Diversify the syllabi: Underrepresentation of female authors in college course readings

Abstract

Emerging evidence demonstrates that female-authored publications are not well represented in course readings in some fields, resulting in a syllabi gender gap. Lack of representation may decrease student awareness of opportunities in professional fields and disadvantage the career success of female academics. We contribute to the evidence on the syllabi gender gap by: 1) quantifying the extent to which female authors are represented in assigned course readings; 2) examining representation of female authors by gender of instructor and discipline; and 3) comparing female representation in syllabi with the workforce and with representation as authors of peer-reviewed journal articles. From a list of courses offered in 2018–2019 at Washington University in St. Louis, we selected a stratified random sample of course syllabi from four disciplines (humanities; social science; science, technology, engineering, and mathematics; and other). We coded the gender of course instructors and course reading authors using the genderize application programming interface. We examined representation of female authors at the reading, course, and discipline level using descriptive statistics and data visualization. The final sample included 2435 readings from 129 unique courses. The mean percentage of female authors per reading was 34.1%; 822 (33.8%) of readings were female-led (i.e., a female first or sole author). Female authorship varied by discipline, with the highest percentage of female-led readings in social science (40%). Female instructors assigned a higher percentage of readings with female first authors and readings with higher percentages of females on authorship teams. The representation of female authors on syllabi was lower than representation of females as authors in the peer-reviewed literature or in workforce. Adding to evidence of the syllabi gender gap, we found that female authors were underrepresented as sole and first authors and as members of authorship teams. Since assigned readings promote academic scholarship and influence workforce diversity, we recommend several strategies to diversify the syllabi through increasing awareness of the gap and improving access to female-authored publications.

The effect of mentee and mentor gender on scientific productivity of applicants for NIH training fellowships

“…Of the mentee/mentor dyads in our dataset, 94.1% of mentees and 90.09% of mentors had self-identified records of gender. Genderize (genderize.io) was used to assign gender to those without self-identified gender information, as done in previous studies [12, 27, 28]. The agreement between self-identified gender and Genderize was 98%, allowing confidence in using Genderize to populate the small portion of non-self-identified records.…”

Knowledge syntheses in medical education: Meta-research examining author gender, geographic location, and institutional affiliation

“…We recognize that our effort to predict gender is an oversimplification of a complicated social construct, especially because an individual's gender is best described by that individual. However, we believe this approach is a reasonable starting point to begin providing a sense of the field; it also follows the protocol of similar papers recently published on this topic [11,33].…”

“…We recognize that this binary approach is an important limitation of our study and that, as noted above, an individual's gender is best described by that individual. Based on a survey of the literature for similar studies [11,33], we believe a critical need for future research is work that aims to more accurately ascertain investigator gender.…”

Creando redes de mujeres en una disciplina masculinizada: el caso de la Red de Politólogas

“…1 A pesar de ello, durante mucho tiempo esto no se vió ni se denunció y la mayor parte de las investigaciones sobre la propia disciplina estuvieron carentes de perspectiva de género. Es recién hace algunos años que diversos trabajos de la academia anglosajona, europea y latinoamericana han denunciado la existencia de prácticas masculinas en la producción de conocimiento (Tatagiba et al, 2020;Freidenberg, 2019;Atchinson, 2018;Rocha-Carpiuc, 2016;Elizondo, 2016); en el desarrollo diferenciado de las carreras académicas (Rocha-Carpiuc y Machado Madeira, 2019); en la reproducción de sesgos implícitos de género respecto al papel de las mujeres en la docencia, la investigación o la práctica profesional (Bealieu et al, 2017; Verge Mestre y Alonso Álvarez, 2017; Martin, 2016); en lo que se enseña (Verge Mestre et al, 2018;) y a quiénes se incluyen como referencias en los programas de las asignaturas (Harris et al, 2020;Abels, 2016), en el ejercicio de la disciplina (como práctica profesional) y en el funcionamiento de las instituciones académicas.…”