Other Publications

Women and Men of the Engineering Path: A Model for Analyses of Undergraduate Careers

by
Clifford Adelman

This monograph, by Clifford Adelman of the U.S. Department of Education's research and statistics division and a technical adviser to NISE's "College-Level I" project, was published jointly by U.S.E.D. and NISE.


Executive Summary

This monograph seeks to provide college academic administrators, institutional researchers, professional and learned societies, and academic advisers with a tapestry of information to improve their understanding of the paths students take through higher education. It begins with the observation that of those students who earn bachelor's degrees by age 30, 16 percent entered with no particular major in mind, and only 42 percent of the balance earned degrees in their intended field. These data indicate a considerable degree of student field migration.

The study demonstrates that migration rates are by-products of factors in students' choice of field, including curricular momentum and quality of academic performance carried forward from high school, the growing trend toward multi-institutional attendance, the nature of community college curricula for transfer students, credit loads and stop-out behavior, classroom experiences, changing student perceptions of the labor market, and student misconceptions of what given fields of study and occupations are all about.

Engineering was chosen as a case because it brings all the variables affecting choice, persistence, and migration into play. And because undergraduate engineering programs are offered in a limited number of institutions, we can offer a sharper primary story line about student history and choice. Engineering was also chosen because, while the overall "attrition" from the field is not high after students reach the "threshold" of the field, it is much higher for women than men, an unfortunate situation in a discipline with a historically severe gender imbalance.

The evidence used in Women and Men of the Engineering Path comes principally from the 11-year college transcript history (1982-1993) of the High School & Beyond/Sophomore Cohort Longitudinal Study (HS&B/So), as well as the high school transcripts, test scores, and surveys of this nationally representative sample.

This is the first national tracking study of students in any undergraduate discipline that identifies attempted major fields from the empirical evidence of college transcripts. A "curricular threshold" of engineering was defined, and the careers of students described with reference  to that threshold. While 16 long-term "destinations" of students who reached the threshold are identified, they are collapsed into four for purposes of analysis:

Selected Findings

Attendance Patterns and Degree Completion.

The Empirical Core Curriculum.

High School Backgrounds.

Choice and Attrition in Engineering.

Selected Major Findings

(1) Curricular momentum begins in secondary school, and sets up both trajectories and boundaries. Secondary school mathematics study is the key booster to these trajectories, with performance in trigonometry the gate to potential science or engineering majors in college. The trajectories accelerate and the boundaries become more defined in college. Curricular momentum explains why nearly half the students who leave engineering (the migrants) eventually earn bachelor's degrees in the physical sciences and computer science.

(2) There are considerable differences between engineering and science that confuse students in high school and eventually come into play in field migration. Engineering practice, as students discover only in time, involves clients (and all the ambiguities, cultural contexts, and negotiations that come with clients) far more than the practice of science, and client specifications lie at the core of engineering design. The differences in the culture and texture of engineering and science are highlighted in women's experience in both the college laboratory and the workplace.

(3) The metaphor of "paths" is a far more flexible and accurate way to describe student histories than "pipelines." We cannot micromanage choice, and judge a system to be deficient because students are constantly exploring, acquiring, and changing academic identity. "Pipelines" with "leaks" are convenient metaphors of institutional  policy, but they neglect both the texture of student histories and the nature of the paths students discover, sometimes with many detours. What we can do is to improve the signs along the pathways, and, in the case of women in engineering, improve the quality of instruction and professional sensitivity to women's minority status.

Conclusions

This monograph concludes with a number of suggestions for changing the image of engineering among high school students and potential college majors, particularly women. Given what we know of actual practices in different kinds of engineering workplaces, whatever negative views students have ought to be reexamined. There is just as much complexity and difference, joy and difficulty in the engineering workplace as there is in other occupations. Engineers are not a monolithic gang of boys "tinkering" in a technological "sandbox," and telling bad jokes abut incompetence. Foremost among the suggestions is that neither women nor men will choose engineering for the right reasons unless the profession can reach out to a broad population with a full portrait of the richness of its culture an practice, and with a clear map of its intersections with and divergences from bench science.

The study also concludes with suggestions to other disciplines for undertaking similar tracking studies , particularly in fields such as psychology or nursing, where men have been a distinct minority.


National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Copyright (c) 1999. The University of Wisconsin Board of Regents. All Rights Reserved.
Please send comments to: uw-wcer@education.wisc.edu
Last Updated:  May 05, 2003