Talking about Leaving

Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences

Reactions to the Review: A Reality Check

I thought that the major points made correlated to my experience as an SME student...but that perhaps the reasons for "stick- to-it-ivenes" were general to any discipline...not just SME.

Even now (well into my postgraduate career), receiving praise is a primary motivator for me. I'm drawn to projects where I interact directly with the people who want and will eventually use my software, and I thrive on their positive feedback after each new release. And nothing slows me down more dramatically than the feeling that I'm the only one who cares whether and when a new tool is finished.

One can read all the books they want about gender differences and what does and doesn't affect why a student leaves a particular major or why more men are in the technical field and women in the liberal arts. The truth is plain and simple. If you are interested in computer science, the arts, psychology, etc. you just have to keep on trying regardless of the countless degrading insults you get from your peers and co-workers. No one but yourself is in charge of your future, no one is going to sit down and take the time to review the material with you, no one is going to get the degree for you, or even comfort you when things are going bad. In general man, woman, animal, alien...you are on your own...study hard and keep on trying.

Granted my opinion probably doesn't amount to anything more than a hill of beans since I'm not the top student in the University, but I'll be damned to leave my major because of "gender differences," the material increasing in difficulty, or leaving because I found an easy way out. Basically, I'm in for the long haul, and I hope the rest of you are in it too.

My reactions to the findings of the study were that I felt relieved in a sense that the real reasons students stayed with or changed their major were really not gender related but more related to the individuals ability to endure tough times through difficult material and "survive" it. Granted I never felt incompetent because I was a female, I never felt that because of my sex that that was the reason I couldn't grasp concepts. I generally have the misfortune of overdoing it with school work. I "read into" too many things that are as plain as day, and I usually don't learn my mistakes until the class and semester are over.

I know I should be more positive about myself, have more confidence in myself. It's just that every time I think I've got a concept down, along comes someone to tell me it's wrong.

I was not at all surprised by the results, but believe that it is absolutely essential to have good work that demonstrates them.

I did not switch, but I was about to quit! In my last attempt to survive, I talked to other people who gave me useful hints in coping strategies and survival skills. It worked, and I am still in the field... working on my coping strategies.

I say that 2nd, 3rd, and 4th items (confidence, persistence, assertiveness) are most important. I don't think if the 1st one (competence) applies to all successful men, but we as women think that we have to have it in order to have the rest. I believe it is true only to a certain limit.

I lost the 5th item (strong interest in the discipline) somewhere along the road, and my motivation for the 6th one (strong interest in the career) includes money.(I regret not getting into a medicine related field where one could eventually become self-employed with good income. In engineering, you always need to work in a team, know the politics of teaming, etc. but that is another issue.)

About the support system: I think if it is too wide, it would be superficial and has a negative impact. Usually nobody complains in a big group, and I would get the impression that they are all successful and I am the only one with problems, and tend to take the problems personally: I am not capable of this and that ... However, the gatherings will give you a chance to meet others and one can pick individuals out of the group and have a more intimate talk and relationship with them, a formal or informal mentoring or just friendship, and such support is absolutely necessary, and great! The only women I know who did not need such support were those whose fathers were professors and could give them the necessary support.

This has been my major problem: I would need my advisor's approval to become confident about my research, but he criticized and expected me to defend my work confidently! I did not know that this was his way with everybody, and I took his criticism too harsh and personal. I just thought that my work was all baseless and wrong. Well, now I see that I was wrong, and this was just his style of examining my work. He expected me to defend it strongly and prove to him that my work is good work. I expected him to be on my side and understanding and supportive and ... In a very hard way, I learned that my advisor is not my friend, is not my mentor, and is not there to support me as a person, but could only guide me with my research.

Now I see that a major part of getting Ph.D. is being able to defend your work, and just doing good work, even excellent work, is not good enough!

It is true that professors' and advisors' behavior is probably the same for all. Men take it as a hint to improve their work, and such criticism helps them succeed but some women take it as a strong signal of disapproval and discouragement and very personal. Interestingly, I used to think it was me from an Eastern culture with this problem. but I figured out that other women with similar problems come from diverse cultures and places in the world! So, it is more of a gender issue than a cultural issue.

