Teaching accreditation exams reveal grading biases favor women in male-dominated disciplines in France

Science

Volumn 353, Issue 6298, 2016, Pages 474-478

  Breda, Thomas ^a,b   Hillion, Mélina ^a,c  

^a PARIS SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (France)

^b CNRS   (France)

^c CREST   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOMINANCE; FEMALE BEHAVIOR; GENDER DISPARITY; HUMAN BEHAVIOR; MALE; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; SOCIAL PROBLEM; TEACHING;

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ACCREDITATION; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE; FEMALE; FRANCE; GENDER BIAS; GEOGRAPHY; HIGH SCHOOL; HISTORY; HUMAN; MALE; MATHEMATICS; PHILOSOPHY; PHYSICS; PRIMARY SCHOOL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEX RATIO; SOCIOLOGY; TEACHER; TEACHING; EDUCATION; ENGINEERING; PSYCHOLOGY; SCIENCE; SEXISM; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; TECHNOLOGY;

FRANCE;

ACCREDITATION; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; ENGINEERING; FEMALE; FRANCE; HUMANS; MALE; MATHEMATICS; SCIENCE; SEXISM; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84980028605     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf4372     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. J. M. Sheltzer, J. C. Smith, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 10107-10112 (2014).
2. C. Hill, C. Corbett, A. St. Rose, Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (American Association of University Women, Washington, DC, 2010).
3. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2007).
4. M. S. West, J. W. Curtiss, AAUP Gender Equity Indicators 2006 (American Association of University Professors, Washington, DC, 2006).
5. M. Foschi, L. Lai, K. Sigerson, Soc. Psychol. Q. 57, 326-339 (1994).
6. R. Steinpreis, K. Anders, D. Ritzke, Sex Roles 41, 509-528 (1999).
7. J. Swim, E. Borgida, G. Maruyama, D. G. Myers, Psychol. Bull. 105, 409-429 (1989).
8. C. A. Moss-Racusin, J. F. Dovidio, V. L. Brescoll, M. J. Graham, J. Handelsman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 16474-16479 (2012).
9. E. Reuben, P. Sapienza, L. Zingales, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 4403-4408 (2014).
10. S. J. Ceci, W. M. Williams, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 3157-3162 (2011).
11. S. J. Ceci, D. K. Ginther, S. Kahn, W. M. Williams, Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 15, 75-141 (2014).
12. W. M. Williams, S. J. Ceci, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 5360-5365 (2015).
13. National Research Council, Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2009).
14. N. H. Wolfinger, M. A. Mason, M. Goulden, J. Higher Educ. 79, 388-405 (2008).
15. C. Glass, K. Minnotte, J. Divers. High. Educ. 3, 218-229 (2010).
16. A. D. Irvine, Dialogue 35, 255-292 (1996).
17. D. Kimura, "Preferential hiring of women" (University of British Columbia Reports, 2002); www.safs.ca/april2002/hiring.html.
18. C. Seligman, Summary of Recruitment Activity for All Full-Time Faculty at the University of Western Ontario by Sex and Year (The Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 2001); www.safs.ca/april2001/ recruitment.html.
19. T. Breda, S. T. Ly, Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 7, 53-75 (2015).
20. S. J. Leslie, A. Cimpian, M. Meyer, E. Freeland, Science 347, 262-265 (2015).
21. National Science Foundation, Survey of Earned Doctorates (NSF, Alexandria, VA, 2011); www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvydoctorates/.
22. Materials and methods are available as supplementary materials on Science Online.
23. A. H. Eagly, Am. Psychol. 50, 145-158 (1995).
24. D. Halpern, Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, ed. 3, 2000).
25. E. S. Spelke, Am. Psychol. 60, 950-958 (2005).
26. J. S. Hyde, Am. Psychol. 60, 581-592 (2005).
27. We checked that candidates' score on the test, "Behave as an ethical and responsible civil servant," for the computation of candidates' rank on oral tests do not affect the main results. To do this, we restricted the analysis to the period before it was implemented in 2011. We also replicated the analysis by keeping only one oral and one written test in each of the medium- and high-level exams. We kept the pairs of tests that match the most closely in terms of the subtopic or test program on which they were based. Results are virtually unchanged (fig. S3 and table S12).
28. R. G. Fryer Jr., J. Public Econ. 91, 1151-1166 (2007).
29. M. Heilman, R. Martell, M. Simon, Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 41, 98-110 (1988).
30. A. J. Koch, S. D. D'Mello, P. R. Sackett, J. Appl. Psychol. 100, 128-161 (2015).
31. M. Bagues, M. Sylos-Labini, N. Zinovyeva, "Does the gender composition of scientific committees matter?" [Social Science Research Network 2628176, IZA Discussion Paper No. 9199, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn, Germany, 2015].