Women in Engineering and Computer Science

  • Engineering
  • Thread starter I'm Awesome
  • Start date
  • #1
As a girl I worry about going into an engineering field. I'm concerned about job prospects for women or discrimination in the work place. I also worry that it might be strange to be a minority in a class of mostly men. I’d like to hear what some girls think if there’s any on here that know about this.
I’d like to hear what guys think about this too though.
I think I’d be interested in going into something like computer engineering, computer science or robotics.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
268
4
I’d like to hear what guys think about this too though.
I think their needs to be more girls in engineering, computer science, and mathematics. My classes in the university are mostly male. So it wouldn't surprise me if their is some discrimination going on.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
77
0
I think their needs to be more girls in engineering, computer science, and mathematics. My classes in the university are mostly male. So it wouldn't surprise me if their is some discrimination going on.
Just because your classes are mostly male doesn't mean there is discrimination "going on". From what I've heard it's easier to get into technical programs (undergrad) as a minority, in order to balance out the scales as much as possible. In terms of the work place, I have no idea but I think there was a thread about it in either the career guidance or academic guidance section not too long ago.
 
  • #4
chiro
Science Advisor
4,790
132
As a girl I worry about going into an engineering field. I'm concerned about job prospects for women or discrimination in the work place. I also worry that it might be strange to be a minority in a class of mostly men. I’d like to hear what some girls think if there’s any on here that know about this.
I’d like to hear what guys think about this too though.
I think I’d be interested in going into something like computer engineering, computer science or robotics.
Here in Australia, there is a huge push to get women in engineering, computer science, mathematics/statistics as well as some of the sciences not including biology and maybe chemistry.

They have scholarships which are quite lucrative as well for this at least where I live.

I don't know about the discrimination issue, but I imagine if you go to a decent company and show that you can do what you're hired to do, then you'll end up getting treated with the respect you deserve.

There are a lot of idiot males out there that laugh when they hear a women doing a 'man's' job, but that's not representative of the whole.

But yeah for classes, I imagine it would be tough considering the ratio and handling this might be a tough thing, but again at least in my country they do have support systems for women in doing these kinds of fields so you could always talk to these people and if you decide to do it and need to just talk to someone, you could do that.

My personal opinion is we need more women in these fields, and I am finding that slowly things are starting to even out more compared to say 50 (maybe even less!) years ago with the gender mix.
 
  • #5
member 392791
I think men just get defensive when there's a woman smarter than them in their presence. I for one love women smarter than me and I actively try to attract them because I know they'll be more successful than me :D

I'm a male gold digger! =)
 
  • #6
9
0
As a female in physics, I am definitely a minority, but I don't really feel strange about it, nor have I ever felt like I was being discriminated against. As previous posters said, there are many useful resources for us, from scholarships and REUs to student organizations and clubs to retain women in STEM fields. I say go for what interests you, and don't let anyone stop you (especially yourself).
 
  • #7
OldEngr63
Gold Member
732
51
Women get a lot of advantages in terms of hiring, to fill quotas, etc. Whether they feel strange or not is largely up to them. If they can deal with being the only female among a large group of men all day long every day, then they will do just fine. If they find that they have to socialize with the secretaries, this will usually hurt them. I have personally taught a number of women engineers who went on to very successful industrial careers in a wide variety of industries across the country. They were all highly capable, completely competent, relaxed, and able to hold their own in a discussion with any other engineer. I think this was the key to their success.
 
  • #8
335
14
As a phd in physics, I can say that being a woman in science/engineering can be very difficult. The STEM support groups are there for a reason. Ultimately, your best bet is to find a mentor in your desired field and ask them questions (SWE can help you out here if you have a local chapter, you should contact them). Many of the people who give advice on a message board might have no first hand experience with a topic but decide to weigh in anyway :)

Discrimination can, and certainly does happen both overt and covert, at least in academic physics. A PI for a postdoc told me flat out that if I was planning to have kids in the next few years (I'm in my early 30s) I was wasting his time and shouldn't bother with the position. I doubt men get told this.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
jk
146
0
In the larger companies I have worked at as a programmer, there is very little, if any, preferential treatment for women. All that the company cares about is that you can do the job, male or female.
 