I went through an E.E. program in college. The only women in the program made A's. If they only got B's, they dropped out. At the same time, there were guys that were happy just to have D's. I got a B in one electronics class and I did some heavy soul searching about dropping too. I didn't, but I did come close.

I eventually moved to MIS and CS style work because I could never perform at the level I expected of myself - even though I received the highest reviews. I really could not deal with the "failure" aspect of being more competent than my co-workers, but still feeling lost when it came to being effective at work. I think that this relates back to how much uncertainty a person can handle.

I tried to articulate this as the guys viewed things in terms of relative competence (i.e. am I better than the competition in the school?) while women viewed things in terms of absolute competence (i.e. do I know the material well enough to make the grade?).

Women do things for the praise. Depending on teachers for performance assessment and feedback is a detriment in our current academic structure for women.

I would also have to say that it isn't just assertiveness that makes the women stay in the industry after graduation. It is the women who can understand (even if they don't join) another culture that are the most successful. There are many women who turn into bristly porcupines after graduation, not because they aren't competent, but because socializing with men requires a strong enough self-image that you can joke about your skill level in mixed company.

There were several things in your note that struck home.

Within the last 30 minutes, I have had two female students come to ask questions about the first course in Java. The first was very tentative; she had gotten her program to run in one lab, but for some reason, it wouldn't run in another. She was afraid to hand it in at the assigned time, basically because she was not confident in her abilities. I have been working with her all semester to try to get her to believe in herself.

The second student followed on her heels. This young woman had asked earlier about a problem with her program. She came in to announce that SHE HAD FOUND IT, and she was very proud of herself. She had confidence to keep trying.

The most successful women we have are very confident in their abilities. They may struggle, but they know that they can do it. They study hard and believe that they will succeed.

Most of our male CS majors are so confident that it flows from their pores! I do agree that confidence is one of the keys to retaining our females; the real question is how do we instill it?

I was surprised by your statement that "faculty are just as awful to men...". I had never thought of this, but it is true! We need a real attitude adjustment!

Your final line about winning, competition and praise is a real eye opener. Again, this had never occurred to me in just this form. As one thinks about it, the truth becomes more apparent. Just look at the women in my class. I think about my daughter who is just starting her career (fourth year in the field) as an accountant. She quit her last job simply because she was doing a great job but no one seemed to notice.

All too often managers (Department Chairs and faculty as managers of classes) are willing to find fault but when things go right, they feel that is the expected behaviour and so say nothing. We need to praise all of our students when they do something right!! I am guilty too. I will promise myself to do better.

Non switchers cited intrinsic interest in the subject as a prime source of motivation more than twice as commonly as switchers.

This isn't surprising. In fact it is probably a good thing. The "old time science" may be wrong about many things, but it is hard to present a strong agreement against those who say we should probably encourage young people, whose interest in science is marginal, to find something else which they can be passionate about.

I have seen a number of young women come in with the goal of getting a Ph.D. or an MD. Usually the reality catches up with them in the fall of their Jr. year, when they realize what a commitment, to further schooling and to a demanding career, they will have to make; and how this will impact on the personal and family life they have envisioned for themselves. There is no question about their ability - most often they are my most talented students.

There is an ethical dilemma for advisors as well. On the one hand we want them to be professional successes because that is how our own professional worth is measured. On the other hand we cannot advise them in a direction which is not best for them. Or should we gently push them into a career because science or medicine needs more women? It is hard to disentangle all the threads and to feel reasonably certain you have done the right thing.

It is good to see that women role models are now more common. I think a lot of this is shaky knees as they begin to see graduation looming. In the end, most of my female students stay.

Science, and all of American culture, are an "adult male social system" only in the sense that it has traditionally included only males. The extension, which a lot of people want to make, and which I think is wrong, is that since women don't like competition, the "adult male social system" can and should be changed.

