The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space held a July 24 hearing on women in science and technology. According to a committee press release, this was “the first Senate hearing in more than 20 years to consider barriers women face to entering careers in math, science, and technology.”
“I’m going to do everything I can to triple the number of women working in the hard sciences in the next ten years,” pledged Subcommittee Chair Ron Wyden (D-OR). “I’m convinced that the underrepresentation of women in these fields did not happen by accident; women have been actively discouraged from careers in math, science, and technology,” he added.
Sen. George Allen (R-VA) agreed. “We know there may be some challenges and barriers, and we must knock down those barriers,” he said. “We need to do everything we can to foster greater participation in science and technology by women,” he stated. “This issue is one of growing importance to our economy and to our military,” he added.
The sole witness on the first panel was Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) who told the subcommittee that she has noticed “some disturbing trends” regarding women in science and technology. “Women make up 47 percent of the workforce, but only 29 percent of the technology sector,” said Sen. Boxer. “Women make up 12.4 percent of the board seats of the Fortune 500, but only 9 percent of the board seats of technology firms,” she continued.
According to Sen. Boxer, there are barriers before and after women enter the workforce. In one California community, “34 percent of girls were advised not to take math in their senior year in high school,” she said. In the technology industry, “60 percent of women said they would make a different choice” of careers if they could do it over again, she stated. “I hope we can in a bipartisan way do more in promoting and mentoring women” in these important fields, she added.
The second panel included several women from the science, technology, and business sectors. Dr. Kristina Johnson of Duke University told the subcommittee that she is a third generation engineer. “I had, therefore, extraordinary role models and mentors,” she said. “While every girl doesn’t have the benefit as I did of parents who convinced me I could be an excellent engineer, the principles behind my success should provide a road map for other young women and for programs to ensure they have the same vision I did,” she stated.
Dr. Johnson made two recommendations to overcome the barriers to women in the technological fields: “toughen expectations and double the budget of the National Science Foundation (NSF).” She explained, “We need to require all our college-bound students to take math through trigonometry and advanced algebra, if not calculus, and one course each in biology, chemistry, and physics as a requirement for high school graduation.” She also credited the NSF with doubling the number of women in the technological fields over the past decade.
Additionally, Dr. Johnson remarked that, in the 1970s, 300,000 girls and women were involved in sports. Today, as a result of Title IX, there are 3 million. “Maybe there’s a link to Title IX,” she speculated. “Wouldn’t it be great if we could see the same advances in the academic world of science and engineering participation by women, as we have produced due to Title IX legislation,” she added.
Kay Koplovitz of Koplovitz and Company agreed. “Stand firm on Title IX,” she recommended. As a businesswoman and the founder of her own company, Ms. Koplovitz said she was in a state of disbelief in 1997 to learn that “a mere 1.7 percent of the venture capital, in a booming market, was going to this dynamic treasure trove of women entrepreneurs.” She decided to investigate “and find out why.” After numerous interviews with venture capitalists, “95 percent of whom are male,” she discovered that there “was a total disconnect.” She told the subcommittee, “Venture capitalists weren’t refusing women; they just weren’t looking for them.” At the same time, “women didn’t know about venture capital or where to find it,” she said.
As a result, she founded Springboard 2000, an organization dedicated to finding and training “women entrepreneurs with high growth technology driven companies.” The “annual percentage of venture capital invested in women-led firms more than tripled from 1997 to 2001 to nearly 6 percent of the total,” she reported. “While the progress is significant, it’s not nearly enough,” she said.
“What policymakers need to do is to ensure that the pipeline is nurtured and grows,” she advised. “Why should we trust the future growth of our country to only half the population?” she asked.
Nancy Stueber of the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry testified that, as a biologist, she has spend most of her career making science and technology accessible to people of all ages. “Half of those people are female,” she said.
To understand why girls are underrepresented in science and technology, she recommended consideration of “two factors that influence girls’ choices: experience and expectation.” She explained that girls need rich, hands-on science learning experiences, and those experiences must be “relevant to girls’ lives.” As an example, she cited “a recent engineering challenge to build a radio tower that could withstand a simulated earthquake.” She continued, “We found many boys, but few girls interested.” However, “when we switched the challenge to the design of an earthquake-proof room, the girls suddenly wanted to participate.”
“The expectations we set are equally important,” she said. “Girls will live up to the expectations we set for them. They need teachers trained in gender equity issues and female mentors and role models,” she added.
