The Carleton Geology Department has a reputation as being one of the best geology programs in the country. The department prides itself on the high number of women geologists it produces. Is this perceived success real, and if so, what are the reasons for this success?
This paper explores some of the reasons why the Carleton geology department continues to graduate a high percentage of female majors. I interviewed ten women geology majors in their junior and senior years with a list of questions about the factors that influenced their decisions in becoming geology majors. The women were selected unscientifically from those whom I found frequently in the geology labs in Mudd Hall. The information presented here is a combination of my own personal observations, the results of research into existing literature, and the interviews.
Measurements of Success
Statistically, the Carleton Geology Department has been highly productive in graduating women scientists. This is particularly true when compared with national figures on women geology students. According to American Geological Institute information, the national average percentage of women receiving bachelor’s degrees in geology between the years 1973 and 1982 was 20%. Carleton averaged 46% for that time period. It is not unusual for Carleton to have twice the female to male ratio of other schools.
Within Carleton itself, geology consistently produced more female majors than the other physical laboratory sciences (physics and chemistry). From 1987-1994, the average percentage of female graduates in chemistry was 43%, and physics was 26% women. By comparison, geology averaged 54% women graduates for those same years.
Enrollment statistics alone do not provide a complete picture of whether a program is successful. For this reason, student opinion was also sought in an informal poll of ten female geology majors. Women were asked to rate their satisfaction with the geology department on a scale from one to ten (ten being the highest). Overall, women were very positive about their experiences in the geology department, and gave the department an average satisfaction rating of eight.
Another measure of departmental success in creating women scientists is the number of women who continue their studies in earth sciences. If the numbers of women who pursue graduate degrees in earth sciences is a measurement of success, Carleton women are doing very well compared to women from other schools, and just as well as Carleton men. Information on graduate degrees was obtained from a study by the Office of Planning and Institutional Research at Franklin and Marshall College.
Carleton ranks high in female earth science doctorates compared to other four-year liberal arts colleges. Between the years 1979-1988, Carleton alumni received 15 degrees, making Carleton the highest producer of female earth science Ph.D. recipients ahead of Wellesley (10), and Smith (9) (both all female colleges). Combining the top ten coeducational undergraduate schools, 20% of Ph.D.’s were earned by women. For Carleton graduates receiving Ph.D.’s, 37.5% were women.
Additionally, Carleton earth science ranked higher in the number of doctorate recipients than the other sciences at Carleton. Although they ranked first in earth science, Carleton women ranked fifth in physics, sixth in chemistry, eighth in engineering, ninth in all the sciences, fourteenth in the life sciences, and fifteenth in mathematics. Also interesting is the fact that when compared to other colleges, Carleton men rank fifth for doctorates in earth science, compared to the females’ ranking of first. This once again points to the fact that Carleton has been more successful than other schools in nurturing women geologists.
Carleton geology women are holding their ground when it comes to comparison with their male peers. Assuming that most of the doctorate recipients from 1979-1988 graduated from Carleton between 1973 and 1985, it appears as though the same percentage of women and men who graduated from Carleton went on to receive doctorates (12% each, 15/123 women and 20/164 men). This contradicts national trends showing the percentage of women geologists decreasing as the level of degree increases. One study found that the proportion of women in the geosciences decreases by ten percentage points (approximately 50% of the total women) from bachelor’s to doctorate recipients. In this light, Carleton women are extremely successful when it comes to pursuing advanced degrees in earth science.
Obstacles for Female Scientists
As the status of women in geoscience is changing, stereotyped images are fading, not only in the minds of men, but in those of the women themselves. Geology, like other so-called hard sciences, historically has been a male domain and has been considered an unfeminine discipline. The geosciences have indeed had a long standing image of rugged masculinity: the field geologist living and working under primitive, physically demanding conditions. In such a “physical” world, women, if not discouraged from pursuing the profession, were largely seen as teachers, librarians or map makers. The misconceptions regarding women’s ability or willingness to participate fully in all aspects of geoscience explains why, until very recently, women entered the profession in small numbers and tended to advance relatively slowly when they did pursue a geoscience career.
Additional obstacles that have historically excluded females from science include:
- comprising a minority in their classes and departments.
- little contact with other women and perceived isolation, often due to the vertical progression of required courses.
- few female teachers as role models.
- having to deal with male professors who are not accustomed to having females in class (male discomfort).
- pressure to conform to traditional sex-role expectations.
- lower expectations for females.
- unwelcoming, overly competitive or hostile atmosphere.
- lack of support for females.
- less experience with scientific observation and instruments.
- lack of personal connection with scientific tasks and questions.
- unaware of career opportunities and future applicability.
- ineffective teaching methods and class structure.
- sexual harassment.
- lack of inclusion in male networks.
- condescension, invisibility, devaluation.
Cumulatively, these gender biases have served to exclude women from pursuing scientific degrees and careers.