Science is a competitive meritocracy, as are national and world economies and political systems. This is not male - this is human. It is a common thread through all of human history. Science is fundamentally a contest between the hypotheses and evidence espoused by different groups in a competitive arena. There is no question that it would be good to have less nastiness and intimidation (which is a male tactic for SKEWING the competition), but to remove the fundamental competitive aspect destroys science. I don't believe that infusing more women into science will result in less competition either. In Biology where 48% of the Ph.D.'s now go to women, and the "adult male social system" hasn't been changed much - it just includes more humans of both genders now.

The REAL question I think is how to help young women develop the social strategies necessary to succeed in the competitive world of science and most other professions. Individuals are highly adaptable, and we will probably be more successful in helping them gain competence in competition and respect for the process, than in trying to remove competition from successful cultures.

I have found myself in the position of considering changing my major from computer science. After reading the comments that were posted about women in my position I realized how many of them actually pertain to me.

In addition I would like to add to the comment about competition in classes. Not only is the competition stiff, there is the added component that often times, there are a large number of students who are professionals in the field. For example in my Program Design class, I have to compete against a group of professional C programmers. No matter how well I may have learned the material it is impossible in one semester to have the same knowledge that a professional has.

What this amounts to is although I have a 89 class average in this class, because of the competition, I am barely maintaining a 'C'.Also I moved to a large university from a small junior college and the culture shock has been difficult to accept. At my previous school I have always found teachers that truly cared about their students and wanted to see students succeed. The college as a whole fostered an attitude of success for their students. However after changing schools I personally have found teachers who have little interest in their students and in particular my computer classes foster an attitude of "Let's fail as many students as possible" since those students will never make it anyway. I have even been told that universities intentionally do this in most science classes to "filter out the undesirables."

What I question at this point is if placing this type of stress, competition, and demoralizing behavior on myself is really worth pursuing the degree.

It's absolutely, definitely 100% true for me that my persistence in CS depends on both intrinsic interest and relationships with people I can cite examples all along my career if necessary -- from my mom who signed me up for a computer class when I was bored in high school, to the boyfriend who pushed me into college courses, through current female colleagues and supportive CS fiancee.

I do find it slightly odd to list "competence" as a coping skill, though I can see how it's one of many possible responses to a challenge. I even know one woman who chose CS because she felt it was easier to get competence recognized in this discipline which I guess is often true.

Don't lose heart. Stay in there, and then change it. There are hundreds of thousands of jobs out there waiting for you, with great salaries. The job options and job security in computer science is unbelievable.

There is plenty of room for the advanced, experienced "C" programmers, and YOU. Most of your productive work skills are learned on the job. You need to demonstrate that you have the ability to learn, and good attitude and team skills. An academic career is not the only option. There is a LOT of fun on the job, and in this field, you can move to find a good place for you.

If you are seeking an academic career, talk to your counselors and faculty about what it takes to get ahead and how they perceive grades alone. Ask them if they are really trying to get rid of students!

I got my undergrad degree in an Ivy League school that really wanted students to succeed. I did have a couple of friends who did not finish, but they really had to try very hard.

I went to graduate school at a state school. The number of grad students, as best I recall, one year, was something like 80. The number of people who finished a Ph.D. the same year was something like 3. Almost no one finished.

To the first, I have given a small monetary donation. To the second, I have talked children of friends OUT of applying there, and I am of the opinion that "they owe me", not that I expect them to pay.

So my first thought is "don't change your major. change your university."

Yes, Science is unforgiving in the sense that there is a "right" answer, whereas in English or History, there is more wiggle room, more room for subjective opinion. Also it is heartlessly cumulative. If you miss the wrong course as a freshman and you never finish the B.SC. Chains of required courses are many years long.

Computer "Science" is actually less of a science in the first sense than Physics, Chemistry, and other fields without "Science" in their names, but as I have experienced it being taught, it is still relatively unforgiving about the sequence of courses.

This explains some of the "survival of the fittest" attitude, but if a college does not properly match the skill level of their students to the demands of the course, that is just bad teaching and bad administering, and the students should vote against such colleges with their feet, by leaving.

Outside academia, your grades very quickly stop mattering if you pass and get the degree. References matter more UNTIL you stop using professors as references because you have more recent people to ask. So, if the "C" is reliable, that is not fatal if you do decide to stick it out.