Are women victims of a widespread bias in science and engineering, as a 2006 report of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) concluded? Or are there alternative explanations for the paucity of women in various quantitative fields? What, if anything, is to be done to encourage more women engineers and Listen to Audio
play pause

Download Audio as MP3 scientists? This conference, hosted and organized by AEI resident scholar Christina Hoff Sommers, will feature commissioned papers from several outstanding scholars and bring together thinkers from all sides of the debate.

The authors of the NAS report, "Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering," believe that the exclusion of many talented women from scientific fields is a threat to our nation's competitiveness. They urge universities and policymakers to tackle the science and math gender gap as a pressing national issue. According to the report, only sweeping changes in the culture and structure of academic science could lead to a larger representation of women in fields such as mathematics, computer science, engineering, and physics. Among the report's recommendations are workshops to educate federal and academic personnel about unconscious bias and how to combat it, and revisions to universities' criteria for determining academic advancement. The report also urges federal agencies to conduct stringent Title IX compliance reviews on relevant math, science, and engineering programs.

Critics of the NAS report argue that it endorses gender bias as the primary reason for the scarcity of women in the hard sciences without adequately considering alternative explanations. For example, a large and growing body of research suggests that men and women, on average, have different aptitudes and interests. They also note that the report relies on controversial research suggesting that women are victims of unconscious bias and held back by the psychological effects of "stereotype threat." Finally, critics assert that the report's recommendations would alter the culture and practice of science in fundamental ways--especially in such economically vital areas as electrical engineering and computer science, which are most aggressively targeted for change.