34. Keller, E.F. (1983). A feeling for the organism: The life and work of Barbara McClintock. New York: W.H.Freeman.
35. Keller, E.F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36. Kole, A. (1995, August 3). Highlights of the Affirmative Action Review-Report to the president by the office of the general counsel. Washington, DC: Department of Education.
37. Kulis, S., Sciotte, D., & Collins, S. (2002). More than a pipeline problem. Labor constraints and gender stratification across the scientific disciplines. Journal of Research in Higher Education, 43(6), 657-691.
38. Latour, B., &, Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
39. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40. Lauer, N.C. (2000, July 18). Judge upholds Bush's anti-affirmative action plan. Women's Enews. Retrieved May 1, 2001, from http://www.womensenews.org.
41. Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. McIlwee, J., & Robinson, J.G. (1992). Women in engineering: Gender, power and workplace culture. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
43. McIntosh, P. (1984). The study of women: Processes of personal and curricular revision. Forum for Liberal Education, 6(5); 2-4.
44. McNeil, L., & Sher, M. (1999). The dual-career couple problem. Physics Today, 52(7), 32-37.
45. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46. National Science Board. (2000). Science & Engineering Indicators-2000 (NSB-00-1). Arlington,VA: National Science Foundation.
47. National Science Foundation. (1993). Education and human resources program for women and girls program announcement (NSF 93-126) Arlington, VA: Author.
48. National Science Foundation. (1994). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1994. (NSF 94-333). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
49. National Science Foundation. (1997). Professional opportunities for women in research and education. Program announcement (NSF 97-91). Arlington, VA: Author.
50. National Science Foundation. (2000). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. 2000 (NSF 00-327). Arlington, VA: Author.
51. National Science Foundation. (2001a). Program for gender equity in science, mathematics, engineering and technology (PGE). Program Announcement (NSF 01-6). Arlington, VA: Author.
52. National Science Foundation. (2001b). ADVANCE. Program solicitation. Arlington, VA: Author.
53. National Science Foundation. (2001c). ADVANCE institutional transformation awards. Retrieved October 1,2001 from http://www.nsf.gov/advance.
54. National Science Foundation. (2003). Gender diversity in science, technology engineering and mathematics education (GDSE) Program Announcement (NSF 03-502). Arlington, VA: Author.
55. National Science Foundation. (in press). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering.
56. Project Kaleidoscope. 1994. Project kaleidoscope phase II: What works: Focusing on the future. Washington, DC: Independent Colleges Office.
57. Pryse, M., Chair, and Members of the Task Force on Faculty Roles and Rewards of the National Women's Studies Association. (1999). Defining women's studies scholarship. A statement of the National Women's Studies Association Task Force on Faculty Roles and Rewards. College Park, MD: National Women's Studies Association.
58. Richard, G.V., & Krieshok, T.S. (1989). Occupational stress, strain, and coping in university faculty.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 34, 117-132.
59. Richardson, D., Sutton, C., & Cercone, K. (1995). Female-friendly geoscience: Eight techniques for reaching the majority. In S.V. Rosser (Ed.), Teaching the majority. pp. 183-192. New York: Teachers College Press.
60. Riley, M.D. (2001). U. of Arizona's millenium project to assess campus equity. Women in higher education, 10(4); 1-2.
61. Rosser, S.V. (1990). Female friendly science. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
62. Rosser, S.V. (1995). Teaching the majority: Breaking the gender barrier in science, mathematics, and engineering. New York: Teachers College Press.
63. Rosser, S.V. (1997). Re-engineering female friendly science. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
64. Rosser, S.V. (1999). Different laboratory/work climates: Impacts upon women in the workplace. In C.Selby (Ed.), Women in science and engineering: Choices for success. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (pp. 95-101).
65. Rosser, S.V. (2001). Balancing: Survey of fiscal year 1997, 1998, and 1999 POWRE awardees. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7(1); 1-11.
66. Rosser, S.V. & Lane, E.O'Neal. (2002). Key barriers for academic institutions seeking to retain women scientists and engineers: Family unfriendly policies, low numbers, stereotypes, and harassment. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8(2); pp. 163-191.
67. Rosser, S.V., & Zieseniss, M. (1998). Final report on professional opportunities for women in research and education (POWRE) workshop. Gainesville, FL: Center for Women's Studies and Gender Research.
68. Rosser, S.V., & Zieseniss, M. (2000). Career issues and laboratory climates: Different challenges and opportunities for women engineers and scientists (Survey of fiscal year 1997 POWRE Awardees). Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 6(2); 1-20.
69. Sandler, B. (1997, Spring). Too strong for a woman: The five words that created Title IX. About Women on Campus, 5(2); 5.
70. Schneider, A. (2000, August 18). Female scientists turn their backs on jobs at research universities. Chronicle of Higher Education, A12-A14.
71. Schuster, M., & Van Dyne, S. (1984). Placing women in the liberal arts: Stages of curriculum transformation. Harvard Educational Review, 54(4); 413-428.
72. Solomon, B.M. (1985). In the company of educated women. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
73. Sonnert, G., & Holton, G. (1995). Who succeeds in science? The gender dimension. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
74. SRI International. (1994). The visiting professorships for women program: lowering the hurdles for women in science and engineering. NSF Summary and Comments (NSF 93-159). Arlington, VA: Author.
75. Swoboda, F. (1995, March 16). Glass ceiling firmly in place, panel finds. Washington Post, A1, A18.
76. Tobias, S. (1990). They're not dumb, they're different. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation.
77. Tobias, S. (1992). Revitalizing undergraduate science education: Why some things work and most don't. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation.
78. Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
79. Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
80. Vetter, B. (1996). Myths and realities of women's progress in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. In C.S.Davis, A.B.Ginorio, C.S.Hollenshead, B.B.Lazarus, P.M. Rayman, & Associates (Eds.) The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 29-56). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
81. Wadsworth, E. (2002). Giving much, gaining more. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
82. Wasserman, E.R. (1998). Women in the national academy: Their lives as scientists and as women. Magazine of the Association of Women in Science, 27, 6-10.
83. Wasserman, E.R. (2000). The door in the dream: Conversations with eminent women in Science. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
84. Wenniger, M.D. (2001). Partner hires: A fact of life on most campuses. Women in Higher Education 10(4): 5.
85. Williams, J. (2001, December 15). What stymies women's academic careers? It's hiring couples. The Chronicle of Higher Education, B10.
86. Wilson, R. (2001, April 13). The backlash against hiring couples. Chronicle of Higher Education, A16.
87. Wright, K.N., & Saylor, W.G. (1992). A comparison of perceptions of the work environment between minority and non-minority employees of the federal prison system. Journal of Criminal Justice, 20(1), 63-71.
88. Zimmerman, B. (2000). Building NWSA. NWSA Journal, 12(1); 165-168.