The culture of engineering: Woman, workplace and machine

Hacker, Sally L.

doi:10.1016/s0148-0685(81)96559-3

Cited by 95 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Female Gender Socio-Cultural Norms and Values N Emotional or relational thinking and social complexity (Hacker, 1981) N Nurturing, people-oriented, wish to benefit society (Eccles, 2006) N Collaboration instead of competition (Baron-Cohen, 2002;Seymour, 1995) N Dislike of aggressive, self-promotion (Wolfe and Powell, 2009) The primarily indirect, group-oriented style exhibited by girls in Group 1 fits with the traditionally ''feminine'' prioritization of group process over the end product, as outlined in earlier gender research. Lower-than-average post-test content knowledge gains for this group support this assertion (see Figure 12).…”

Section: Group Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Male Gender Socio-Cultural Norms and Values N Value technological and mathematical competence and rational thinking (Hacker, 1981) N Perception that engineering success is contingent on acquisition of organizational power (Mcllwee & Robinson, 1992) N Disapproval of weakness or admission of mistakes in others (Wolfe & Powell, 2009) N Focus on tasks instead of group processes (Johnson & Schulman, 1989) The group dynamics exhibited by males in the boys-only group seems to fit with traditionally ''male'' values as outlined through earlier research. The boys worked in a more hierarchical manner and made overt attempts to gain control of the design process.…”

Section: Group Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…A field traditionally dominated by men, engineering culture has been described as ''stress[ing] the acquisition of organizational power '' and ''requir[ing] that interest in technology and organizational power be interactionally 'presented' in the appropriate form -a form closely tied to the male gender role'' (Mcllwee & Robinson, 1992, p. 19). Others have described engineering as fostering a patriarchal culture that places value on ''male'' traits and values (such as rationality and competence) instead of ''female'' traits and values, such as emotional or relational thinking and social complexity (Hacker, 1981). A perception that engineering culture places high value on power and masculinity may cause women to overlook engineering as a career.…”

Section: Gender Gaps In Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

‘‘Can I drop it this time?’’ Gender and Collaborative Group Dynamics in an Engineering Design-Based Afterschool Program

Schnittka¹,

Schnittka²

2016

Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 21st century has brought an increasing demand for expertise in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). Although strides have been made towards increasing gender diversity in several of these disciplines, engineering remains primarily male dominated. In response, the U.S. educational system has attempted to make engineering curriculum more engaging, informative, and welcoming to girls. Specifically, project-based and design-based learning pedagogies promise to make engineering interesting and accessible for girls while enculturating them into the world of engineering and scientific inquiry. Outcomes for girls learning in these contexts have been mixed. The purpose of this study was to explore how cultural gender norms are navigated within informal K-12 engineering contexts. We analyzed video of single-and mixed-gender collaborative groups participating in Studio STEM, a design-based, environmentally themed afterschool program that took place in a rural community. Discourse analysis was used to interpret interactional styles within and across groups. Discrepancies were found regarding functional and cultural characteristics of groups based on gender composition. Singlegender groups adhered more closely to social gender norms. For example, the boys group was characterized by overt hierarchies, whereas the girls group outwardly displayed solidarity and collaboration. In contrast, characteristics of interactional styles within mixed gender groups strayed from social gender norms, and stylistic differences across group types were greater for girls than for boys. Learning outcomes indicated that girls learned more in mixed-gender groups. Our results support the use of mixed-gender collaborative learning groups in engineering education yet uncover several challenges. We close with a discussion of implications for practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Group Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Group Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Gender Gaps In Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

‘‘Can I drop it this time?’’ Gender and Collaborative Group Dynamics in an Engineering Design-Based Afterschool Program

Schnittka¹,

Schnittka²

2016

Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their families, moreover, support girls' entry into science and engineering for its earning potential, prestige for the family, and improved marriageability. Other explanations for varying levels of women's presence in IT careers look at the workplace itself, and how organizational dynamics create barriers for women technical workers and researchers (Hacker 1981;McIlwee and Robinson 1992;Scott-Dixon 2004;Woodfield 2000). This latter approach is the one I take, as I'm interested in the barriers that are embedded in organizational practices-written and unwritten, formalized and informal-in policy and in everyday practice.…”

Section: Diverging Trends In India and The United Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Not only are they more male-dominated than other types of firms but they also tend to be governed by "cultures of engineering" in which male technical prowess is an organizing principle for social relations (Burris 1993;Hacker 1981;McIlwee and Robinson 1992;Wajcman 1991;Wajcman 2004). The following project seeks to expand on this important theoretical field to address the implications of these cultures of engineering in an increasingly global era.…”

Section: Introduction: Women In Engineering and Itmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global circuits of gender: women and high-tech work in India and the United States

Poster¹

2013

Gender, Sexuality &Amp; Feminism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the experiences of women in engineering and technology careers in an increasingly transnational era. It draws from an interview study, conducted during the early stages of the global high-tech industry, with over 180 women and men IT personnel in three organizational settings: a major Silicon Valley computer firm, its multinational subsidiary in India, and a local Indian IT firm. The IT industry, I find, has created new avenues of employment for women transnationally, but with variable tradeoffs. Surprisingly, the masculine "cultures of engineering" often noted in the US literature are weaker in the Indian cases. These women face less questioning of their technical competence and gain greater access to jobs such as engineering. In the US case, however, women workers are more likely to become IT managers and receive comparable wages to their male colleagues. I situate these findings in the contextual politics of information technology in Indian and US societies, and their contradictory effects in both drawing women into the IT workforce and excluding them from organizational power. Furthermore, I use the multinational case to explore what happens in the global circuits between these sites, and if they undermine or exacerbate various hostile environments for women.

show abstract

Undergraduate students' espoused beliefs about different approaches to engineering design decisions

Guanes

Leonard

Dringenberg

2023

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEngineers are socialized to value rational approaches to problem solving. A lack of awareness of how engineers use different decision‐making approaches is problematic because it perpetuates the ongoing development of inequitable engineering designs and contributes to a lack of inclusion in the field. Although researchers have explored how engineering students are socialized, further work is needed to understand students' beliefs about different decision‐making approaches.Purpose/HypothesisWe explored the espoused beliefs of undergraduate students about technical, empathic, experience‐based, and guess‐based approaches to engineering design decisions.Design/MethodWe conducted semistructured one‐on‐one interviews with 20 senior engineering students at the conclusion of their capstone design experience. We used a combination of deductive and inductive data condensation approaches to generate categories of beliefs.ResultsWe identified a total of nine categories of beliefs, organized by approach. Although students' espoused beliefs did reflect the emphasis on technical approaches present in their socialization, they also described technical approaches as limited and overvalued.ConclusionThe landscape of beliefs presented make explicit both the challenges and the opportunities that students' beliefs play as the backdrop for any efforts of engineering educators to develop engineers as effective and equitable engineering designers.

show abstract

The culture of engineering: Woman, workplace and machine

Cited by 95 publications

References 3 publications

‘‘Can I drop it this time?’’ Gender and Collaborative Group Dynamics in an Engineering Design-Based Afterschool Program

‘‘Can I drop it this time?’’ Gender and Collaborative Group Dynamics in an Engineering Design-Based Afterschool Program

Global circuits of gender: women and high-tech work in India and the United States

Undergraduate students' espoused beliefs about different approaches to engineering design decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About