Factors in Success
One would expect that a successful science program for women would be one that counterbalances these obstacles. The success of the Carleton Geology Department for women can be attributed to a unique combination of the character of the women themselves, a strong tradition of women in the department, and departmental atmosphere, curriculum, and teaching philosophies. Each of these aspects of the geology department addresses some of the obstacles cited as deterring women from entering scientific fields.
The Character of Carleton Women Geology Majors
The one factor that significantly predisposes certain women to a geology major is a love of the outdoors. A large majority of the women surveyed indicated hiking, camping, or other outdoor sports and recreational activities as significant interests and pastimes. Furthermore, they cited outdoor labs and field trips as one of the reasons for becoming interested in geology. Therefore, it seems if a disproportionately large number of women who come to Carleton are interested in outdoor activities, that might be a factor in the large number of women geology majors.
The second common theme in the women interviewed who chose a Carleton geology major is that they stated having already overcome gender stereotyping to various degrees in their own lives. Gender role stereotyping is a large reason cited for women not entering scientific fields. Therefore, it seems that the women who are successful in science are those who are able to bypass or overcome those stereotypes. For many women in the geology department, the acting-out of behaviors not traditionally ascribed to females, or a refusal to accept gender roles that their peers seemed readier to accept, exhibited itself at an early age. For example, one woman stated that, “I went through a phase in seventh grade when I wore lipstick and wanted to look pretty, but (I) soon reverted back to my tomboy stage.” Another woman’s comment when questioned about her childhood stated, “I beat up on boys- but I think most girls did.” She also noted that she was one of the few women in her high school who considered herself a feminist. This is not to say that all women in the geology department are radical feminists who once considered themselves tomboys. It simply serves to illustrate that gender-role stereotypes do exist in our society (otherwise these girls would not have considered themselves tomboys, but children, doing childish things), and that the women in the geology department seem to show a trend of non-conformity to gender stereotypes in some areas of their lives. I don’t know to what extent these attitudes are present in women of other majors on campus.
Tradition of Women in Geology
Previous studies have shown that a strong, positive correlation exists between the proportion of women faculty and the proportion of women students. One reason for this may be the attitudes of the faculty toward the students. A 1979 report by the National Research Council explains that “both women and men faculty tend to be supportive of students of the same sex to a greater extent than those of the opposite sex…”. They conclude that the smaller the proportion of female faculty, the smaller the faculty belief in women’s competence and the lower the expectations of their accomplishment. At Carleton, where the geology department has four permanent professors, there has been one female professor since 1978. One female professor is better than none. However, it is unlikely that a composition of 25% female professors would be a main reason for the large number of women majors.
A larger influence can probably be found in the strong tradition of female geology majors. Although this does not explain why women first started becoming involved in geology at Carleton, it is an important factor in continuing high numbers. There are many reasons why women in the department lead to more women in the department. First of all, older students serve as role models for younger students, and as lab assistants. A lack of vertical progression in the curriculum encourages mixing of students of all levels. The presence of many women students in the department allows younger students to construct an image of themselves as also being successful in the department. Furthermore, female presence assists in overcoming the anticipation of isolation in classes and the department.
Another effect of having a strong history of women geology graduates is that male faculty become more accustomed to working with women, and their discomfort level decreases. Since discomfort of males in positions of authority is cited as a large deterrent to women majors, this would seem to have a positive affect on the number of women who remain in geology.
Departmental Character and Teaching Methods
The final factors influencing women’s success in Carleton’s geology department are classroom atmosphere, philosophies, methods of teaching, and curriculum. In the geology department, all of these facets are interrelated. Departmental philosophies are exhibited in ways of instruction, as well as classroom atmosphere and curriculum.
- Communal Atmosphere
According to women geology majors, the biggest attraction of the geology department is its communal atmosphere. This atmosphere is created and maintained by the faculty, the physical arrangement, and classroom and laboratory dynamics.
For the most part, Carleton geology professors are perceived as placing a high priority on students. Faculty know everyone in their classes, including the large introductory classes of 40-50 students. Furthermore, faculty try to maintain accessibility to students by keeping their doors open to student questions and input. This individual attention may contribute the feeling of support women feel in their geology classes.
The physical atmosphere of the geology department also contributes to a sense of community. Instead of individual desks, students sit at large work tables with a number of other students. Many of the classrooms are interconnected, or accessible by more than one entrance. Large windows on laboratories facilitate openness and common knowledge of activities pursued by other students.
The department also fosters a sense of community in the classroom by emphasizing group projects and collaboration. As an illustration, departmental chairperson Dr. Mary Savina envisions the ideal laboratory set-up is not as one in which there is a computer for each student, but as two, three or four people working together around one computer. Most labs and lab write-ups are conducted in teams, instead of by individuals. This creates a setting of collaboration rather than competition. Although students do state that there is a significant amount of competition with the department, they perceive it to be primarily a function of personality types, not externally imposed by departmental structures. A collaborative atmosphere may be particularly beneficial to females. Research shows that women function better academically when they do not perceive the situation as one in which they are competing against others. On the contrary, females “prefer and perform better in situations where everyone wins”.
