The Maneater

Study indicates gender divide in US schools, colleges

Researchers from the University of Toronto report several factors contribute to lopsided male to female ratios in schools of study.

Published Aug. 26, 2011

A strong focus on male athletics. A faculty with more male than female instructors. A pre-professional emphasis as opposed to a liberal arts education.

These factors, tested and analyzed by researchers from the University of Toronto earlier this year, indicate a likelihood of gender divides in undergraduate schools.

According to the study conducted by Toronto graduate student Jayne Baker and professor Ann Mullen, though overall female college enrollment is higher than male, women typically flock to certain areas of study.

The study indicates that schools with a strong focus on male athletics also have stronger gender divides in academic programs than those where male athletics are not valued to the same degree.

“We were certainly surprised at the degree to which gender segregation varies across the institutions in our sample,” Baker said in an email. “And, of course, the findings about football are really intriguing, and we hope to try to uncover just what it is about football-focused institutions that may influence students’ decision-making.”

According to the fall 2010 enrollment summary, 91.2 percent of MU social work students were female, and 86.5 percent of engineering students were male.

School of Social Work Director of Undergraduates Kalea Benner said stereotypes about the profession may repel males without close ties to the field.

“Some of what brings men into the program is having knowledge of the social work professionals who have been in the role of helping themselves and their families in school settings, hospital settings where they have been able to identify with a professional social worker and the role that the social worker plays,” she said. “I think having a mentor in the profession is significant for many of our students.”

Baker said research indicates universities should work with students and inform them about all types of fields in order to avoid gender divides between majors.

“Universities should consider looking at the kind of culture that is created on their campuses as a result of the features of the university, such as sports programs and female faculty positions,” she said. “This does seem to influence gender segregation in fields of study.”

The idea that well-known, successful male sports teams draw students in to universities from a young age, Benner said, could contribute to the overall environment of the school.

“The emphasis on male athletics is a media emphasis as well as a university emphasis,” she said. “The publicity that the university receives as our football team is on TV six out of the next 12 Saturdays, that does make an impact on students as they’re watching and wanting to be here. I think the university does a nice job of supporting women’s athletics, but there’s nowhere near the publicity generated, or the income generated, by those sports.”

Other factors the study indicated lead to stronger gender barriers included fewer female professors and staff leaders and the curricular focus of the institution.

Baker said the results of the study are alarming because females consistently make only 80 percent of the salary of their male counterparts, a number that drops off to 69 percent by 10 years after graduation.

“We should be concerned if institutions are somehow contributing to men and women earning their degrees in different, sex-typed majors, because of what we know about the gender wage gap and occupational segregation,” she said in an email.

Benner said students should take advantage of resources provided at the MU Student Center and base their decisions for study not off of what their peers and parents say or gender guidelines.

“We do have a number of men who come in and are very successful in their academics as well as in the profession,” she said. “Social work is a profession where it’s service-oriented and oriented toward helping others and making sure people can maximize their potential. I think that can appeal to a number of people, regardless of gender.”

Comments (3)

10:54 a.m., Aug. 26, 2011

Thomas Woodrow said:

I'm amazed at how many college women choose career fields like social work, sociology and art that have dismal pay prospects. Men tend to shy away from those fields en masse. Couldn't help but chuckle how the social work professor tries to plug one of the lowest paying fields in America as "maximizing" one's potential. One should not go into a low paying field and then mumble about gender being the cause of one's poverty, when in fact it was the choice of career fields that induced the sorry earnings prospects.

8:48 a.m., Aug. 31, 2011

Kathlene Mullens said:

Mr. Woodrow: If women were supported by faculty and staff in other academic disciplines, perhaps they would choose those career fields more often. When there are not female professors (or even TA's), women are less likely to be comfortable in those disciplines. The issues with gender bias by field start early in education- into high school and before- where women are often herded into lower-paying fields. Women must be encouraged and supported- as men already are- to pursue STEM careers. http://campustechnology.com/articles/2010/03/23/colleges-professors-discourage-women-from-pursuing-stem-careers.aspx Regards, Kathlene

9:54 a.m., Aug. 31, 2011

August said:

Read that comment with more care, perhaps you will understand it better. "Social work is a profession where it’s service-oriented and oriented toward helping others and making sure people can maximize their potential." "Couldn't help but chuckle how the social work professor tries to plug one of the lowest paying fields in America as "maximizing" one's potential." She is not trying to "plug" her major but describing the goal of her profession. From your post I gather that it is difficult for you to understand a value that is not a dollar sign. It is true, many young women choose majors that satisfy an urge to create, educate or enrich the lives of others while also earning a living. The jobs they are qualified for, while being some of the most important, are frequently some of the lowest paying. Does this mean they were foolish to choose to be teachers, artists or social workers? Or that our system is foolish for paying, say, a sports commentator so much more when they offer so much less to society as a whole?

Post a comment