Women are well known to suffer to get ahead in the sciences, especially in domains where there is considerable under-representation of female scientists. The scale of the problem was underlined by recent research from Washington University in St. Louis, which showed that female authors were under-represented sole and first authors on papers.
This under-representation in authored works then ensures that female-authored publications are under-represented in course readings in various fields.
“Women are underrepresented as authors on course materials across disciplines, limiting the exposure of students to women experts,” the researchers say. “And it is completely fixable. This paper helps to increase awareness of the disparity, so instructors can intentionally create a more equitable reading list.”
Unequal attribution
The researchers examined a list of courses that were available at Washington University during the 2018-19 term. The courses covered social science; humanities; science, technology, engineering and mathematics; and other.
The instructors and reading authors for each course were coded according to their gender using the genderize application programming interface. This allowed the researchers to explore the representation of female authors at the reading, course, and discipline level.
In total, the researchers assessed 2,435 readings from 129 courses. On average, there were 34.1% female authors per reading, with 33.8% of the readings being female-led. This varied considerably by discipline, with 40% of papers in social sciences produced by female authors.
This was then reflected in the readings on each course, with female instructors assigning a higher percentage of readings with female-first authors. The representation of female authors on syllabi was lower than representation of females as authors in the peer-reviewed literature or in the workforce.
“Adding to evidence of the syllabi gender gap, we found that female authors were underrepresented as sole and first authors and as members of authorship teams,” the researchers say. “Since assigned readings promote academic scholarship and influence workforce diversity, we recommend several strategies to diversify the syllabi through increasing awareness of the gap and improving access to female-authored publications.”
To aid faculty in identifying readings by underrepresented groups more easily, the authors recommend the development of reading collections that faculty can draw from.
“These collections could ideally be housed in a central location, perhaps on discipline-specific professional association websites or discipline neutral locations like the website for The Chronicle of Higher Education,” the authors conclude.
