NY Times on Women’s Interest in Computing

The New York Times yesterday had a nice piece on the declining interest of women in computer science, the impact on the field, and some efforts to reverse the trend. Here’s a snippet:

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — For decades, undergraduate women have been moving in ever greater numbers into science and engineering departments at American universities. Yet even as they approach or exceed enrollment parity in mathematics, biology and other fields, there is one area in which their presence relative to men is static or even shrinking: computer science.
Women received about 38 percent of the computer science bachelor’s degrees awarded in the United States in 1985, the peak year, but in 2003, the figure was only about 28 percent, according to the National Science Foundation.
At universities that also offer graduate degrees in computer science, only 17 percent of the field’s bachelor’s degrees in the 2003-4 academic year went to women, according to the Taulbee Survey, conducted annually by an organization for computer science research. [That's CRA's survey, by the way...]
Since then, many in the field say, the situation has worsened. They say computing is the only realm of science or technology in which women are consistently giving ground. They also worry that the number of women is dropping in graduate programs and in industry.
They are concerned about this trend, they say, not just because they want to see young women share the field’s challenges and rewards, but also because they regard the relative absence of women as a troubling indicator for American computer science generally — and for the economic competitiveness that depends on it.

This is perhaps the trend that’s most disturbing to those in the computing community who care about the issue:


Basically, the interest of women in computing has never been lower. In a previous posting, we’ve described some of the ways the community is trying to address the problem, including hiring an “Image Strategist” to focus on improving the image of computing. (Jill K. Ross is that new strategist and she’ll have an update on the efforts of the “Image of Computing National Task Force” in May at a meeting of the National Center for Women & Information Technology in Boulder.) Efforts like those described in the article are also crucially important. The National Science Foundation supports many such efforts in computing under its Broadening Participation in Computing program in the Computer and Information Science and Engineering directorate. (And we’ve mentioned recently that pending legislation in the House would help programs with the goals of increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in computing such as those supported by BPC (or science and engineering generally) have an easier time getting renewed funding from NSF, as long as they are deemed to be effective.)
We’ll keep you informed on the progress of these efforts — both programmatic and legislative — in the coming weeks. In the meantime, CRA’s Jay Vegso has posted links to some further discussion of the issues cited in the Times piece over at the CRA Bulletin. The Bulletin is a good one-stop shop to lots of data about the state of IT and the IT workforce and pipeline.
Finally, we’ve got a lot of additional information on the state of the IT workforce over at our IT Workforce page, including:
 

Time Magazine has a pretty decent piece on NSF’s Global Environment for Networking Innovations program, which has the goal of “[enabling] the research community to invent and demonstrate a global communications network and related services that will be qualitatively better than today’s Internet.”

Although it has already taken nearly four decades to get this far in building the Internet, some university researchers with the federal government’s blessing want to scrap all that and start over.
The idea may seem unthinkable, even absurd, but many believe a “clean slate” approach is the only way to truly address security, mobility and other challenges that have cropped up since UCLA professor Leonard Kleinrock helped supervise the first exchange of meaningless test data between two machines on Sept. 2, 1969.
The Internet “works well in many situations but was designed for completely different assumptions,” said Dipankar Raychaudhuri, a Rutgers University professor overseeing three clean-slate projects. “It’s sort of a miracle that it continues to work well today.”
No longer constrained by slow connections and computer processors and high costs for storage, researchers say the time has come to rethink the Internet’s underlying architecture, a move that could mean replacing networking equipment and rewriting software on computers to better channel future traffic over the existing pipes.
Even Vinton Cerf, one of the Internet’s founding fathers as co-developer of the key communications techniques, said the exercise was “generally healthy” because the current technology “does not satisfy all needs.”

We’ve covered the progress of GENI previously in this space, including the most recent announcement by the Computing Community Consortium (CCC) of the naming of the initial members of the GENI science council. As it stands now, GENI is a “Horizon” project in NSF’s 2007 Facilities Plan — a step away from “Readiness Stage,” which would allow for extensive pre-construction planning. There are currently 10 projects listed in the plan as “Horizon” projects, and just one in the “Readiness Stage” for FY 2008 (the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope). For FY 2008, NSF has requested $20 million to ramp up GENI pre-construction planning — so the program is moving forward, but still has some distance to go before it’s ready to be included in the queue of projects being considered for the “Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction” account in future budget years.

 

Innovation Briefing Event

The Task Force on the Future of American Innovation and the House R&D Caucus are hosting a lunch briefing on Tuesday, April 17 at noon. The Role of Basic Research in Innovation, Economic Competitiveness and National Security will include speakers from industry and academia and will be based on the second Benchmarks report, “Measuring the Moment: Innovation, National Security, and Economic Competitiveness” that we have previously covered in this space.
Speakers will include:
Dr. Anita Jones from the University of Virginia giving a presentation called, “The Role of Defense Research in the Innovation and Competitiveness Debate”
Dr. C. Dan Mote, President of the University of Maryland . His presentation is “Progress Since the Rising Above the Gathering Storm Report and What Still Needs Attention”
Amy Burke from Texas Instruments speaking on “Industry Perspective on the Importance of Federal Investment in Basic Research”
Task Force Chair Doug Comer, the director of legal affairs and technology policy at Intel, will do the welcome, introductions, and speak to the Benchmark’s report.
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) and Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), the co-chairs of the House R&D Caucus will also make remarks at the briefing.
Anyone with an interest in innovation and competitiveness is welcome to attend. RSVP to Jessica Delucchi at 202.646.5046 or delucchij@battelle.org by Monday, April 16. Space is limited so reservations are on a first come basis.
Update: Doug Comer, Dr. Mote, and Amy Burke spoke to a packed room at the Task Force on the Future of American Innovation and House R&D Caucus briefing ” The Role of Basic Research in Innovation, Economic Competitiveness and National Security.” Over 100 people attended from industry, academia, and the Hill, including Representatives Judy Biggert (R-IL), Rush Holt (D-NJ), and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA).
15.jpg Comer discussed the Measuring the Moment report issued last year by the Task Force and gave an overview of the continued importance of federal funding for basic research to the economy as a whole.
As one of the Rising Above the Gathering Storm authors, Dr. Mote discussed the impact the report has had and what is still undone. He emphasized that the states need to be actively engaged in support of basic research at the university level and vocal about their support to their federal delegations.
Burke presented a specific picture of why federally funded basic research is important to Texas Instruments and how that translates to industry as a whole. She gave specific examples of technologies that have had major economic impact and were begun through basic research.
22.jpg Maybe just as importantly, each attendee left with a copy of the Benchmarks report (pdf) and other Task Force material and at least one Member of Congress was seen toting the report around later that day….
All in all, a good, well-attended event.