  • #10
834
266
Honestly, I haven't seen anything that looked like overt or even subversive discrimination of women in engineering. I think too many women start this field, and then drop out for a variety of reasons that have little to do with the practice of engineering, and everything to do with finding something they enjoy more.

Heavy industry technical challenges (not just engineering, but also the technical and trade work) appeal to many men for much of the same reason that it appeals to boys. It's big, dirty, noisy, and potentially dangerous. This is exactly the sort of thing that turns off most women. I know a few women who work on water and waste-water plants. It is routine, dirty, noisy, and dangerous work with approximately 10% women or less on the plant floor. The closer you get to the office, the more likely it is you'll find more women.

I know women with engineering backgrounds, and most tend toward the management side of things as soon as they can get enough experience to legitimately take charge. I know only a very few who stick to the raw engineering side of things for year after year because they like it. Yet I know many men who seem to really enjoy the innovative and creative side of building bigger, smaller, or really efficient things.

Those who suggest that this is cultural miss an important point: I think there may be more to this than meets the eye.
 
  • #11
1,104
25
There are tons of programs for women in the sciences in engineering. At my undergrad university, they even got preferential treatment---guaranteed on campus housing for all four years.
 
  • #12
eri
1,034
20
As a girl I worry about going into an engineering field. I'm concerned about job prospects for women or discrimination in the work place. I also worry that it might be strange to be a minority in a class of mostly men. I’d like to hear what some girls think if there’s any on here that know about this.
I’d like to hear what guys think about this too though.
I think I’d be interested in going into something like computer engineering, computer science or robotics.
If you want to start somewhere where you won't be a minority, so at least you don't have to worry about discrimination from professors or other students, Smith College is the only women's college (or at least it was a few years ago) with an engineering program, and they also have good computer science and physics departments.

As a female physicist, I've experienced some discrimination, but it's nothing obvious that other people would easily pick up on. Not something a guy might notice he was even doing until it was pointed out to him - things like being assigned to teach only classes for non-majors despite having more experience than the people teaching higher-level classes and being ignored in faculty meetings. While professional organizations often have sessions at major conferences about sexism in the workplace and how to avoid discriminating against women and minorities while serving on hiring and tenure committees, the vast majority of the audience is always women and minorities. The people who need to hear it are the ones who never attend.
 
  • #13
jk
146
0
Honestly, I haven't seen anything that looked like overt or even subversive discrimination of women in engineering. I think too many women start this field, and then drop out for a variety of reasons that have little to do with the practice of engineering, and everything to do with finding something they enjoy more.
I wouldn't be so sure. Discrimination is rarely overt these days because of the threat of lawsuits. It is illegal.
Heavy industry technical challenges (not just engineering, but also the technical and trade work) appeal to many men for much of the same reason that it appeals to boys. It's big, dirty, noisy, and potentially dangerous. This is exactly the sort of thing that turns off most women. I know a few women who work on water and waste-water plants. It is routine, dirty, noisy, and dangerous work with approximately 10% women or less on the plant floor. The closer you get to the office, the more likely it is you'll find more women.
If I was a woman of child bearing age interested in having children sometime, I wouldn't work in an environment like that either . However, I wouldn't assume that is the case for most women
In a lot of the "older" engineering fields like civil, mechanical etc..there is a good old boy mentality that is unwelcoming to women. I would expect that would discourage women from continuing in that career path. A hostile work environment can be a form of discrimination.
I know women with engineering backgrounds, and most tend toward the management side of things as soon as they can get enough experience to legitimately take charge. I know only a very few who stick to the raw engineering side of things for year after year because they like it. Yet I know many men who seem to really enjoy the innovative and creative side of building bigger, smaller, or really efficient things.
I think there are many women who enjoy the "innovative and creative side" of building things as well.
Those who suggest that this is cultural miss an important point: I think there may be more to this than meets the eye.
You really should explain your reasoning when you make vague statements like that.
 
