Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 28;15(10):e0239012. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239012. eCollection 2020.
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.
新兴证据表明,在某些领域的课程阅读材料中,女性作者的作品代表性不足,导致课程阅读材料存在性别差距。代表性不足可能会降低学生对专业领域机会的认识,并使女性学者在职业发展中处于不利地位。我们通过以下方式为课程阅读材料的性别差距证据做出了贡献:1)量化指定课程阅读材料中女性作者的代表性程度;2)按教师性别和学科检查女性作者的代表性;3)将课程阅读材料中的女性代表性与劳动力和同行评议期刊文章的作者代表性进行比较。我们从圣路易斯华盛顿大学 2018-2019 年开设的课程列表中,选择了来自四个学科(人文科学;社会科学;科学、技术、工程和数学;以及其他)的课程大纲的分层随机样本。我们使用 genderize 应用程序编程接口对课程教师和课程阅读作者的性别进行编码。我们使用描述性统计和数据可视化来检查阅读、课程和学科层面上女性作者的代表性。最终样本包括 2435 篇阅读材料,来自 129 门不同的课程。每篇阅读材料中女性作者的平均比例为 34.1%;822 篇(33.8%)阅读材料是女性主导的(即,女性是第一或唯一作者)。学科不同,女性主导的阅读材料比例也不同,社会科学的比例最高(40%)。女性教师指定的具有女性第一作者的阅读材料和具有更高女性作者比例的阅读材料比例更高。课程大纲中女性作者的代表性低于同行评议文献或劳动力中的女性代表性。除了课程阅读材料的性别差距证据外,我们还发现女性作者作为唯一作者和第一作者以及作为作者团队成员的代表性不足。由于指定的阅读材料促进学术研究并影响劳动力多样性,因此我们建议通过提高对差距的认识和改善获取女性作者出版物的机会,采用几种策略来使课程大纲多样化。