- Joint Student Ownership and High Expectations
Also contributing to the community atmosphere of the department is joint student ownership. Senior geology majors each have a desk at which to leave their material and to work at any time. Underclass people have access to lockers and drawers in which to leave personal belongings. The labs are always open to geology students. This works because students are entrusted with the responsibility of stopping suspicious activity, and keeping track of departmental equipment. It is not unusual for 10-20 geology students to be working in the labs at night when no faculty are on duty. Responsibility for physical property is one illustration of the accountability and high expectations geology faculty place on students. These high expectations are also evident in student performance in other areas, such as time and thought that goes into assignments. Women students do not note significantly different expectations for male and female students.
This respect by the faculty is also manifested in their solicitation of student input in departmental matters such as teaching philosophies, curriculum, and faculty decisions. Discussions of departmental philosophies take place in informal settings, as well as formal settings such as the weekly geology forum, student surveys, and lab-assistant meetings.
In the classroom also, women perceive professors as respecting their input. Many women noted that the faculty valued and encouraged diverse perspectives and opinionated discourse on subject material. In class, things are not presented as either “right” or “wrong”, but with multiple interpretations or explanations. This encourages students who come from perspectives other than the white male perspective that has dominated western scientific thought. Furthermore, multiple-answer problems encourage development of hypotheses that are relational, rather than reductionistic. Students interpret these methods as a respect for their ideas, and take pride in the autonomy of their scientific findings.
- Departmental Approach to Teaching Science
Equally influential in attracting women majors is the departmental approach to science. This can be summarized as science as process, not memorized facts. In class and in labs, there is an emphasis on analytical procedures. Weekly labs focus on hands-on experience and observation. Indoor labs usually include the use of technical instruments such as computer modeling programs, microscopes, and stereoscopes. However, many of the labs take place outdoors in the field. Additional field work is conducted on week-long departmental field trips in the spring and fall. Peter Frederick of the Carleton Learning and Teaching Center describes what he observed of the department as “human interaction with the earth, geology as human centered, student centered, holistic”.
The benefits to women of this teaching approach are many. It encourages students to see a connection between themselves, their work, and the outside world. Women consistently perform better when they have a connection with their subject matter. Hands-on experience and outdoor field work which plays off of previous student interests encourages personal interest in what is being studied. An emphasis on the connections between people, ideas, and objects boosts performance levels among women.
Also, by emphasizing the importance of methods, more time is spent in the observation mode, collecting data with technical equipment. This provides hands-on experience that allows women to lessen the disparity of experience between males and females with technical equipment, and positively influence female’s perception of their ability to use scientific equipment. One study found that “the programs that have been successful in attracting and retaining women in equipment-oriented, non-traditional field…have included a special component for remedial hands-on experience”.
Additionally, it has been recognized that females tend to spend more time with details and relationships between details before considering an abstract framework for those details than their male peers. Therefore, an extended period of time in the observation mode may fit well with female learning styles.
-
Education of Future Possibilities
Outside geologists and geology alums are highly visible in the geology department. Guest speakers and lecturers visit the department several times each term. The department also sponsors career explorations in which geologists from different fields discuss their jobs. Many of the people who visit the department are Carleton geology alums. Alums are also highly visible due to strong networking between graduates, and by faculty and students within the department itself. This increases knowledge of career-track futures and demonstrates the applicability of geologic questions, thus serving as a motivating factor for people who want to see connections between what they are doing and the “real world”.
Additional Questions
The thought has crossed my mind that a predisposition toward a geology major in Carleton women may be a large factor in the high number of women geology majors. For example, this would be the case if many women came to Carleton with the intent of majoring in geology, or if women were attracted to Carleton due to factors such as the campus setting, that predisposed them to geology.
I found no direct evidence for this to be the case. Of the ten women interviewed for this project, only one indicated that she planned on majoring in geology when she arrived at Carleton. In fact, some people did not even know what geology was, let alone envision themselves as geologists. When questioned about intended majors early in their Carleton careers, the most commonly cited were English, Biology, and Physics.
The hypothesis that correlation between the reasons women chose to attend Carleton and the attractions of the geology major slanted the number of geology majors cannot be refuted, but shows little evidence. For example, if women chose to come to Carleton primarily because of its physiographic setting, in a rural area with proximity to the arboretum, they might be more inclined to choose a field science. However, in my survey, I found that the reasons people gave for attending Carleton did not correlate with Carleton’s physiographic setting. For many, they came to Carleton despite its location, not because of it.
Julianne Williams ’94 wrote this term paper for an education course entitled “Schooling and Opportunity in American Society.” She later prepared an expanded version which she presented at the Geological Society of America meeting in Seattle in 1994. Sadly, Julie was brutally murdered while she was camping on the Appalachian Trail in June, 1996.