  • #14
32
1
In my experience, women get preference to men as far as getting jobs in Engineering. All the girls in my classes I know, even the ones who have sub-par GPA's got snatched up immediately when it came time to look for internships.
 
  • #15
OldEngr63
Gold Member
732
51
I once worked an accident investigation with a young woman assisting me (I am a man). When it was time to do the really dirty part of the job, climbing around among the coal dust covered piping that was left after the explosion, there was no question who was going to do that part of the investigation. I had to take two consecutive showers to get even half way clean after that. I think that there was definite discrimination involved in that assignment, but I knew better than to fight it.
 
  • #16
834
266
You really should explain your reasoning when you make vague statements like that.
I knew someone would question me on this. I'm about to write about some ugly realities that still infest our world: Read them if you dare.

Many graduates, men and women, emerge from the university with some really strange ideas of what engineering might be like. The problem is that their teachers are mostly professors and teaching assistants with very little on the job, hands-on, real-world experience.

So here they come, marching in to the work-force, thinking that they're going to do all sorts of really high tech supah-geeky gee-whiz math and physics stuff. Right now, there is another thread by a guy who wants to know if we engineers sit in our cubicles all day long and tinker with modeling software.

It's not like that. First, we adhere to the Keep It Simple, Stupid (KISS) principle. We want our projects to work the first time, not have to explain why some really ornate gee whiz gadgetry doesn't work. This appalls many recent graduates who seriously thought they would find themselves looking up solutions to differential equations to apply to a specific application. I can count the number of times that has happened over 25 years on my fingertips. Most of us learn rules of thumb to keep things simple and comprehensible.

Note that I'm not saying we never use this math or that it is bad. Those rules of thumb have limits, and it is imperative that the engineer know what those limits are. But all that said, we try to stay within the territory where these rules apply mostly because of the KISS principle.

Second, many recent graduates are either shocked or pleasantly surprised to find themselves working right in the middle of the action. Here's the deal: Rarely do we ever get a clean sheet design. It is always useful to visit the customer's site, interview the technical staff, look at the equipment currently in use, and do a bit of reverse engineering to figure out how things are actually working.

Third, when things start going weird, people will call with questions. You won't be able to help much unless you've at least been there on site enough to know exactly how things are configured.

What this all adds up to is that a lot of engineering work is not and should not be an office sport. The stuff they teach in a university is heavy on theory, and very light on practice.

In a practical sense, you are going to get dirty. You are probably going to see some high energy and potentially hazardous stuff. It's your job to know what the limits of the equipment are, and what is supposed to happen when it breaks. There can be significant stress. The environment may have hidden dangers. Nobody tells you this while you're studying in the university.

Is there discrimination against women? I haven't seen it. If anything, we give the ladies the latitude to opt out of the more physical work, such as climbing a tower or entering an underground vault. Of the women I have known in technical and engineering endeavors, most move on to other things after less than 5 years on the job. Meanwhile their male colleagues continue for a decade or more. Whether this is for biological, social, or perhaps emotional reasons, I don't know.

Allow me to point out that even raising a family isn't an issue in our company. We have the same leave policies for both parents. I took advantage of it for each of my children when they were born, and I do my share of going on field trips with my kids, picking them up when they're sick, and so on. The issue of child rearing today is not all that different for mothers or fathers (at least where I work). Yet, even in an environment like this, we still see a tendency for women to shy away from engineering.

I think there is something about physical, dirty, and potentially hazardous work sites that tends to discourage women and attract men. That's where a lot of engineering happens. I wish I could say exactly what it is that we could change that might attract more women, because I wouldn't mind seeing more balance in a workplace like this.

