Introduction: pipeline break

H. Etzkowitz, H. Smith, C. Henry, A. Poulovassilis
{"title":"Introduction: pipeline break","authors":"H. Etzkowitz, H. Smith, C. Henry, A. Poulovassilis","doi":"10.4337/9781786438973.00007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We are now at the cusp of attaining the conditions needed for gender equality and equity in academic science. However, traditional academic science cultures are high walls, and those barriers have not yet fully been breached. Women now can enter many previously male-dominated academic fields but are still under-represented in higher positions. The socalled ‘pipeline’ thesis – encourage entry at the lower levels on the premise that with time, the increase will filter up to the higher levels – has led to the founding of numerous programmes and projects to encourage girls and young women to engage with science, technology and mathematics. An ‘assisted pipeline’ has worked up to and including PhD programmes and entry level positions in many academic science fields. However, it has been noted that the pipeline is ‘leaky’, with women being lost in ever greater proportions as they ascend the academic ladder (mixing metaphors). Indeed, their paucity at advanced levels is so great, with little ‒ if any ‒ improvement over the past 30 years, that it has been held that the pipeline is broken (see Etzkowitz et al., Chapter 19 in this volume). As Paula England (2010) has argued more broadly, the gender revolution has ‘stalled’. A simple funnel mechanism, an educational system attached to a pipeline with a ‘capillary action’ flow, propelling upward mobility of individuals expected to rise by virtue of increased input, has failed to produce equity, let alone equality. Instead, it has transmogrified into a mechanical model of an engine that has seized up and stopped running, at least temporarily, and is in stasis. In a ground vehicle, such as an automobile, a stall is inconvenient but not usually fatal unless a following vehicle runs into the stopped one. The academic system has proved resistant and resilient in the face of pressures to change. It bends, accepting gender research programmes, and is resilient, promoting relatively few female scientists, who generally accept the male model of science, thus keeping the existing system intact. Nevertheless, there are men and women scientists who attempt to innovate a female ‘family friendly’ model, balancing work and life with a private sphere, that an increasing number of","PeriodicalId":192255,"journal":{"name":"Gender, Science and Innovation","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gender, Science and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786438973.00007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We are now at the cusp of attaining the conditions needed for gender equality and equity in academic science. However, traditional academic science cultures are high walls, and those barriers have not yet fully been breached. Women now can enter many previously male-dominated academic fields but are still under-represented in higher positions. The socalled ‘pipeline’ thesis – encourage entry at the lower levels on the premise that with time, the increase will filter up to the higher levels – has led to the founding of numerous programmes and projects to encourage girls and young women to engage with science, technology and mathematics. An ‘assisted pipeline’ has worked up to and including PhD programmes and entry level positions in many academic science fields. However, it has been noted that the pipeline is ‘leaky’, with women being lost in ever greater proportions as they ascend the academic ladder (mixing metaphors). Indeed, their paucity at advanced levels is so great, with little ‒ if any ‒ improvement over the past 30 years, that it has been held that the pipeline is broken (see Etzkowitz et al., Chapter 19 in this volume). As Paula England (2010) has argued more broadly, the gender revolution has ‘stalled’. A simple funnel mechanism, an educational system attached to a pipeline with a ‘capillary action’ flow, propelling upward mobility of individuals expected to rise by virtue of increased input, has failed to produce equity, let alone equality. Instead, it has transmogrified into a mechanical model of an engine that has seized up and stopped running, at least temporarily, and is in stasis. In a ground vehicle, such as an automobile, a stall is inconvenient but not usually fatal unless a following vehicle runs into the stopped one. The academic system has proved resistant and resilient in the face of pressures to change. It bends, accepting gender research programmes, and is resilient, promoting relatively few female scientists, who generally accept the male model of science, thus keeping the existing system intact. Nevertheless, there are men and women scientists who attempt to innovate a female ‘family friendly’ model, balancing work and life with a private sphere, that an increasing number of
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
简介:管道断裂
我们现在正处于实现学术科学中的性别平等和公平所需条件的风口浪尖。然而,传统的学术科学文化是一堵高墙,这些壁垒尚未完全被打破。女性现在可以进入许多以前男性主导的学术领域,但在更高的职位上仍然不足。所谓的“管道”理论——鼓励较低层次的人进入,前提是随着时间的推移,这种增长将会渗透到较高的层次——已经导致了许多鼓励女孩和年轻女性参与科学、技术和数学的计划和项目的建立。一个“辅助管道”已经发展到包括许多学术科学领域的博士课程和入门级职位。然而,有人指出,这条管道是“漏水的”,随着女性在学术阶梯上的上升,越来越多的人失去了女性(混合隐喻)。事实上,他们在高级水平上的缺乏是如此之大,在过去的30年里几乎没有任何改善,以至于有人认为管道已经断裂(见Etzkowitz等人,本卷第19章)。正如Paula England(2010)更广泛地指出的那样,性别革命已经“停滞”。一个简单的漏斗机制,一个与“毛细管作用”流动的管道相连的教育系统,推动个人的向上流动,期望通过增加投入而上升,但未能产生公平,更不用说平等了。相反,它已经变成了一个引擎的机械模型,它已经停止运转,至少暂时停止运转,处于停滞状态。在地面车辆中,如汽车,失速是不方便的,但通常不是致命的,除非后面的车辆撞上了停下来的车辆。事实证明,面对变革的压力,学术体系具有抵抗力和弹性。它屈服了,接受了性别研究项目,并且具有弹性,提拔了相对较少的女性科学家,她们通常接受男性的科学模式,从而保持了现有系统的完整。然而,也有男女科学家试图创新一种女性“家庭友好”模式,平衡工作和生活与私人领域,越来越多的人
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Introduction: pipeline break Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Commercialization Networking, Mentoring and Support Gender Cultures and Institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1