But those are the facts as I've seen them for the last 25 years. I am the father of two daughters, and a son. My oldest daughter still thinks my work is pretty cool even though she just became a teenager. Of my three children, I think she is most likely to take after me and I would like to see her do it. Nevertheless, I also know that there are some things we simply can't socialize over. There still are differences between men and women. Although we must not discriminate, we'd be fools to pretend that we're exactly alike.
 
  • #17
jk
146
0
I knew someone would question me on this. I'm about to write about some ugly realities that still infest our world: Read them if you dare.

Many graduates, men and women, emerge from the university with some really strange ideas of what engineering might be like. The problem is that their teachers are mostly professors and teaching assistants with very little on the job, hands-on, real-world experience.

So here they come, marching in to the work-force, thinking that they're going to do all sorts of really high tech supah-geeky gee-whiz math and physics stuff. Right now, there is another thread by a guy who wants to know if we engineers sit in our cubicles all day long and tinker with modeling software.

It's not like that. First, we adhere to the Keep It Simple, Stupid (KISS) principle. We want our projects to work the first time, not have to explain why some really ornate gee whiz gadgetry doesn't work. This appalls many recent graduates who seriously thought they would find themselves looking up solutions to differential equations to apply to a specific application. I can count the number of times that has happened over 25 years on my fingertips. Most of us learn rules of thumb to keep things simple and comprehensible.
One should be careful when extrapolating from one's experience. It depends on the job. I can name specific cases where engineers were actually sitting at desks all day designing or tweaking designs. One friend basically spent his first job out of college picking parts out of a catalog. Another friend worked on a factory floor but most of his work was on a computer. A civil engineer friend did work outdoors about half his time but the other half was spent writing reports. Another friend, a control engineer, spends most of his time travelling to various plants around the world supervising the installation and maintenance of control equipment. In a lot of the cases, the hard, dangerous work is done by people who are called technicians.
Note that I'm not saying we never use this math or that it is bad. Those rules of thumb have limits, and it is imperative that the engineer know what those limits are. But all that said, we try to stay within the territory where these rules apply mostly because of the KISS principle.
I would venture to guess that those "rules of thumb" were in some part derived from a more systematic study of the problem.
Second, many recent graduates are either shocked or pleasantly surprised to find themselves working right in the middle of the action. Here's the deal: Rarely do we ever get a clean sheet design. It is always useful to visit the customer's site, interview the technical staff, look at the equipment currently in use, and do a bit of reverse engineering to figure out how things are actually working.

Third, when things start going weird, people will call with questions. You won't be able to help much unless you've at least been there on site enough to know exactly how things are configured.

What this all adds up to is that a lot of engineering work is not and should not be an office sport. The stuff they teach in a university is heavy on theory, and very light on practice.
The idea is to give you a broad enough base on which to build.
In a practical sense, you are going to get dirty. You are probably going to see some high energy and potentially hazardous stuff. It's your job to know what the limits of the equipment are, and what is supposed to happen when it breaks. There can be significant stress. The environment may have hidden dangers. Nobody tells you this while you're studying in the university.
No reason why this can only be done by men
Is there discrimination against women? I haven't seen it. If anything, we give the ladies the latitude to opt out of the more physical work, such as climbing a tower or entering an underground vault. Of the women I have known in technical and engineering endeavors, most move on to other things after less than 5 years on the job. Meanwhile their male colleagues continue for a decade or more. Whether this is for biological, social, or perhaps emotional reasons, I don't know.
If I was a woman, I would find that extremely patronizing.
Allow me to point out that even raising a family isn't an issue in our company. We have the same leave policies for both parents. I took advantage of it for each of my children when they were born, and I do my share of going on field trips with my kids, picking them up when they're sick, and so on. The issue of child rearing today is not all that different for mothers or fathers (at least where I work). Yet, even in an environment like this, we still see a tendency for women to shy away from engineering.
Is it possible that you are confounding cause and effect here? Isn't it just possible that some women shy away from engineering because of not being treated equals by their male peers and supervisors?
I think there is something about physical, dirty, and potentially hazardous work sites that tends to discourage women and attract men. That's where a lot of engineering happens. I wish I could say exactly what it is that we could change that might attract more women, because I wouldn't mind seeing more balance in a workplace like this.
Your argument seems to be based on the assumption that engineering is physical, dirty or dangerous and that women avoid it for those reasons. This would be more convincing to me if women did not gravitate away from the non-physical, non-dirty and non-hazardous parts of engineering. I am not sure that is the case
But those are the facts as I've seen them for the last 25 years. I am the father of two daughters, and a son. My oldest daughter still thinks my work is pretty cool even though she just became a teenager. Of my three children, I think she is most likely to take after me and I would like to see her do it. Nevertheless, I also know that there are some things we simply can't socialize over. There still are differences between men and women. Although we must not discriminate, we'd be fools to pretend that we're exactly alike.
No one is saying that we are exactly alike but no one has proven that the differences, whatever they may be, are sufficient to account for the huge disparity in the number of men and women who make it in engineering. You seem to be making the case that the disparity is due to biology but you never come out and say it so I can not be sure.
It is very hard to separate the effects of socialization and biology. It may not even be possible to complete separate them and say that this part is due to social upbringing and that part due to nature. This is an age-old question.
By the way, the fact that you have daughters does not mean that you don't have preconceived notions. Fathers tend to be more protective of their daughters than their sons in my experience.
 
  • #18
jk
146
0
I once worked an accident investigation with a young woman assisting me (I am a man). When it was time to do the really dirty part of the job, climbing around among the coal dust covered piping that was left after the explosion, there was no question who was going to do that part of the investigation. I had to take two consecutive showers to get even half way clean after that. I think that there was definite discrimination involved in that assignment, but I knew better than to fight it.
For every story like yours, I bet I can find a case where a woman working in a technical field was barred from doing something she is capable of because of discrimination.
 
  • #19
As a guy from a mechanical engineering program, I can say that the few women we had in our classes were treated the same as anyone else. I had been involved in a few group projects with women in the group and nobody ever questioned what parts of the project they should get based on sex. Same goes for the work environments I've been in. The only time a woman gets criticized for incompetence is when they deserve it, but it works the same way for the men too.

People can't avoid unfairness in life, regardless of the context. The successful ones shrug it off and push forward.

check this out too:
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/10/eleven_women_with_kettering_un.html
 
  • #20
there IS discrimination going on. check out the physics today article
 
  • #21
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616
there IS discrimination going on. check out the physics today article
Linky please?
 
  • #22
http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v65/i2/p47_s1 [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
chiro
Science Advisor
4,790
132
http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v65/i2/p47_s1 [Broken]
I don't doubt that physics, which the writer of the article implies is a 'male' field to be in has a lot of bias and discrimination which needs to be addressed, but my question to you is this:

When it comes to tenure, promotions, doing talks and all the rest of it, should you treat women exactly the same as you treat men?

The reason for asking this is because if someone was going to choose between and a man and woman where the man was beyond driven working crazy hours in the lab and the woman who is still an extroadinarily hard worker who matches the male in work history, determination and smarts wants to take some time off to have a baby and raise her children, then who would be chosen?

Being the kind of environment that science can be (and in many respects is), the woman would probably lose her opportunities for promotion even in a case where a lot of the bias and discrimination has been removed.

As the article said, many male physicists are married to women who are uneducated or earn lower incomes. I don't know, but it seems to me that the physicists want to work on physics and avoid the kinds of things like spending time to raise children and so forth. I don't want to paint everything with one brush, but does that conjecture make sense?

So in conclusion my question is: should women be treated exactly like men considering the above kind of scenario and if not/why not? I'm interested to hear a woman's perspective on this over a mans because we can only conjecture what women are thinking, but it makes sense to me to just get the answer from the horses mouth (if you aren't familiar with expressions then google that: I'm not calling you a horse!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
YES you SHOULD treat women the same.

Say a women physicist has a child with her husband that she didn't want. She's not going to give up the baby because it's her obligation and responsibility. Because she is a RESPONSIBLE, and INTELLIGENT woman, means men in her field have an advantage over her.
Just because a woman carries the baby in her womb, also, doesn't mean that men can just leave their children with the mother like it's not his responsibility, ya know?
I think society just sort of created this idea that men can just leave the children with the women. That's just some paradigm, not necessarily right.

So a male physicist, gets his wife pregnant and DOESN'T take responsibility and expects his wife to 'deal with' the child. It's just as much his obligation as it is hers. And he gets certain advantages over a woman who has a child.

and if women are discriminated against in this field, you are just going to push them away from it! we need more women in this field. the paradigm needs to be shifted.

and yes, i'm very biased towards women, since I am one and am in the physics field and particularly annoyed with your question: should women be treated exactly like men?
yes they should.

everyone should just be treated like a person in that field. let their work define what kind of advantages they get.

say that woman in physics with the baby returns to work, making up for everything, and working that many times harder..doing a better job than her male colleagues.. and then the men get MORE benefits, simply for being a male?

do you understand?
sorry this reply is so hastily written
 
  • #25
chiro
Science Advisor
4,790
132
YES you SHOULD treat women the same.

Say a women physicist has a child with her husband that she didn't want. She's not going to give up the baby because it's her obligation and responsibility. Because she is a RESPONSIBLE, and INTELLIGENT woman, means men in her field have an advantage over her.
Just because a woman carries the baby in her womb, also, doesn't mean that men can just leave their children with the mother like it's not his responsibility, ya know?
I think society just sort of created this idea that men can just leave the children with the women. That's just some paradigm, not necessarily right.

So a male physicist, gets his wife pregnant and DOESN'T take responsibility and expects his wife to 'deal with' the child. It's just as much his obligation as it is hers. And he gets certain advantages over a woman who has a child.

and if women are discriminated against in this field, you are just going to push them away from it! we need more women in this field. the paradigm needs to be shifted.

and yes, i'm very biased towards women, since I am one and am in the physics field and particularly annoyed with your question: should women be treated exactly like men?
yes they should.

everyone should just be treated like a person in that field. let their work define what kind of advantages they get.

say that woman in physics with the baby returns to work, making up for everything, and working that many times harder..doing a better job than her male colleagues.. and then the men get MORE benefits, simply for being a male?

do you understand?
sorry this reply is so hastily written
The above was not to do with the fact that the woman had a child: it's got more to do the with the fact that this activity will affect her work.

It's like a business being in the situation where an employee gets injured at work and gets a lot of time off, but the employer has to pay for the benefits as well as the extra wages for the new guy that replaced them.

The employer in the above situation would if they could just get on with what they do and hire someone new.

Just as this situation has come into the radar of small and large businesses, so too I imagine will the whole maternity and other related issues in the scientific sector and maternity issues are starting to be dealt out of force especially by big companies.

It's not because your a women, it's simply because with all things weighed together, the other scientist with more dedication to their work and probably with things that are based on luck are going to prevail.

This is the real world: this is what happens. It's going to depend ultimately on the kind of job, the culture and environment of the workplace (and possibly industry as a whole) as well as on the existing policies, but it's not really hard to understand in terms of the employers bottom line why this happens to both men and women.

Politically though this kind of thing is paraded every chance that a business or government department can get for publiuc brownie points in terms of hiring people with disabilities or loudly saying about all the maternity, paternity, and other benefits that a company produces but at the end of the day if it hits them too hard they will find a way to make it go away.

I would imagine that if the male physicist ended up a situation that greatly affected his work and 10 people who are just as capable and just as hard working where in the mix, the guy would lose out if you take all the random crap that goes in to selecting applicants.

But having said the above, it would be foolish to deny that discrimination still exists between men and women but even then you need to consider what the employer/grant funder/person who makes hiring decision has to do.
 

Related Threads on Women in Engineering and Computer Science

  • Last Post
3
Replies
50
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
722
Replies
96
Views
26K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
763
Replies
1
Views
718
Top